EDUCATION MEDIA LLC

K–12 Structural Diagnostic Review Instrument

Aligned to the Colorado Four Domains for Rapid School Improvement
RFP DAAA 2026000072 – School Instructional Transformation Partner

  • Education Media has developed an interactive demonstration environment to illustrate how Diagnostic Review findings populate a structured performance dashboard.
  • All data displayed are simulated examples for evaluation purposes only and do not represent actual school performance data.

  • The demo environment reflects the structural logic of the Diagnostic Review Instrument but does not represent an active CDE implementation.
Education Media | Admin Dashboard (Sample)
District Structural Health Dashboard
Top-level administrative view (non-interactive sample)
Confidential • Demo Implementation Year
Demo Environment (Simulated Examples)
This dashboard mockup illustrates how district/school administrators could view rollups from the Four Domains rubrics and advancement pipeline. All values shown are sample data for UI demonstration only.
Sites in Portfolio
12
2 Intensive • 6 Targeted • 4 Universal
15 Directed Action
Overall Structural Health
63%
Portfolio average across Domains I–IV
Critical → Embedded63%
3 High Risk +6% QoQ
Top Strategic Priority Flags
Early Literacy
Attendance • MLL • HS Accountability
Early Literacy6 sites
Attendance4 sites
Multilingual Learners3 sites
Next Actions (30 Days)
7
Diagnostics • Coaching • PD
2 Diagnostic Reviews
Schedule site visits
Due
3 Coaching Cycles
Artifacts + walkthroughs
Active
2 Universal PD Sessions
Open enrollment
Planned
Four Domains Rollup (Portfolio Average)
Sample scores shown as percent equivalents
Last 90 Days
Domain I — Leadership
68%
Emphasis: Instructional Identity • Structural Coherence • Sustainability
Domain II — Talent
61%
Emphasis: Adult Capacity • Artifact Quality • Coaching Responsiveness
Domain III — Instruction
58%
Emphasis: Mastery Progression • Assessment Integrity • Feedback Cycles
Domain IV — Culture
65%
Emphasis: Purpose • Student Agency • Mastery Ownership
System Risk Summary
Counts are illustrative
Critical Re-Engineering Required
3
Monitor Stabilization Needed
5
Stable On Track
4
Notes for CDE / District Leadership
Placeholders for evaluator-ready narrative
  • Portfolio shows strongest consistency in Leadership & Culture.
  • Instructional mastery progression is the primary growth lever.
  • Early Literacy sites require tighter benchmark coherence in Phase A.
Sites Needing Attention (Sample)
Top risks based on simulated rubric totals
Risk Filter
Site Tier Priority Health
Pine Ridge Elementary
Early Literacy • Region: Metro
 Intensive Literacy 41%
Canyon View MS
Attendance • Region: South
 Targeted Attendance 52%
Summit HS
HS Accountability • Region: West
 Targeted Accountability 57%
Lakeside K–8
MLL • Region: North
 Universal MLL 63%
Program Structural Advancement Pipeline (Preview)
Non-interactive example of how sites move through phases
Phase A → C
Re-Engineering Required 3
Pine Ridge Elementary
I: 45% • II: 42% • III: 33% • IV: 44%
Canyon View MS
I: 50% • II: 46% • III: 38% • IV: 41%
Meadowbrook HS
I: 48% • II: 40% • III: 36% • IV: 39%
Structural Design Established 3
Lakeside K–8
I: 78% • II: 54% • III: 46% • IV: 52%
Aspen Grove ES
I: 81% • II: 53% • III: 44% • IV: 50%
Summit HS
I: 74% • II: 55% • III: 48% • IV: 51%
Adult Capacity Embedded 2
Riverbend MS
I: 86% • II: 74% • III: 61% • IV: 60%
Cedar Point K–5
I: 88% • II: 76% • III: 63% • IV: 62%
Instructional Transformation Verified 1
Evergreen HS
I: 92% • II: 84% • III: 81% • IV: 74%
Culture of Mastery Embedded 1
North Star Academy
I: 95% • II: 92% • III: 90% • IV: 94%
Tip: When you wire this up later, each site card can deep-link to the most recent rubric snapshot and the relevant Domain form.
Rubric Entry Shortcuts (Placeholders)
Replace the href values with your live form URLs before embedding into the instrument PDF or WordPress page.
Domain I — Leadership Rubric Form Domain II — Talent / Capacity Rubric Form Domain III — Instructional Transformation Form Domain IV — Culture & Climate Form
Reports & Evidence Packets (Sample)
Non-interactive placeholders for admin export options
Artifacts
Site Summary
Domain scores + Phase recommendations
Portfolio Rollup
District view across tiers
Evidence Packet
Artifacts + logs + rubric snapshots
Progress Brief
Phase movement over time
To keep the RFP narrative clean: label these as “prototype visualizations” and “simulated examples” (not production system commitments).
Admin Settings (Sample)
Shown for UX completeness only
Role-Based Access
District admin • Site leader • Coach
RBAC SSO-ready
Data Governance
Demo-only. Production policy TBD.
Privacy Audit Logs
Regional Filters
Metro • West • South • North
Regions Tiers

