Spokane (WA) TPEP Observation Framework
Spokane Public Schools' implementation of Washington's Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program (TPEP), structured around the eight teaching criteria established in state law (RCW 28A.405.100) and aligned to the Marzano model. Spokane Public Schools serves over 28,000 students and uses this locally adapted framework to evaluate teachers against Washington's statutory criteria while drawing on Marzano-based instructional elements and a four-level proficiency scale.
The Spokane TPEP is organized into 8 domains, 31 criteria, and a 4-level rating scale.
Used by Spokane Public Schools in Washington state as a district-specific TPEP implementation. Under Washington law, districts select from three state-approved instructional frameworks; Spokane adopted a locally adapted Marzano-based model organized around the eight statutory teaching criteria required by RCW 28A.405.100.
Domains and Criteria
The Spokane TPEP domains and criteria
Criterion 1: Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement
Providing clear learning goals and scales, celebrating student success, understanding student interests and backgrounds, and demonstrating value and respect for reluctant learners and students regularly underserved by school systems.
- Component 1.1: Providing Clear Learning Goals and Scales
- Component 1.2: Celebrating Success
- Component 1.3: Understanding Students' Interests and Backgrounds
- Component 1.4: Demonstrating Value and Respect for Reluctant Learners and Students Regularly Marginalized or Underserved by School Systems
Criterion 2: Demonstrating effective teaching practices
Conducting direct instruction, practicing and deepening, and knowledge application lessons; using academic vocabulary; asking in-depth questions and probing incorrect answers with underserved learners; noticing disengagement; and evaluating lesson effectiveness.
- Component 2.1: Conducting Direct Instruction Lessons
- Component 2.2: Conducting Practicing and Deepening Lessons
- Component 2.3: Conducting Knowledge Application Lessons
- Elements 2.a.1 through 2.a.8
- Component 2.4: Asking In-depth Questions of Reluctant Learners and Students Regularly Marginalized or Underserved by School Systems
- Component 2.5: Appropriately Probing Incorrect Answers Given by Reluctant Learners and Students Regularly Marginalized or Underserved by School Systems
- Component 2.6: Noticing When Students Are Not Engaged
- Component 2.7: Using and Applying Academic Vocabulary
- Component 2.8: Evaluating Effectiveness of Individual Lessons and Units
Criterion 3: Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs
Scaffolding information effectively within lessons and planning instruction that addresses the full range of student learning needs, including differentiated support for diverse learners.
- Component 3.1: Effective Scaffolding of Information Within a Lesson
- Component 3.2: Planning and Preparing for the Needs of All Students
Criterion 4: Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum
Aligning instruction to established content standards and making strategic use of available resources and technology to support student learning.
- Component 4.1: Attention to Established Content Standards
- Component 4.2: Use of Available Resources and Technology
Criterion 5: Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment
Organizing the physical classroom, establishing and reviewing rules and procedures, demonstrating withitness, applying and acknowledging adherence to behavioral expectations, and displaying objectivity and control.
- Component 5.1: Organizing the Physical Layout of the Classroom
- Component 5.2: Reviewing Expectations for Rules and Procedures
- Component 5.3: Demonstrating 'Withitness'
- Component 5.4: Applying Consequences for Lack of Adherence to Rules and Procedures
- Component 5.5: Acknowledging Adherence to Rules and Procedures
- Component 5.6: Displaying Objectivity and Control
Criterion 6: Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning
Designing instruction aligned to assessment, using multiple data sources to understand student progress, and tracking individual and class-wide learning over time.
- Component 6.1: Designing Instruction Aligned to Assessment
- Component 6.2: Using Multiple Data Elements
- Component 6.3: Tracking Student Progress
Criterion 7: Communicating and collaborating with parents and the school community
Engaging in positive and timely interactions with parents and the school community about courses, programs, and school events.
- Component 7.1: Engaging in Positive Interactions with Parents and the School Community About Courses, Programs, and School Events
- Component 7.2: Engaging in Timely and Professional Interactions with Parents and the School Community
Criterion 8: Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning
Seeking mentorship for professional growth, promoting positive interactions with colleagues, and participating in district and school improvement initiatives.
- Component 8.1: Seeking Mentorship for Areas of Need or Interest
- Component 8.2: Promoting Positive Interactions with Colleagues
- Component 8.3: Participating in District and School Initiatives
Rating Levels
Spokane TPEP rating levels
Giving feedback on the Spokane TPEP
The slow part is the write-up
Aligning observation evidence to every Spokane TPEP domain and standard by hand, for every teacher and every visit, is what eats a principal's week. Observation Copilot does that mapping for you.
How Observation Copilot Helps
AI-powered Spokane TPEP feedback in seconds
Paste your observation notes. Copilot maps your evidence to the right Spokane TPEP domains and drafts structured, rubric-aligned feedback - ready to review and share. Walkthrough notes return a focused single-indicator debrief; full lesson observations return a multi-domain rubric-aligned report.
- Maps observation notes to Spokane TPEP criteria automatically
- Generates evidence-based summaries for each of the eight criteria
- Suggests ratings aligned to the 4-level scale (Unsatisfactory through Distinguished)
- Creates targeted next steps tied to specific Spokane TPEP components
- Reduces post-observation write-up time from hours to minutes for Spokane principals
Frequently Asked Questions
Spokane TPEP FAQ
- What is the Spokane TPEP framework?
- Spokane Public Schools' implementation of Washington's Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program (TPEP), structured around the eight teaching criteria established in state law (RCW 28A.405.100) and aligned to the Marzano instructional model, rated on a four-level scale.
- What are the criteria of the Spokane TPEP framework?
- The framework covers 8 state criteria: centering instruction on high expectations; demonstrating effective teaching practices; recognizing individual student learning needs; providing clear focus on subject matter content and curriculum; fostering a safe, positive learning environment; using multiple student data elements; communicating and collaborating with parents and the school community; and exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices.
- How is the Spokane TPEP framework scored?
- Performance is rated on a 4-level scale: Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient, and Distinguished.
- Which instructional model does Spokane use for TPEP?
- Washington districts choose from three state-approved instructional frameworks. Spokane Public Schools adopted a locally adapted Marzano-based model organized around the eight statutory teaching criteria.
Used In
States Using Spokane TPEP
Related Reading
Spokane TPEP Resources for Principals
FFT, T-TESS, Marzano, or Your Own: How Observation Copilot Aligns to Any Framework
Whether you use Danielson FFT, T-TESS, Marzano, or a custom rubric, Observation Copilot aligns feedback to your framework.
Read more
Walkthroughs vs. Formal Observations: When Each One Helps and When It Hurts
Walkthroughs and formal observations serve different purposes. Here's how principals balance both in a coaching cycle that actually grows teachers.
Read more
Writing Better Observation Notes: Tips for Getting the Most Out of AI-Powered Feedback
AI-generated feedback is only as good as your observation notes. Practical tips for writing notes that produce better, more specific results.
Read more
The Post-Observation Conversation: How to Make the 15 Minutes After Feedback Count
Delivering feedback is only half the job. Here's how to structure the post-observation conversation so teachers grow from it.
Read more
Ready to streamline your Spokane TPEP observations?
Start generating framework-aligned feedback in seconds.