Data-Driven Instruction
▾A singular source of academic data drives instructional decision-making.
Multiple sources of academic data drive instructional decision-making.
Multiple sources of academic and non-academic data are used together and sometimes drive instructional decision-making.
Multiple sources of academic and non-academic data used together always drive instructional decision-making.
Beginning / Developing
- Student profiles include only previous state assessment data and limited academic sources.
- Universal screeners are administered but analysis is surface-level or unused.
- No evidence of non-academic data (interest surveys, career surveys) informing instruction.
- Teachers sometimes share formative/summative data with students.
- Lesson plans reference only the curriculum guide.
- Teacher provides general rationale to whole class, not data-informed.
- Some evidence of data-based grouping, but groups are static.
Practicing / Achieving
- Student profiles include multiple sources: MAP, diagnostics, adaptive software, career surveys, learning style inventories, etc.
- Universal screeners and diagnostics are fully integrated into the instructional cycle.
- Data sources are regularly refreshed to reflect the most current student information.
- Students have individual access to their own assessment data.
- Teacher provides data-informed rationale to small groups: e.g., "Based on yesterday's exit ticket and your interest in reptiles, we're comparing human and snake circulatory systems."
- Students can articulate a data-grounded rationale for their current task.
- In PLCs, teachers regularly analyze academic and non-academic data together.
Student Feedback
▾Students receive feedback from teachers in order to improve; might be sporadic.
Students receive specific feedback from teachers and occasionally from peers; may not be in real-time.
Students receive specific feedback from both teachers and peers. Teacher utilizes multiple ways to give real-time feedback.
Students frequently receive timely, specific feedback from both teachers and peers. Teacher uses multiple feedback methods and students adjust accordingly.
Progress Monitoring Practices
▾Students complete work and wait for grades or teacher feedback; they are not yet tracking their own progress.
Students sometimes check their progress or respond to feedback, but do not consistently monitor their learning or connect it to goals.
Students regularly track progress toward individual learning goals, use feedback to improve, and can explain where they are in their learning journey.
Students take ownership of progress monitoring by setting goals, tracking growth, seeking feedback, and adjusting strategies to stay on track for mastery.
Performance-Based Assessment
▾Students demonstrate learning through formative and summative assessments, often unvaried.
Students demonstrate learning through a limited variety of performance tasks; connection to learning goals is inconsistent.
Students regularly demonstrate mastery through performance tasks, projects, or presentations connected to clear learning goals.
Students consistently demonstrate mastery through their choice of performance tasks, projects, or presentations; connected to clear goals and applied in meaningful ways.
Diagnostic & Universal Screeners
▾Universal screeners are administered as required but results are not analyzed or used to inform instruction. Student profiles contain limited academic data only.
Universal screeners are administered and results reviewed, but analysis is surface-level. Some diagnostic data occasionally informs grouping or instruction.
Universal screeners and diagnostic assessments are regularly analyzed and sometimes used to inform instructional planning, grouping, and pacing for individual students.
Universal screeners and diagnostics are fully integrated into the instructional cycle. Results consistently inform differentiated instruction, flexible grouping, and personalized pathways for every student.
Varied Learning Experiences
▾Students access content primarily through unvaried learning experiences that may be generic, inauthentic, and lack rigor. All students receive the same instruction.
Students access content through varied learning experiences, but experiences may be generic and/or inauthentic.
Students access content through varied learning experiences that include multiple opportunities for transfer of knowledge, extending application to new and novel contexts.
Students access content through a variety of learning experiences capturing the range of cognitive rigor across the curriculum, offering opportunities for authentic, relevant, and rigorous transfer of knowledge.
Differentiated Learning Objectives
▾Learning objectives are never differentiated based on students' levels of mastery; all students address the same learning objective.
Learning objectives are rarely differentiated based on students' levels of content mastery.
Learning objectives are sometimes differentiated based on students' levels of content mastery.
Learning objectives are regularly differentiated based on students' levels of content mastery.
Beginning / Developing
- Teacher almost always has one learning objective posted for the whole class.
- The LO is the same for all students.
- Objectives are broad or aligned only to grade-level standards, not adjusted for readiness, interest, or learning profiles.
- Differentiation, if present, is not purposeful or data-aligned.
- Some students can articulate the LO and why it's important.
Practicing / Achieving
- Teacher may have several different LOs posted to meet various student needs (e.g., different objectives per station/group).
- Whole class may share an LO but engage at different rigor levels (e.g., different Lexile texts for the same theme objective).
