dr. robert mayes university of wyoming science and mathematics teaching center [email protected]
Post on 22-Dec-2015
214 views
TRANSCRIPT
UbD Think like an Assessor Stage 2
Dr. Robert MayesUniversity of Wyoming
Science and Mathematics Teaching Center
Assessor – 3 basic questionsWhat kind of evidence do we need to support the
attainment of goals?Tasks that reveal understanding, such as comparing
and contrasting or summarizing key conceptsWhat specific characteristics in student responses,
products, or performances should we examine to determine the extent to which the desired results were achieved?Criteria, rubrics, and exemplars are needed
Does the proposed evidence enable us to infer a student’s knowledge, skill, or understanding?Validity and reliability concerns
Stage 2: EvidenceThink like an assessor not an activity designer
What should be sufficient and revealing evidence of understanding?
What would be interesting and engaging activities on this topic?
What performance tasks must anchor the unit and focus the instructional work?
What resources and materials are available on this topic?
Against what criteria will I distinguish work?
How will I give students a grade and justify it to parents?
Assessor Activity Designer
Stage 2: EvidenceThink like an assessor not an activity designer
Assessor Activity DesignerHow will I be able to distinguish between those who really understand and those who don’t (though they seem to)?
What will students be doing in and out of class? What assignments will be given?
What misunderstandings are likely? How will I check for those?
Did the activities work? Why or why not?
Continuum of Assessment MethodsVary in several characteristics
Scope: from simple to complexTime Frame: short-term to long termSetting: decontextualized to authenticStructure: highly structured to ill-structured
Move from snapshot to scrapbook Self-assessment of sources of evidence (HO)
Informal checks
Observation/Dialogue
Quiz/Test
Academic Prompt
Performance Task
Collecting a Range of EvidenceActivity: (HO) determine a range of assessment
evidence you may use related to the Enduring understandingTopics important to know and doWorth being familiar withWhich assessment methods best fit the 3
categories? Worth being familiar with
Important to know and do
Enduring Understanding
Academic Prompt AssessmentsOpen-ended question or problem that require
student to prepare a specific academic responseThink critically and prepare responseRequire constructed response under exam
conditionsDivergent – no single best answerSubjective judgment based scoring using
criteria or rubricMay or may not be secure Often ill-structured – require development of
strategyInvolve analysis, synthesis, and evaluation
Performance TaskAssessmentsComplex challenges that mirror the issues
and problems faced by adultsReal or simulated settings, authenticRequire student to address audience in non-
exam conditionsDivergent – no single best answerSubjective judgment based scoring using
criteria or rubric, Greater opportunity to personalize taskNot secure – students given criteria in advance
Performance Task – 6 FacetsActivity: Use the 6 Facets of Understanding
to generate a performance task related to your enduring understandingQuestioning for Understanding (HO)Performance Verbs (HO)Performance Task creation (HO)Performance Task brainstorming (HO)
Performance Task -GRASPSCreating a performance task with context
and rolesGoalRoleAudienceSituationProduct, Performance, and PurposeStandards and Criteria for Success
Performance Task -GRASPSActivity: Create a performance task using
GRASPSGRASPS Performance Task Scenario (HO)Student roles and audiences (HO)Possible Products and Performances (HO)
Assessor Question 2: Determine achievement
What specific characteristics in student responses, products, or performances should we examine to determine the extent to which the desired results were achieved?Criteria, rubrics, and exemplars are needed
Designing Scoring RubricsRubric: criterion-based scoring guide for
evaluating a product or performance along a continuum.
Consists of:Evaluative Criteria – qualities that must be met
for work to measure up to a standardFixed Measurement Scale – often 4 or 5 levelsIndicators – descriptive terms for
differentiating among degrees of understanding, proficiency, or quality
Rubric Types
Holistic – provide an overall impression of the elements of quality and performance levels in a student’s work
Analytic – divides a student’s performance into two or more distinct dimensions (criteria) and judges each separately
Recommend use of analytic with a minimum of:Criteria for understanding (HO)Criteria for performanceUsing Facet-Related Criteria (Figure 8.3, Pg 178)
Rubric TypesGeneric – general criteria in given
performance area Can be developed before specific task defined Example: General Problem Solving Rubric Example: Generic Rubric for Understanding (HO)
Task-Specific – designed for use with particular assessment activity
Task dependent so cannot be used to evaluate related performance tasks
Rubric TypesLongitudinal Rubric – progression from naïve
to sophisticated understanding Increased understanding of complex functions and
interrelatedness of concepts Greater awareness of how discipline operates Greater personal control over and flexibility with
knowledge
Effective RubricsRelate specific task requirements to more
general performance goalsDiscriminate among different degrees of
understanding or proficiency according to significant features
Do not combine independent criteria in one column of rubric
Use Student Anchors to (Anchor design, Pg 181)Set standards based on student artifactsConsistency in judgment of student workEquip students to do more accurate and
productive self-assessment
Effective RubricsAll potential performances should fit
somewhere in rubricRely on descriptive language (what
quality looks like) not comparative or value language to make distinctions
Avoid making lowest score point sound bad, should describe novice or ineffective performance
Highlight judging performance’s impact as opposed to over rewarding just process or effort
Assessor Question 3:Valid and Reliable
Does the proposed evidence enable us to infer a student’s knowledge, skill, or understanding?
Validity: did we measure what we meant to measureDoes the evidence indicate understanding of
the expressed outcomes?Are the performances appropriate to the
understanding sought?Do not pay so much attention to correctness
that degree of understanding is lost.
ValidityTwo key validity questions for assessment tasks:A student could do well on this performance
task, but really not demonstrate the understanding you are after?
A student could perform poorly on this task, but still have significant understanding of the ideas and show them in other ways?
Activity: determining validity (Figure 8.5)
ValidityTwo key validity questions for rubric:Could the proposed criteria be met but the
performer still not demonstrate deep understanding?
Could the proposed criteria not be met but the performer nonetheless still show understanding?
ReliabilityReliable assessments reveal a credible
pattern, a clear trendNeed for multiple evidence (scrapbook)
rather than just a snapshot of student performance
Have parallel assessments on the same concept using multiple assessment formats.