Program Structural Advancement Pipeline

Domain Score Translation (0–4 Rubric → Percentile)
0–1 = 0–25%
Structural Instability
2 = 50%
Developing / Partial Implementation
3 = 75%
Strong Implementation
4 = 90–100%
Fully Embedded & Sustainable
Re-Engineering Required
North Valley Health
I: 42% | II: 38% | III: 29% | IV: 34%
Riverside Arts Pathway
I: 51% | II: 33% | III: 40% | IV: 28%
West Tech Academy
I: 47% | II: 45% | III: 35% | IV: 39%
Structural Design Established
East Ridge AME
I: 82% | II: 55% | III: 48% | IV: 51%
Greenwood Health Sciences
I: 75% | II: 52% | III: 44% | IV: 50%
Adult Capacity Embedded
Lakeview ICT
I: 88% | II: 76% | III: 63% | IV: 60%
Harbor Media Arts
I: 84% | II: 72% | III: 68% | IV: 61%
Oak STEM Academy
I: 90% | II: 80% | III: 65% | IV: 70%
Instructional Transformation Verified
Summit Performing Arts
I: 92% | II: 85% | III: 81% | IV: 74%
Metro Engineering Academy
I: 89% | II: 82% | III: 78% | IV: 76%
Culture of Mastery Embedded
Central STEM
I: 95% | II: 91% | III: 89% | IV: 93%
Innovation Arts Conservatory
I: 96% | II: 94% | III: 90% | IV: 95%

SECTION 1 — DOMAIN I

Diagnostic Program Analysis & Scoring Rubric

Scoring Key: 0 = Not Present | 1 = Low | 2 = Moderate | 3 = High | 4 = Excellent Alignment

Criterion Score (0–4) Justification (Evidence Source)
1. Instructional Identity Clarity
Defined pathway/program identity clearly articulated and consistently referenced in artifacts, leadership messaging, and classroom expectations.
2. Instructor Expertise & Capacity Alignment
Staff qualifications, instructional depth, and demonstrated ability to deliver mastery-based progression aligned to pathway rigor.
3. Student Entry Integrity & Demand
Clear entry expectations, stable enrollment patterns, and documented advancement criteria (if applicable).
4. School Culture & Professional Expectation Alignment
Behavioral standards, performance expectations, and accountability norms reinforce pathway identity and rigor.
5. External Alignment & Partnerships
Formalized partnerships, compliance crosswalk alignment, postsecondary or industry engagement documented.
6. Postsecondary & Workforce Alignment
Clear articulation of next-step pathways, capstone alignment, career literacy integration, or credential mapping.
7. Work-Based Learning & Simulation Structures
Structured simulations, applied learning experiences, leadership roles, or real-world performance/application tasks embedded.
8. Structural Sustainability & Vertical Coherence
Multi-year progression model documented; continuity independent of individual instructors; compliance anchoring present.
9. Leadership & Vision Coherence
Leadership messaging and decision-making reinforce pathway identity and structural rigor.
Total Score
0 / 36
Interpretation
—

SECTION 2 — DOMAIN II

Instructor Capacity Diagnostic

This section evaluates whether instructors have completed required training, built aligned instructional materials, and demonstrated the capacity to implement the program with structural integrity.

