The T-TESS rubric is Texas’s commissioner-recommended teacher appraisal system: a four-domain, 16-dimension rubric with five performance levels used to evaluate teacher practice through observable evidence and documentation.
For Texas district leaders, appraisers, and educators responsible for teacher evaluation and support, the rating is only as defensible as the evidence behind it, so districts need to distinguish what can be observed during instruction, what requires conferences or artifacts, and what belongs in the formal appraisal record.
This guide explains the current T-TESS structure, evidence requirements, walkthroughs versus formal appraisals, coaching practices, and appraiser calibration, along with the 2024 Alternate Domain I option, the 2026–27 T-TESS 2 pilot, and how Education Walkthrough supports that work.
The goal is to help districts move from compliance-driven scoring to defensible, evidence-based evaluations and coaching that improves instructional practice without treating every walkthrough as a scored evaluation.
Key Takeaways
- The commissioner-recommended T-TESS rubric contains four domains, 16 dimensions, and five performance categories.
- Since 2024–25, eligible teachers may be appraised using Planning or Alternate Domain I for lesson internalization, based on their responsibilities.
- Ratings must consider evidence generated through conferences, observations, goal-setting, professional development, and other documented sources.
- If evidence from an additional observation or walkthrough affects summative ratings, Texas rules require a written summary to be shared within 10 working days.
- Fifteen systems are piloting a 12-dimension rubric in 2026–27; TEA recommends broader implementation beginning in 2027–28.
What Is the T-TESS Rubric?
The Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS) is the commissioner-recommended teacher appraisal system within Texas teacher evaluation systems. It was piloted in 57 school districts during the 2014/15 school year. Texas districts may select T-TESS or adopt a locally developed appraisal system that meets state requirements.
The current commissioner’s rules for teacher appraisal align T-TESS with the Texas Teacher Standards and define the evidence, observation, conference, and reporting requirements for districts using it.
Under the current rubric, teachers are evaluated across 16 dimensions in four domains. Each dimension receives one of five categories: Distinguished, Accomplished, Proficient, Developing, or Improvement Needed. The official rule also requires appraisal of student performance, including student growth. If a district calculates one overall summative score, student performance must account for at least 20% of that score.
T-TESS is more than one classroom visit. Section 150.1002 requires appraisers to consider all data generated in the appraisal process, including pre-conferences, observations, post-conferences, end-of-year conferences, the Goal-Setting and Professional Development Plan, and other documented sources.
The Four T-TESS Domains and 16 Dimensions
The domains separate planning, enacted instruction, classroom conditions, and professional responsibilities. Appraisers should rate the written descriptors for each dimension rather than rely on a general impression of the lesson.
| Domain | Dimensions | Primary evidence |
| I. Planning | Standards and Alignment; Data and Assessment; Knowledge of Students; Activities | Plans, pre-conference, artifacts, and visible alignment |
| II. Instruction | Achieving Expectations; Content Knowledge and Expertise; Communication; Differentiation; Monitor and Adjust | Observed teacher and student actions during instruction |
| III. Learning Environment | Classroom Environment, Routines and Procedures; Managing Student Behavior; Classroom Culture | Observed routines, interactions, and learning conditions |
| IV. Professional Practices and Responsibilities | Professional Demeanor and Ethics; Goal Setting; Professional Development; School Community Involvement | Yearlong records, conferences, goals, collaboration, and communication |
Current T-TESS domains and dimensions in 19 Texas Administrative Code §150.1002.
Domain I Planning and Alternate Domain I
The standard Planning domain covers alignment to state standards, the use of student data, knowledge of students, and the design of activities.
Evidence commonly comes from lesson or unit plans, the pre-conference, student work, assessment information, and what students are asked to do during the observed lesson, including how teachers use formal and informal methods to measure student progress and inform instruction. Strong planning means the teacher designs clear, sequential lessons and flexible lessons that build higher-order thinking around student needs, especially for diverse learners.
Beginning with the 2024–25 school year, Texas added Alternate Domain I for teachers whose responsibilities emphasize lesson internalization rather than creating lessons from scratch. Districts should determine which version aligns with a teacher’s responsibilities and ensure that appraisers use the corresponding rubric and training materials. This is a current requirement to address, not part of the future T-TESS 2 refresh.
Domain II Instruction
The instruction contains five dimensions: Achieving Expectations, Content Knowledge and Expertise, Communication, Differentiation, and Monitor and Adjust, and instruction should actively engage learners.
These dimensions generate much of the evidence visible during a formal observation because they focus on how the teacher presents content, elicits student thinking, responds to differences, checks understanding, and adjusts instruction to meet student needs while supporting high levels of student achievement.
Appraisers should script observable actions and connect them to exact descriptors. Statements such as “students explained two solution methods and challenged a peer’s reasoning” are stronger than conclusions such as “high engagement” because the evidence can be revisited in the post-conference. This also helps show evidence of progress when the teacher analyzes student data and adjusts instruction.
Strong Domain II evidence also shows the teacher plans engaging learning that prompts higher-level responses.
