FINDING AND CREATING - Portland Community College · Student Assessment For Student Learning ......

FINDING AND CREATING HIGH-QUALITY RUBRICS

Judy Arter Independent Consultant

Loren Ford Clackamas Community College

January 27-28, 2011 Anderson Conference

Shifting From a Grading Culture to a Learning Culture: ASSESSMENT THEORY AND PRACTICE

Judy Arter PO Box 470, Beavercreek, OR 97004

[email protected]

Adapted from: Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., and Chappuis, S. (2006). Student Assessment For Student Learning (CASL),

Portland: Pearson Assessment Training Institute. Arter, J. and Chappuis, J. (2006). Creating and Recognizing Quality Rubric (CAR), Portland: Pearson Assessment

Training Institute.

Judy Arter and Loren Ford, Anderson Conference, PCC, January 2011 1 Handout #4

Seminar Goals 1. Understand the relationship betwen assessment and student motivation 2. Understand the different between assessment of and for learning 3. Deepen your understanding of keys to quality student assessment 4. Deepen your understanding of assessment for learning strategies

Goals For This Session 1. Deepen your understanding of keys to to quality student assessment: Key 3 (Assessment Design),

features rubrics need to support instructional (assessment for learning) uses

Topics:

1. Features of effective rubrics when the goal is boosting student achievement of complex learning targets. 2. Several things to improve rubrics right away

Characteristics of Quality Instructional Rubrics

If the goal of using a rubric is formative—to help students understand levels of quality of complex learning targets (such as reasoning, performance skills, and products) to improve achievement—what features do they need?

Compare your list of quality features to the Rubric for Rubrics Summary on page 4 of this handout. Where are the matches? Any surprises? What questions do you have?


Rubric for Rubrics Summary The Rubric for Rubrics has two criteria (traits) Content/Coverage and Clarity. 1. Coverage/Organization: What counts in a student’s work?

A. Criteria Cover the Right Content. Does the rubric cover everything of importance? Does it leave out unimportant things? • Does content represent best thinking in the field about what it means

to perform well on the learning target(s) under consideration? • Does content align directly with the content standards or learning

targets it is intended to assess? • Does content have the “ring of truth”—does the rubric help you

organize your own thinking about quality performance?

B. Criteria Are Well Organized. Is the rubric divided into easily understandable chunks (criteria), as needed? • Is the number of criteria appropriate for the complexity of the

learning target? • Do the descriptors for each criterion fit where they’re placed? • Does the relative emphasis among criteria represent their relative

importance? • Is the contribution of each criterion clear with minimal overlap

among them?

C. Number of Levels Fits Targets and Uses. Is the number of levels appropriate for the intended learning target and use? Can users distinguish among the levels?

2. Clarity: Does everyone understand what is meant?

A. Levels Defined. Is each level of the rubric clearly defined? • Do definitions rely on descriptive words and phrases rather than on

(1) nonspecific words such as “excellent” and “thorough”, or (2) counting the number or frequency of something? Plusses: there are examples of student work at each level for all criteria, and there are student-friendly versions.

• Is wording descriptive, not evaluative? B. Levels Parallel. Are the levels of the rubric parallel in content?

• If a feature is mentioned at one level, is it also mentioned at all the other levels?

Rubric for Rubrics Overview

The Rubric for Rubrics is a rubric for evaluating the quality of performance assessment rating scales, which we call rubrics. It describes the features of a rubric that make it useful for assessment and learning in the classroom. It is intended to be used with general rubrics, not task-specific scoring guides.

How to Use the Rubric • In the Rubric for Rubrics, we will call the two major dimensions criteria or

traits, the lettered subheads under each criterion indicators, and the numbered phrases under each indicator descriptors.

• The descriptors under each indicator are not meant to function as a checklist. Not everything has to be present (or missing) for the classroom rubric to be judged to be at a particular level of quality. Ask yourself, “Which level of descriptors best describes the classroom rubric I’m considering?”

• An odd number of levels is used because the middle level represents a balance of strengths and weaknesses. It would take some work to make it usable, but it probably is worth the effort. A Strong score doesn’t necessarily mean that the classroom rubric under consideration is perfect; rather, it means that it would require very little work to get it ready for use. A Weak score means that the classroom rubric needs so much work that it probably isn’t worth the effort—it’s time to find another one. It might even be easier to begin from scratch.

• Additionally, a Medium score does not mean average. This is a criterion-referenced scale, not a norm-referenced one. It is meant to describe levels of quality in a classroom rubric, not to compare those currently available. It could be that the typical currently available classroom rubric is closer to Weak than to Medium.

• Although three levels are defined, it is in fact a five-level scale. Think of level 4 as a combination of characteristics from levels 5 and 3. Likewise, level 2 combines characteristics from levels 3 and 1.


Criterion 1: COVERAGE/ORGANIZATION

5—Strong 3—Medium 1—Weak

A. Covers the Right Content

1. The content of the rubric represents the best thinking in the field about what it means to perform well on the skill or product under consideration.

2. The content of the rubric aligns directly with

the content standards/ learning targets it is intended to assess.

3. The content has the “ring of truth”—your

experience as a teacher confirms that the content is truly what you do look for when you evaluate the quality of a student product or performance. In fact, the rubric is insightful; it helps you organize your own thinking about what it means to perform well.

1. Much of the content represents the best thinking in the field, but there are a few places that are questionable.

2. Some features don’t align well with the

content standards/learning targets it is intended to assess.