- Differentiation of LOs is purposeful and reflects student data.
- Students can articulate the LO, why it's important, and how it connects to their individual needs and goals.
Personalized Pathways
▾Students follow the same pathway to accomplish their academic goals.
Students follow customized pathways to accomplish their academic goals.
Students follow customized pathways to accomplish their academic and non-academic goals.
Students follow customized pathways that adapt as necessary to accomplish their individual academic and non-academic goals.
Mastery-Based Progression
▾Students advance in lockstep with their peers with little or no opportunity for remediation or extension.
Students advance in lockstep with peers but have regular opportunities for remediation and extension if necessary.
Students have regular opportunities for remediation when necessary and advance upon demonstration of mastery.
Students advance upon demonstration of the highest level of mastery.
Authentic Learning Experiences
▾Learning tasks are primarily teacher-directed and disconnected from students' real-world experiences or interests.
Some tasks connect to students' lives or current events, but links to real-world application are surface-level or inconsistent.
Students engage in meaningful work that connects to real-world contexts, with opportunities to apply knowledge and skills beyond the classroom.
Students consistently participate in authentic, real-world learning experiences that foster problem-solving, collaboration, and community impact.
Student Voice and Choice
▾Students complete assignments exactly as directed by the teacher, with little to no opportunity to make choices in content, process, or product.
Students are given limited choices (e.g., topic, seating, format), but voice is mostly superficial and not tied to meaningful decision-making.
Students regularly exercise choice in how they learn and demonstrate mastery. Students share input on pacing and classroom activities.
Students consistently have meaningful opportunities to decide what, how, and why they are learning. Their voice shapes classroom culture and instructional design; they demonstrate ownership through self-direction and goal-setting.
Classroom Expectations
▾Students work independently or in unchanging peer groups. Teacher sets all expectations with no student co-creation. Culture of compliance rather than mutual respect.
Students work independently or in evolving peer groups, but grouping strategies tend to be unvaried. Some positive expectations are communicated.
Students work in varied groupings with some agency. Classroom culture reflects positive expectations and mutual respect most of the time.
Students receive specific, timely positive feedback. Flexible grouping is purposeful and data-driven. The classroom reflects a consistent culture of positive expectations, equity, and mutual respect co-created with students.
Procedures & Systems
▾Established routines and procedures exist but may be unclear to students and are exclusively managed by the teacher.
Established routines and procedures are clear to students and are exclusively managed by the teacher.
Established routines and procedures maximize instructional time and are sometimes managed by students.
Established routines and procedures maximize instructional time and are co-created with and managed largely by students.
Beginning / Developing
- Classroom routines (entering, transitioning, accessing materials, turning in work) are inconsistent or unclear.
- Transitions take significant time, often leading to off-task behavior or confusion.
- Expectations for behavior and participation are teacher-directed but not student-owned.
- Systems are one-size-fits-all and do not account for diverse learner needs.
- Students are compliant but not empowered — they wait for teacher instructions rather than taking initiative.
Practicing / Achieving
- Clear, predictable systems are in place and students follow them independently with minimal prompting.
- Transitions are smooth and efficient, maximizing learning time.
- Students demonstrate agency: they access resources, select learning spaces/tools, and begin tasks without teacher direction.
- Procedures are personalized: students have options for how/where to learn; systems account for diverse needs (visuals, scaffolds, flexible seating).
- Behavior expectations are co-created, consistently reinforced, and contribute to a safe, inclusive culture.
- The environment is structured yet flexible — systems support both independence and collaboration.
Behavioral Expectations
▾Very few students follow established behavior expectations. Teacher relies on reactive strategies. Behavior management is inconsistent.
Some students follow established behavior expectations. Teacher communicates expectations but reinforces them inconsistently.
Most students follow established behavior expectations. Teacher proactively communicates and reinforces expectations. Strategies are becoming more individualized.
All or nearly all students are self-directed. Strategies to focus students are timely, specific, sensitive to individual needs, and proactive/preventative.
Inclusive Instructional Practices
▾Instruction is one-size-fits-all with little to no accommodation for diverse learners. Accessibility and inclusion are not evident in classroom design or delivery.
Some accommodations are in place for identified students, but they are inconsistently applied. Limited evidence of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles.
Multiple means of representation, engagement, and expression are regularly offered. Most students have access to appropriate supports and scaffolds.
Instruction consistently reflects UDL principles. All students have access to rigorous, appropriately scaffolded learning. The environment is physically and culturally inclusive for every learner.
