strategies for assessment and grading
TRANSCRIPT
Strategies for assessment and
gradingCEFR workshop
CarthageMay 2013
QuestionsO Where does CEFR related rating fit in
to other aspects of evaluation in schools in Tuniisia?
O Do we distinguish clearly between normative, summative and formative assessment?
O What kind of assessment is the CEFR best adapted to?
A low stakes approach to CEFR assessment
O Low stakes – institution / in-course, in class assessmentO Use CEFR criteria, combining self-
assessment, teacher impression, double grading
O High stakes – official public certificationO Use standardised, statistically
validated public examinations wherever available
Assessing CEFR levelsO Specification
O Relating the curriculum to the «can do» statements
O Developing assessment tasks and CEFR criteriaO Standardisation and standard setting
O Training with illustrative samplesO Bench marking local samples
O Moderation and validationO Counteracting subjectivity with double markingO Check results against collateral information
Why do we need moderation?
O People using their own «private» criteria
O Unconscious «lead» criteria – e.g. accuracy v. fluency
O Severity / lenienceO Normative / comparative grading
Criterion ratingO It provides explicit information about
what a student can doO Measures which assess student
achievement in terms fo a criterion standard provide information on student performance independent of reference to the performance of others
O Aligning the criteria to the CEFR scale places the learner on a continuum of achievement