Domain III Learning Environment
Learning Environment covers routines and procedures, student behavior, and classroom culture. Evidence may include how transitions work, how expectations are communicated, whether instructional time is protected, how students interact, and whether the environment supports learners, their social emotional success, participation, and academic risk-taking.
A strong learning environment also includes teacher supports that help all students meet high expectations and achievement goals.
A short visit can capture evidence relevant to this domain, but a brief snapshot does not automatically establish a dimension rating. The appraiser must consider the full record and the descriptor language.
Domain IV Professional Practices and Responsibilities
Domain IV covers professional demeanor and ethics, goal setting, professional development, and involvement in the school community.
Because much of this work occurs outside a single lesson, appraisers need yearlong evidence from goals, conferences, professional learning, collaboration, reflection, family communication, and other documented sources.
Goal-setting plans are updated throughout the year based on self-assessment to support professional growth. Professional learning communities help teachers actively engage with colleagues, strengthen skills, and contribute to school improvement and teacher growth.
Inferring Domain IV from a single classroom observation creates an evidence mismatch. District templates should clearly separate classroom evidence from professional-practice documentation.
What Do the Five T-TESS Performance Levels Mean?
Every dimension has its own descriptors at five performance levels. Appraisers should read vertically within each dimension rather than apply a single, generic definition to the entire rubric.
- Improvement Needed: The evidence aligns with the lowest descriptor for that dimension.
- Developing: Practice shows parts of the dimension but does not yet consistently meet the Proficient descriptor.
- Proficient: The evidence meets the expected descriptor for effective practice in that dimension, which is the expected standard for most teachers.
- Accomplished: The evidence meets the more advanced descriptor, often with stronger student ownership or consistent impact as specified by the dimension.
- Distinguished: The evidence meets the highest written descriptor for that dimension.
Higher ratings shouldn’t simply be awarded because a lesson felt impressive. The rating must match the dimension-specific language in the official T-TESS rubric and reflect best practice rather than general impressions.
When evidence falls across levels, appraisers should return to the descriptor, examine the cumulative record, and document the reasoning used.
What Evidence Can a Short Walkthrough Collect?
A walkthrough can support coaching and contribute documented evidence, but Texas rules determine when it also affects the summative appraisal.
The safest approach is to make the purpose clear before visits begin and use forms that separate evidence from ratings.
- Strong walkthrough evidence: Observable teacher actions, student responses, task alignment, questioning, checks for understanding, adjustments, routines, and classroom interactions.
- Evidence requiring other sources: Planning decisions, professional goals, professional learning, ethics, family communication, school-community involvement, and how a teacher uses informal methods beyond the observed lesson.
- Evidence to avoid: Inferences about intent, personality labels, or a performance-level judgment unsupported by the descriptor and cumulative record.
Texas rules allow additional observations and walkthroughs at the certified appraiser’s discretion. They do not require a post-conference for each additional visit.
However, when information from an additional observation or walkthrough affects summative ratings, the appraiser must provide a written summary within 10 working days, and teacher-response and appeal provisions apply; districts should also keep evidence collection separate from rated teacher evaluation systems decisions unless the rules for summative use are triggered.
Districts can use shared teacher observation templates to ensure consistent evidence fields across campuses while reserving formal ratings for the authorized appraisal process.
Formal T-TESS Appraisal vs Informal Coaching Walkthrough
The distinction depends on purpose, documentation, how the evidence is used, and the district’s appraisal policies, and T-TESS replaced PDAS with a model that emphasizes growth over compliance.
| Aspect | Formal appraisal | Coaching walkthrough |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Produce required appraisal evidence and ratings | Support-focused feedback and follow-up |
| Timing | At least one 45-minute observation; shorter segments may aggregate to 45 minutes by written mutual consent | Brief and frequent under local practice |
| Conferences | Required steps depend on the observation and appraisal cycle | Usually a short feedback conversation rather than the formal cycle |
| Rating impact | Contributes to the official appraisal record | Should remain unrated unless the district intends to use evidence under the applicable rules |
| Documentation | Formal reports and rule-based timelines apply | If evidence affects summative ratings, a written summary must be shared within 10 working days |
The official T-TESS evaluation process includes orientation, goal setting, pre-conference, observation, post-conference, and end-of-year conference stages, all tied to professional growth rather than mere procedural completion.
Education Walkthrough’s T-TESS evaluation cycle overview provides a district-leader view of how those stages fit across the year.
From Compliance to Coaching Without Blurring the Boundary
Compliance establishes the required appraisal process. Coaching uses narrower evidence between formal milestones to help teachers test one change, receive feedback, and revisit the same focus in ways that support teacher growth and student success. The two can align to the same rubric without becoming the same event.
A practical compliance-to-coaching loop follows five steps:
- Select one dimension. Use a teacher goal, prior evidence, or a campus priority to define the focus.
- Capture observable evidence. Record what the teacher and students said or did without assigning a performance level during the walkthrough.
- Agree on one action. Convert the evidence into a manageable instructional step the teacher can test.
- Re-observe the same focus. Return after the teacher has had time to apply the action and collect comparable evidence.