Physical Learning Environment
▾Classroom layout is static and teacher-centered. Resources are not easily accessible. Space does not support varied learning modes.
Classroom layout allows for some flexibility. Some materials are accessible, but the space is not consistently organized to support independent learning.
Classroom space is organized to support varied learning modes. Resources are accessible and students can navigate the space with some independence.
The physical environment is intentionally designed to maximize student independence. Flexible seating, clearly labeled resources, and purposeful zones support diverse learner needs and self-direction.
Self-Direction
▾Students rely entirely on the teacher for direction. They wait to be told what to do next and cannot work independently without constant prompting.
Students can follow directions once given but need frequent check-ins. They have limited ability to self-monitor or self-correct without teacher support.
Students demonstrate growing independence. They can navigate tasks, manage their time, and seek support when needed without waiting for teacher prompting.
Students are fully self-directed. They initiate their own learning, manage time effectively, self-monitor progress, and advocate for what they need to move forward.
Opportunities for Input
▾Students have no formal opportunity to provide input on their learning environment, pacing, or instruction. Decisions are entirely teacher-driven.
Students occasionally share opinions when asked, but input is informal and rarely influences instructional decisions.
Students are given regular structured opportunities to share feedback on their learning experience. Teacher sometimes adjusts instruction or environment based on student input.
Student input is consistently sought and meaningfully integrated into instructional design, pacing, and classroom culture. Students see evidence that their voices shape their learning environment.
Advocacy Beyond Self
▾Students focus only on their own tasks and do not demonstrate awareness of or responsibility for the broader classroom community.
Students show some awareness of peers' needs, but advocacy beyond self is limited and inconsistent.
Students regularly support peers, contribute to a collaborative classroom community, and begin to advocate for others' learning needs.
Students consistently demonstrate advocacy beyond themselves — supporting peers, contributing to an equitable classroom community, and taking action for the broader school or community.
Goal-Setting
▾Goals, if set at all, are set by the teacher for students. Students do not have ownership over their learning goals and cannot articulate them.
Students are introduced to goal-setting, but goals may be generic, teacher-assigned, or disconnected from data. Students can restate goals but may not fully own them.
Students set personal academic goals using data, track their progress regularly, and can explain how their goals connect to their learning.
Students independently set ambitious, data-informed academic and personal goals, track growth over time, adjust strategies as needed, and can articulate why their goals matter to their futures.
Classroom Climate & Relationships
▾The classroom climate feels unsafe or unpredictable for some students. Relationships between teacher and students, and among peers, are not consistently warm or respectful.
The classroom climate is generally positive but inconsistent. Teacher-student relationships are developing; peer relationships are cordial but not deeply collaborative.
The classroom climate is consistently warm and respectful. Teacher-student and peer relationships are positive and support risk-taking and learning.
The classroom is a community of deep trust, belonging, and mutual respect. Relationships are intentionally cultivated and every student feels seen, valued, and safe to take academic and social risks.
Emotional Awareness & Regulation
▾There is no structured support for students' emotional awareness or regulation. Emotional needs are addressed reactively, if at all.
Some SEL language or tools are present (e.g., feelings chart), but use is inconsistent and not integrated into daily practice.
Students have access to regulation strategies and SEL language is woven into classroom routines. Teacher proactively checks in on students' emotional states.
Students consistently demonstrate emotional awareness and use a repertoire of self-regulation strategies independently. SEL is explicitly integrated into instruction and students support one another's emotional wellness.
Social Skills & Collaboration
▾Students work in isolation most of the time. Collaborative structures are absent or unproductive. Social skills are not explicitly taught or reinforced.
Students have some opportunities to collaborate, but social skills are not explicitly taught. Group work is inconsistent and students may struggle to work productively together.
Students regularly engage in structured collaborative learning. Social skills (listening, respectful disagreement, shared accountability) are explicitly taught and reinforced.
Students are skilled collaborators who take varied roles, hold each other accountable, and engage in productive discourse. They apply strong social skills to solve problems and produce meaningful collective work.
SEL Integration in Academics
▾SEL and academics are treated as separate domains. There is no evident connection between emotional/social learning and academic content or instructional design.
SEL practices exist alongside academics (e.g., morning meetings) but are rarely connected to content or used to deepen learning.
SEL competencies are sometimes integrated into academic tasks (e.g., perspective-taking in writing, collaboration in projects). Teacher makes connections between SEL and content explicit.
SEL is seamlessly woven into academic instruction. Students consistently apply SEL competencies (self-awareness, responsible decision-making, relationship skills) to deepen learning and engage with challenging content.