Scoring Key: 0 = Not Present | 1 = Low | 2 = Moderate | 3 = Strong | 4 = Fully Embedded

Overall Program Health
0%
—
Criterion Score (0–4) Evidence / Notes
1. Training Completion & Participation
Instructors completed required training and workshops.
2. Curriculum & Planning Materials
Curriculum maps, planning documents, and pacing guides are complete and coherent.
3. Lesson & Assessment Design
Lesson plans and assessments reflect mastery-based progression.
4. Instructional Coherence
Materials align with program identity and demonstrate internal consistency.
5. Sustainability & Structural Durability
The program can operate consistently without heavy external support.
Total Score
0 / 20
Viability Classification
—

Training / Coaching Progression Pipeline

Training Assigned
Maria Sanchez
New Enrollment
David Kim
Awaiting Start
Training In Progress
Angela Brooks
Module Completion: 60%
Artifact Submitted
Kevin Patel
Awaiting Coach Review
Coaching Review
Sophia Green
Revision Required
Daniel Ortiz
Feedback Delivered
Class Implementation Verified
Emily Johnson
Observation Completed
Mastery Certified
Robert Lee
Credential Issued
Needs Intervention
Olivia Martinez
Coaching Escalation

SECTION 3 — DOMAIN III

Instructional Transformation Diagnostic

This section evaluates whether classroom instruction produces measurable, evidence-based mastery progression aligned to program standards.

Scoring Key: 0 = Not Present | 1 = Emerging | 2 = Developing | 3 = Strong Implementation | 4 = Fully Embedded & Sustainable

Overall Instructional Health
Instructional Model Not Yet Operational
Criterion Score (0–4) Evidence / Notes
1. Learning Objective Clarity
Clear, measurable objectives aligned to standards.
2. Observable Mastery Progression
Students demonstrate structured skill progression.
3. Assessment Integrity
Performance-based assessments aligned to mastery.
4. Feedback & Revision Cycle
Students receive actionable feedback and revise work.
5. Instructional Responsiveness
Instructor adjusts instruction based on mastery data.
6. Student Work Quality & Rigor
Artifacts reflect increasing complexity and precision.
7. Coaching Integration
Instruction reflects documented coaching feedback integration.
Total Score
0 / 28
Instructional Classification
Instructional Model Not Yet Operational

SECTION 4 — DOMAIN IV

Culture & Climate — Student Identity & Agency

This section evaluates whether instructor purpose has been embedded into classroom culture in a way that produces student identity formation, agency, ownership, and differentiated mastery progression.

Scoring Key: 0 = Not Present | 1 = Emerging | 2 = Inconsistent | 3 = Strong | 4 = Fully Embedded Cultural Norm

Overall Cultural Health
Fragmented or Surface-Level Climate
Criterion Score (0–4) Evidence / Notes
1. Purpose Transmission
Students can articulate the program purpose and pathway identity.
2. Student Identity Formation
Students describe themselves as becoming something specific within the pathway.
3. Mastery Ownership
Students track their progress and understand advancement expectations.
4. Differentiated Support Structures
Instruction reflects tiered scaffolds based on readiness and performance data.
5. Student Agency & Decision-Making
Students exercise meaningful choice in projects, roles, or leadership.
6. Rigor Norm Internalization
High standards are student-owned, not teacher-enforced.
7. Climate Stability & Psychological Safety
Students feel safe to revise, take risks, and grow.
Total Score
0 / 28
Cultural Classification
Fragmented or Surface-Level Climate
Understanding the

Diagnostic Scoring Tiers

Our framework provides a clear visual guide to understanding your school’s diagnostic scores. From Strong Structural Fit to Identity Architecture Absent, each tier represents a different level of alignment and clarity. Use this guide to interpret your results and identify areas for improvement.

Total Score Range

Interpretation

26–36

Strong Structural Fit

18–25

Promising Fit – Clarification Required

10–17

Structural Instability – Recalibration Required

0–9

Identity Architecture Absent

444 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 800, Long Beach, CA 90802