- Review the trend. Use several pieces of evidence to decide whether to continue, adapt, or close the coaching goal while reviewing evidence trends to support student achievement over time.
A 2024 study on classroom-observation scoring found that rater and time effects can influence scores and showed that accounting for multiple sources of error changed which teachers were identified as below standard.
Another 2024 analysis across multiple observation systems concluded that rater error is complex and difficult to estimate precisely, reinforcing the need for ongoing calibration rather than one-time certification.
Rubric-aligned observation can still support learning when teachers and leaders use the rubric to discuss concrete practice rather than treat it only as a score. A 2024 research review argues that rubric-based observations can help teachers refine their instructional decisions when the rubric’s view of good teaching is put into conversation with their own practice.
How Districts Can Improve Appraiser Calibration
Calibration is the ongoing work of making sure appraisers interpret descriptors and evidence consistently.
Certification is required, but district leaders still need local routines that reveal drift across campuses.
- Score common evidence independently: Have appraisers review the same lesson segment or evidence packet before discussing ratings.
- Defend the descriptor match: Require each rating to cite the exact rubric language and the evidence that supports it.
- Review evidence language: Replace judgments such as “weak management” with observable actions, counts, sequences, or quotations.
- Check difficult boundaries: Spend calibration time where appraisers split between adjacent levels, not only on obvious examples.
- Repeat across the year: Recalibrate after staffing changes, policy updates, and before summative conferences.
The related pages on the steps in a T-TESS cycle and teacher T-TESS preparation can be assigned to appraisers and teachers, respectively, without turning this rubric page into a duplicate process guide.
T-TESS 2 Update for the 2026–27 School Year
Districts should distinguish the current 16-dimension rubric from the T-TESS 2 pilot.
TEA’s June 4, 2026 update says the refreshed rubric retains four domains but reduces the structure to 12 dimensions: Instructional Preparation, Instructional Delivery, Learning Environment, and Professional Practices and Responsibilities.
TEA reported that 89% of Texas school systems use T-TESS. Field testing took place during 2025–26, and more than 95% of surveyed teachers and 100% of surveyed school leaders said the pilot rubric was an improvement over the current rubric. Those percentages describe surveyed field-test participants, not all Texas educators.
Fifteen school systems are participating in the 2026–27 pilot. TEA’s anticipated timeline identifies 2027–28 as the recommended implementation year and 2028–29 as the implementation year for districts unable to adopt in 2027–28.
Districts outside the pilot should continue using their currently authorized appraisal system while planning for training and monitoring in accordance with further TEA guidance.
How Education Walkthrough Supports T-TESS-Aligned Evidence
Education Walkthrough can support the evidence and coaching work around T-TESS without replacing certified appraisers, local policy, required conferences, or official summative documentation.
Verified platform capabilities include built-in and customizable frameworks, mobile observations, shared templates, same-day feedback, evaluation-cycle tracking, district-level visibility, teacher history, offline access, and role-based permissions.
For district teams, the practical value is consistency. Leaders can use one shared form for a selected dimension, capture evidence during a visit, send focused feedback, return to the same look-for, and examine trends across schools.
The teacher evaluation software page explains how these features support formal and formative workflows.
The Education Walkthrough does not determine legal compliance or automatically assign T-TESS ratings. Districts remain responsible for selecting the authorized rubric, certifying appraisers, applying the commissioner’s rules and local policy, maintaining official records, and handling teacher responses or appeals.
Strengthen T-TESS Evidence and Coaching
Use the T-TESS Rubric as Both a Standard and a Coaching Language
The current T-TESS rubric gives Texas districts four domains, 16 dimensions, and five performance levels for evaluating teacher practice.
A defensible Texas teacher evaluation connects each rating to the correct descriptor and cumulative evidence, while a productive coaching process narrows the same framework into observable actions teachers can revisit between formal milestones.
Education Walkthrough helps district leaders organize rubric-aligned evidence, share feedback, maintain common templates, and review patterns across campuses.
Start Your Free T-TESS Coaching Trial
Frequently Asked Questions
Still have questions? Here’s what Texas district leaders and appraisers often ask about T-TESS.
Do All Texas Teachers Receive Annual T-TESS Appraisals?
Not necessarily. Eligible teachers may receive less frequent appraisals when permitted by district policy and Texas rules. Districts must still complete the required annual review process.
Who Can Conduct a T-TESS Appraisal?
T-TESS appraisals must be completed by certified appraisers who have completed state-approved training. Districts are responsible for confirming that assigned appraisers meet current certification requirements.
Can a Teacher Request a Second T-TESS Appraiser?
Yes. A teacher may request a second appraiser after receiving an observation summary or summative appraisal report. The request must follow the deadlines and procedures established by Texas rules and district policy.
What Happens When a Teacher Disagrees With T-TESS Feedback?
Teachers may submit a written response or rebuttal and request a second appraisal when applicable. Districts should document the response and follow their established appraisal and grievance procedures.
Can Campuses Have Different Coaching Priorities?
Yes. Education Walkthrough allows districts to maintain shared observation standards while using focused templates or look-fors for different campuses, departments, or instructional priorities.
