| | Exceptional (10‐9) | Very good (8 ‐ 7) | Needs improvement (6 ‐ 5) | Poor (4‐0) |
| Goals and objectives | Imagine a realistic group of students with specific needs Fit the intended learners and integrate the teacher’s background knowledge and/or research about the context. Goals and objectives are clearly stated Goals are specific to the group of students yet overarching and able to be “transplanted” into other units for those students Objectives are observable and measurable Objectives clearly work toward and are aligned with over‐arching goals Objectives reflect actual class activities with interaction type and purpose Objectives are meaningful and authentic to the specified learners
| Imagine a realistic group of students with specific needs, but may seem arbitrary or need more research Fit the intended learners but might be slightly off with regards to context or age‐level or proficiency‐ level appropriateness Most goals and objectives are clearly stated Most objectives are observable and measurable Objectives may be working toward and aligned with over‐arching goals, but this is not clearly indicated in the unit plan Most objects reflect actual class activities with their interaction type and purpose Most objectives are meaningful and authentic to the specified learners
| Imagined group is not realistic or there is not a developed sense of understanding about the intended learners May not fit the intended learners or integrate the teacher’s background knowledge and/or research about the context Some are clearly stated Some objectives are observable / measurable, but some might not reflect class activities Some objectives are meaningful and authentic
| Goals and objectives are not included Goals and/or objectives inadequately account for learner population or categorize learners Goals and objectives are not clearly differentiated or are not aligned Objectives are too vague or general or do not reflect class activities Objectives are not meaningful or authentic
|
| Planning | Instructions detailed, expanded, and clear Time is clearly indicated and realistic to the task Learner needs and potential problems are noted and anticipated Type of interaction is clearly indicated for each activity and a mix of interactional formats is included in each daily lesson Students reflect on what they learned during daily and unit student‐centered closing activities A teacher script (or samples of teacher talk) and expected student responses is included
| Instructions are clear but may lack detail and expansion in parts Time is indicated and realistic to most tasks Learner needs and potential problems are sometimes noted The type of interaction is noted but might not be balanced or might not be aligned with each activity Students have the opportunity to reflect on what they learned during daily and unit closing activities, but sometimes teacher‐centered A few examples of possible teacher talk and expected student responses are included
| Instructions are given, but time allotments are not indicated. Instructions may be too vague or general Learner needs and potential problems are occasionally noted Most of the interaction is teacher‐centered Teacher‐centered closing activities are included both at the end of daily lessons and at the end of the unit
| Very few instructions are givens Potential problems are not noted in the lesson plan narrative Time course is not noted or is unreasonable The lesson plans are teacher‐ centered Some daily lessons or the unit plan lacks closure Teacher may only summarize what was covered as the “closure”
|
| Presentation of Materials | Original (or adapted) materials are included for all lesson plans. Nearly all activities are sequenced based on principles of teaching/learning (e.g., scaffolding, top‐ down to bottom‐up, etc.) Videos, sound files, or writing samples are included for listening and reading activities and contribute to the unit goals and objectives Technology is effectively integrated in the unit Plans materials, and assessments are well‐organized and easy to find
| Materials are included; they are somewhat authentic Sequencing of activities may need some work Media files are included, but might not be tightly integrated with teaching objectives Technology is used in the unit but may not clearly support the unit’s goals and objectives Plans, materials, and assessments follow an organizational format but may be difficult to find
| Materials and media files are included, but there is very little scaffolding or sequencing of activities to ensure learning Technology is used in the unit but distracts from the unit goals and objectives Plans, materials, and assessments are difficult to follow and / or find
| Very few materials (e.g., graphic organizers, handouts, media files, etc.) are included with the lesson plans Media files are unavailable No use of technology Organizational format of the unit and supporting materials is unclear
|
| Approach | The unit plan skillfully employs at least one of the approaches to TESOL presented in the class (cbi, ffi, task‐ based, action‐based, etc.) At times the unit plan integrates different approaches to achieve learning objectives Skills are integrated in the unit plan and learning activities address a variety of learners’ linguistic, social, academic, and/or professional needs There is evidence of incorporation of course readings/concepts or exceptional job with one primary approach (e.g., TBLT, SIOP, etc.)
| The unit plan uses at least one approach discussed in the course There is little to no clear integration of different approaches The unit plan focuses on one or two learner goals There may be an overemphasis of one or two major skills (e.g., listening and speaking)
| The unit plan attempts to structure lessons around one approach The unit plan may be largely based on conventional language teaching methods Different skills might be taught, but are not integrated together in activities Skills are not taught, only practiced and assessed
| The unit plan does not exhibit an understanding of communicative language teaching or approaches presented in class Skills are not taught, only assessed The unit plan lacks evidence of understanding course concepts.
|
| Assessments | Assessments correspond to the goals and objectives and measure student learning as well as effectiveness of teaching Assessments are creative, practical, and authentic Assessments clearly provide opportunities for washback Assessments have both content and face validity Assessments include a well‐ developed rubric and / or detailed key Alternative assessments include detailed student guidelines At least two methods of formal assessment are included and at least one of those is an alternative assessment
| Assessments are loosely integrated with learning and teaching Assessments are practical and authentic Assessments potentially provide opportunities for washback Assessments have either content or face validity Assessments are included with a general rubric and / or key included Alternative assessments include student guidelines but the guidelines lack detail
| Assessments do not match the instruction or the lesson objectives A grading checklist is included with alternative assessment Assessments meet two or three of these principles: authentic, practical, washback, content validity, face validity. A general description of alternative assessments is given to students in writing
| Assessments have little to no connection to course goals and objectives A rubric, grading checklist, and / or key might be provided, but it lacks detail Assessments only meet one or none of the principles Only one assessment included, or both assessments are traditional, or no assessments included Students do not receive directions for alternative assessments in writing.
|
