Evaluation Rubric for Portfolio



Criterion

4

A-level qualities
(90–100)

3

B-level qualities
(80–89)

2

C-level qualities
(70–79)

1 or 0

D- or F-level qualities
(60–69 or below 60)



Score
Evidence for standards attainment

 The level 4 portfolio provides clear, compelling, and consistent evidence of the candidate’s work to demonstrate attainment of the standard(s). The level 3 portfolio provides some evidence of the candidate’s work to demonstrate attainment of the standard(s). The level 2 portfolio provides limited evidence of the candidate’s work to demonstrate attainment of the standard(s). The level 1 portfolio provides little or no evidence of the candidate’s work to demonstrate attainment of the standard(s).  
Evidence for professional growth

There is clear and convincing evidence of the candidate’s professional growth, as demonstrated through the description of each artifact, the analysis of its importance, and the candidate’s reflection on the artifact. Evidence is present of the candidate’s professional growth, as demonstrated through the description of each artifact, the analysis of its importance, and the candidate’s reflection on the artifact; however, such evidence is less convincing, substantial, or significant than in a level 4 submission. Analysis and/or reflection is superficial and lacks depth. Evidence is present of the candidate’s professional growth, as demonstrated through the description of each artifact, the analysis of its importance, and the candidate’s reflection on the artifact; however, such evidence is weak or skeletal. Analysis and/or reflection is missing or unrelated to the description and analysis. There is little or no evidence of the candidate’s professional growth. , Description, analysis and/or reflection are missing, description lacks meaning, or elements are unrelated to one another.  
Coherence and purpose

 All components are tied together; each artifact is relevant and worthwhile and is part of a significant and meaningful plan that promotes the professional growth of the candidate. Most components are tied together; most artifacts are relevant and worthwhile and are part of a meaningful plan that promotes the professional growth of the candidate. Evidence is present of the candidate’s professional growth, as demonstrated through the description of the artifacts, the analysis of their importance, and the candidate’s reflection on the artifacts; however, such evidence is weak or skeletal. Analysis and/or reflection is missing or unrelated to an overall plan. Few components are tied together and most artifacts are not relevant or worthwhile; most do not appear to be part of a meaningful plan that promotes the professional growth of the candidate.  

Total:

  

Note: Criteria are evaluated on a 4-3-2-1-0 basis. Total rubric points are converted first to a letter grade and then to a numerical equivalent based on a 0–100 scale: 12 = A (93–100); 11 = A– (90–92); 10 = B+ (88–89); 9 = B (83–87); 8 = B– (80–82); 7 = C+ (78–79); 6 = C (72–77); 5 = C– (70–71); 2–4 = D (60–69); 0–1 = F (below 60).


Adapted from Bradley V. Balch, Pamela M. Frampton, and Marilyn A. Hirth (2006). Preparing a professional portfolio: A school administrator's guide. Boston: Pearson