1. A diferent format of PBS 2. Leve 1! "ear 1#2 $ % &'e PBS(Do)*ment Standard Pre'ta'i+ %. Leve 2! "ear , (2-1,+ . (2-1.+ ,. Te't and E/am .. Mid "ear E/amination and End!of!"ear E/amination 0. Tem1ate for 2ormative and S*mmative Te't (E/)e Pro3ram+ 4an!Ma)5A1r! 4*n54*!Se15O)t!De) 6. Li'tenin3 and S1ea7in3 '7i m*'t 8e in)or1orated 9. No ':o;)a'e 2ie <. &'e e/er)i'e or a)tivit= 8oo7' 5 :ando*t 5 ora 1re'entation 1-.Eviden)e' 11.Maintain Tran'it >e)ord (not mandator=+ 12.Tea):er?' )ommitment 1%.A''e' P*1i' Leve ( Hoi'ti) A''e''ment+ 1,.T:e roe of En3i': Pane' in '):oo@ 8e3innin3 of '):oo 1..Arammar a''e''ment t:ro*3: '1ea7in3 and ;ritin3 10.Bo)a8*ar= ! "ear . Leve Will teachers be given clear and specific guidelines on what constitutes very limited understanding, limited understanding, satisfactory understanding, good understanding, very good understanding, and excellent understanding of a particular standard? Should we just focus on the average levelsLevels 3 & 4 (satisfactory and good and what about the rest? !ow do you "easure what is satisfactory and what is good? #he standards are subjective