Unit Plan Project Rubric

Specific Criteria for Acceptable Performance

WARNING: This in-course summative assessment is related to the Admission to Student Teaching institutional gateway for physics teacher education majors. In order to receive the positive recommendation of the PTE coordinator required for Admission to Student Teaching, all candidates must earn an overall average score of 2 (Acceptable) on this performance task. In addition, no single dimension may be scored unacceptable.


(0% to 50% of points)
(50% to 75% of points)
(75% to 100% of points)
(110% of points)


(5 points)

Not included. Inconcise, rambling overview; not a complete overview. Concise and accurate overview; explains major concerns that should be addressed; provides broad goals in relation to Illinois Learning Standards
(10 points)
Not included. Clear that only a cursory search for resources has been conducted; not all three areas have been addressed. Complete and detailed listing of resources available for use in teaching the subject matter; all three areas addressed.
(20 points)
Poorly written objectives; written more like teacher goals; not performance-based; or not provided. Objectives exhibit poor word choice; objectives are a mix of teacher goals and student performance-based tasks. States unit's major and minor science content and intellectual process skills objectives using inquiry-oriented and observable behaviors. Acceptable plus includes due consideration for dispositions.
(20 points)
Activities clearly fail to correspond to student performance objectives. Activities correspond to student performance objectives, but appear to be teacher centered. Good variety of student-centered activities well designed to help students achieve student performance objectives. Acceptable plus details provided to such an extent that one can easily plan a lesson following the descriptions provided.
(5 points)
Little to no consideration given to assessment. Consideration only given for summative assessments, and none for formative assessments; test a mere sampling of questions. Contains a through assessment of student learning, including formative and summative; provides a complete test rather than a mere sampling of questions; test well written, includes a variety of assessment strategies. Acceptable plus includes a wide array of TIPER's, tasks inspired by physics education research; TIPER's clearly identified by category.
with Standards
(5 points)
Fails to include alignment table between student activities and Illinois Learning Standards. Includes a table showing alignment between major student activities and Illinois Learning Standards. Includes a table showing alignment between major and minor student activities and Illinois Learning Standards. Acceptable plus includes National Science Education Standards in alignment table.
Time Line
(5 points)
Little to no consideration given to presenting a meaningful or coherent time line. Time line provided, but organization of subject matter inappropriate. Day-by-day summary of inquiry-oriented lessons, including interactive demonstrations, lab activities, and technology utilization.
(5 points)
More emphasis on didactic teaching; less emphasis on students constructing understanding from experiences; little to no consideration for student groupings.. A roughly equal mix of teacher-centered and student-centered pedagogy; equal emphasis on transmitting knowledge and discovering knowledge; some consideration for student groupings, but does not show planning required to use them effectively. Provides a detailed overview of diverse and effective teaching procedures that are student student-centered; addresses classroom atmosphere and student management; explains how a variety of diverse student groupings will be used to construct meaning from science experiences and develop dispositions for further inquiry and learning. Acceptable, but includes consideration for one or more of the following: problem-based learning activity; Modeling Method of Instruction; provides clear evidence that formal cooperative learning strategies will be employed a la Johnson & Johnson, Circles of Learning (Pig's FACE acronym).
Metacognitive Practices
(5 points)
No consideration given for metacognitive practices at all; provides no examples. Plan for metacognitive practices is limited only to specific situations; provides three or fewer examples. Plan for metacognitive practices infuses student self-assessment and self-regulation throughout unit. Provides five examples. Acceptable plus includes innovative approaches to get students actually doing the work of metacognition.
Context of
(5 points)
Little to no consideration for context of science. Provides only a very limited consideration for the importance of the subject matter for the students. Explains how unit content will relate to students in relevant and meaningful fashion, including science-technology interactions; scientific, personal, cultural and social values. Acceptable plus includes a rationale for teaching unit that deals with benefits of this science study to society and the professions.


(5 points)

Little or no consideration of the social context. Provides a list of community resources that could be integrated into instruction. Explains hypothetically how one might use human and institutional resources in the intended community to advance the education of students in science. Acceptable plus provides substantive detail about how one or more human resources from within the community can be employed to engage students in learning.
(5 points)
Little to no consideration for alternative conceptions. Lists only a very limited array of students' alternative conceptions. Lists a wide variety of preconceptions and misconceptions that students have in relation to subject matter of unit. Clearly referenced. Acceptable plus links various alternative conceptions to specific classroom activities.
(5 points)
Little to no consideration given to safety concerns. Safety concerns addressed, but important considerations left out. Brief summary of safety concerns related to subject matter of unit; notes potential sources of hard, and ways to mitigate hard should a hazardous activity be included in unit.

Last updated 8/06/2008