Leaders who have defined their personal philosophy on how curriculum should be implemented will be better prepared to make curriculum-related decisions for their school. Such a philosop

Curriculum Implementation Philosophy – Rubric

Philosophy: Curriculum Implementation and Grade 6 points

Criteria Description

Philosophy: Curriculum Implementation and Grade

5. Target 6 points

Personal philosophy comprehensively describes position regarding expectations of

future school’s curriculum implementation. Grade range is provided.

4. Acceptable 5.22 points

Personal philosophy clearly describes position regarding expectations of curriculum

implementation. Grade range is provided.

3. Approaching 4.44 points

Personal philosophy vaguely describes position regarding expectations of

curriculum implementation. Grade range is not provided.

2. Insufficient 4.14 points

Personal philosophy unrealistically describes position regarding expectations of

curriculum implementation. Grade range is not provided.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Philosophy: Cultural Inclusiveness 12 points

Criteria Description

Philosophy: Cultural Inclusiveness

5. Target 12 points

Personal philosophy thoroughly addresses cultural inclusiveness.

4. Acceptable 10.44 points

Personal philosophy reasonably addresses cultural inclusiveness.

3. Approaching 8.88 points

Collapse All

Personal philosophy unclearly addresses cultural inclusiveness.

2. Insufficient 8.28 points

Personal philosophy poorly addresses cultural inclusiveness.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Philosophy: Di�erentiation for Learning Needs and Tiered Intervention 12 points

Criteria Description

Philosophy: Differentiation for Learning Needs and Tiered Intervention

5. Target 12 points

Personal philosophy exceeds standards in addressing differentiating for learning

needs and creatively discusses options for tiered intervention.

4. Acceptable 10.44 points

Personal philosophy appropriately addresses differentiating for learning needs and

logically discusses options for tiered intervention.

3. Approaching 8.88 points

Personal philosophy marginally addresses differentiating for learning needs and

minimally discusses options for tiered intervention.

2. Insufficient 8.28 points

Personal philosophy ineffectively addresses differentiating for learning needs and

options for tiered intervention are irrelevant.

1. No Submission 0 points

Not addressed.

Philosophy: Technology 12 points

Criteria Description

Philosophy: Technology

5. Target 12 points

Personal philosophy substantially describes position regarding incorporating

technology to enhance instruction.

4. Acceptable 10.44 points

Personal philosophy aptly describes position regarding incorporating technology to

enhance instruction.

3. Approaching 8.88 points

Personal philosophy somewhat describes position regarding incorporating

technology to enhance instruction.

2. Insufficient 8.28 points

Personal philosophy ineffectively describes position regarding incorporating

technology to enhance instruction.

Philosophy: Vision and Mission 9 points

Criteria Description

Philosophy: Vision and Mission

5. Target 9 points

Personal philosophy skillfully embeds how the school's mission and vision are

related to the curriculum.

4. Acceptable 7.83 points

Personal philosophy directly embeds how the school's mission and vision are

related to the curriculum.

3. Approaching 6.66 points

Personal philosophy inexplicitly embeds how the school's mission and vision are

related to the curriculum.

2. Insufficient 6.21 points

Personal philosophy unconvincingly embeds how the school's mission and vision

are related to the curriculum.

Organization 3 points

Criteria Description

Organization

5. Target 3 points

The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas

that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides

the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is within the

required word count.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The

content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is

within a reasonable range of the required word count.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

The content is not adequately organized even though it provides the audience with

a sense of the main idea. The summary may not be within a reasonable range of the

required word count.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The

ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other; or the

summary is widely outside of the required word count.

Mechanics of Writing 3 points

Criteria Description

includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use

5. Target 3 points

Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-

developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are

varied and engaging.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder

comprehension. Variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some

practice and content-related language.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent

language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.

1. No Submission 0 points

Documentation of Sources 3 points

Criteria Description

citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and

style

5. Target 3 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment

and style. Format is free of error.

4. Acceptable 2.61 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is

mostly correct.

3. Approaching 2.22 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some

key formatting and citation errors are present.

2. Insufficient 2.07 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to

assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. No Submission 0 points Total 60 points