Skip to Content

Official Site of The State of New Jersey

Governor Phil Murphy • Lt. Governor Tahesha Way

Educator Evaluation

Student Growth Objectives Quality Rating Rubric

The Quality Rating Rubric describes the components of excellent Student Growth Objectives (SGO), guiding districts to tools and resources that support SGO development.

**Tracking Progress and Refining Instruction**
Excellent	Good	Fair	Inadequate
Includes all or most standards forwhich the teacher is responsible during the instructional period	Includes the standards for which the teacher is responsible during the instructional period.	Includes some of the standards for which the teacher is responsible during the instructional period.	Includes a few of the standards for which the teacher is responsible during the instructional period.
Articulates how the majority of selected standards are critical to the enduring understanding of the subject area, success in future classes, and readiness in college, career, and life.	Articulates how some selected standards are critical to the enduring understanding of the subject area, success in future classes, and readiness in college, career, and life.	Articulates how some selected standards lead to future success.	Does not justify how the standards chosen to lead to future success or does so poorly.

**Assessments**
Excellent	Good	Fair	Inadequate
Align all items to the chosen standards taught during the SGO period. All critical standards have multiple items.	Align most items to the chosen standards taught during the SGO period. Most critical standards have multiple items.	Align some items to the chosen standards taught during the SGO period. Some critical standards have multiple items.	Align a few or no items to the chosen standards. Critical standards are not identified and have few items.
Range of rigor accurately reflects the rigor of instruction, content, and skills of course.	Range of rigor mostly reflects the rigor of instruction, content, and skills of course.	Range of rigor somewhat reflects the rigor of instruction, content, and skills of course.	Range of rigor does not reflect the rigor of instruction, content, and skills of course.
Highly accessible to all students regardless of background knowledge, cultural differences, or special needs.	Mostly accessible to all students regardless of background knowledge, cultural differences, or special needs.	Somewhat accessible to all students regardless of background knowledge, cultural differences, or special needs.	Disadvantages of certain students because of background knowledge, cultural differences, or special needs.
Assessment design is consistently high quality. Includes rubrics, scoring guides, and/or answer keys for all items, all of which are accurate, clear, and thorough.	Assessment design is mostly high quality. Includes rubrics, scoring guides, and/or answer keys for all items, most of which are accurate, clear, and thorough.	Assessment design is of moderate quality. Includes rubrics, scoring guides, and/or answer keys for some items, most of which are accurate, clear, and thorough.	Assessment design is of low quality in virtually all aspects of design.
Teachers of the same subject matter/grade level use a common summative assessment.	Teachers of the same subject matter/grade level’s summative assessments are similar but not the same.	Teachers of the same subject matter/grade level’s summative assessments of the same standards are different.	Teachers of the same subject matter/grade level assess different standards in different ways.

**Collaboration**
Excellent	Good	Fair	Inadequate
Most, or all, key decisions were made collaboratively between teachers (and/or teachers and administrators).	Many key decisions were made collaboratively between teachers (and/or teachers and administrators).	Some key decisions were made collaboratively between teachers (and/or teachers and administrators).	Few or no key decisions are made collaboratively by teachers (and/or teachers and administrators).

**Tracking Progress and Refining Instruction**
Excellent	Good	Fair	Inadequate
Standards are assessed in a way that growth is logically measured and is regularly monitored with instruction adjusted accordingly throughout the school year.	Standards are assessed in a way that growth is logically measured and is regularly monitored throughout the school year.	Standards are assessed in a way that growth is logically measured throughout the school year.	Standards are assessed in a way that growth cannot be measured or monitored until the summative assessment is given.
Common assessments are used as checkpoints in measuring growth.	Common assessments are used in measuring growth.	Common assessments are rarely used in measuring growth.	Commons assessments are not in use in measuring growth.

**Starting Points/Scoring Plan**
Excellent	Good	Fair	Inadequate
Multiple, high-quality measures of baseline data are used to determine student starting points.	Multiple measures of baseline data, the quality of which may vary, are used to determine student starting points.	A single measure of high quality is used to determine student starting points.	A single measure of low quality is used to determine student starting points.
Student learning targets are differentiated to be ambitious and achievable for all or nearly all students.	Student learning targets are differentiated to be ambitious and achievable for a majority of students.	Student learning targets are differentiated to be ambitious and achievable for some students.	Student learning targets are not differentiated or are set too low.
“Full attainment” accurately reflects a teacher’s considerable impact on student learning. “Exceptional attainment” clearly exceeds the objective set.	“Full attainment” somewhat reflects a teacher’s impact on student learning. “Exceptional attainment” of the SGO does little to reflect the teacher’s impact on student learning.	"Full attainment” loosely reflects a teacher’s impact on student learning. “Exceptional” was easily attained by a less-than-ambitious scoring plan.	“Full attainment” is too low or too high to accurately represent a teacher’s considerable impact on student learning.
Scoring range is justified by the analysis of baseline data and the rigor of the assessment.	Scoring range is implied by the presented baseline data and the rigor of the assessment.	Scoring range is somewhat reflected by baseline data and the rigor of the assessment.	Scoring range is not reflected by baseline data and the rigor of the assessment.

Page Last Updated: 06/25/2024

Back
to top