3. Much of the content is relevant, but you

can easily think of some important things that have been left out or that have been given short shrift, or it contains an irrelevant criterion or descriptor that might lead to an incorrect conclusion about the quality of student performance.

1. You can’t tell what learning target(s) the rubric is intended to assess, or you can guess at the learning targets, but they don’t seem important, or content is far removed from current best thinking in the field about what it means to perform well on the skill or product under consideration.

2. The rubric doesn’t seem to align with the content

standards/learning targets it is intended to assess. 3. You can think of many important dimensions of a

quality performance or product that are not in the rubric, or content focuses on irrelevant features. You find yourself asking, “Why assess this?” or “Why should this count?” or “Why should students have to do it this way?”


Criterion 1: COVERAGE/ORGANIZATION

5—Strong 3—Medium 1—Weak

B. Criteria are Well Organized

1. The rubric is divided into easily understandable criteria as needed. The number of criteria reflects the complexity of the learning target. If a holistic rubric is used, it’s because a single criterion adequately describes performance.

2. The details that are used to describe a criterion go together; you can see how they are facets of the same criterion.

3. The relative emphasis on various features of performance is right—things that are more important are stressed more; things that are less important are stressed less.

4. The criteria are independent. Each important feature that contributes to quality work appears in only one place in the rubric.

1. The number of criteria needs to be adjusted a little: either a single criterion should be made into two criteria, or two criteria should be combined.

2. Some details that are used to describe a criterion are in the wrong criterion, but most are placed correctly.

3. The emphasis on some criteria or descriptors is either too small or too great; others are all right.

4. Although there are instances when the

same feature is included in more than one criterion, the criteria structure holds up pretty well.

1. The rubric is holistic when an analytic one is better suited to the intended use or learning targets to be assessed—or—the rubric is an endless list of everything; there is no organization; the rubric looks like a brainstormed list.

2. The rubric seems “mixed up”—descriptors that go

together don’t seem to be placed together. Things that are different are put together.

3. The rubric is out of balance—features of more importance are emphasized the same as features of less importance.

4. Descriptors of quality work are represented redundantly

in more than one criterion to the extent that the criteria are really not covering different things.

C. Number of Levels Fits Targets and Uses 1. The number of levels of quality used in the

rating scale makes sense. There are enough levels to be able to show student progress, but not so many levels that it is impossible to distinguish among them.

1. Teachers might find it useful to create more

levels to make finer distinctions in student progress, or merge levels to suit the rubric's intended use. The number of levels could be adjusted easily.

1. The number of levels is not appropriate for the learning

target being assessed or the intended use. There are so many levels that it is impossible to distinguish among them, or too few to make important distinctions. It would take major work to fix the problem.


Criterion 2: CLARITY 5—Strong 3—Medium 1—Weak

A. Levels Defined Well 1. Each score point (level) is defined with indicators

and descriptors. A plus: There are examples of student work that illustrate each level of each trait.

2. There is enough descriptive detail in the form of

concrete indicators, adjectives, and descriptive phrases that allow you to match a student performance to the “right” score. A plus: If students are to use the rubric, there are student-friendly versions, and/or versions in foreign languages for ELL students.

3. If counting the number or frequency of something

is included as an indicator, changes in such counts really are indicators of changes in quality.

4. Wording is descriptive not evaluative.

1. Only the top level is defined. The other levels

are not defined. 2. There is some attempt to define terms and

include descriptors, but some key ideas are fuzzy in meaning.

3. There is some descriptive detail in the form of

words, adjectives, and descriptive phrases, but counting the frequency of something or vague quantitative words are also present.

4. Wording is mostly descriptive of the work, but

there are a few instances of evaluative labels.

1. No levels are defined; the rubric is little more than a list of

categories to rate followed by a rating scale. 2. Wording of the levels, if present, is vague/confusing. You

find yourself saying such things as, “I’m confused,” or “I don’t have any idea what this means.” Or, the only way to distinguish levels is with words such as extremely, very, some, little, and none; or completely, fairly well, little, and not at all.

3. Rating is almost totally based on counting the number or

frequency of something, even though quality is more important than quantity.

4. Wording tends to be evaluative rather than descriptive of the work; e.g., work is “mediocre,” “above average,” or “clever.”

B. Levels Parallel

1. The levels of the rubric are parallel in content—if an indicator of quality is discussed in one level, it is discussed in all levels. If the levels are not parallel, there is a good explanation why.

1. The levels are mostly parallel in content, but there are some places where there is an indicator at one level that is not present at the other levels without a good reason.

1. Levels are not parallel in content and there is no explanation of why, or the explanation doesn’t make sense.


Rubric Content

Rubric for Rubrics, Criterion 1: Coverage/Organization, Indicator 1A: Content.

Two important questions: 1. Would the information obtained from using this rubric allow me (the instructor) to (a) accurately

judge level of student mastery of important learning outcomes, and/or (b) plan meaningful instruction?

2. Would the content of this rubric send the right message to students about what a quality performance or product looks like; would it focus student attention on the learning rather than the grade?

Common Pitfall: Not including important stuff; including irrelevant stuff.

Common Pitfall: Not being clear on learning targets.

Rubric for Rubrics, Criterion 1: Content/Coverage, Indicator C: Number of Levels Fits Target and Purpose

Common Pitfall: Having a rubric that adds to 100 points.


Research Report Rubric

Score Criterion

50 points Content/Organization: A theme is established and developed with the most pertinent details; content is accurate; technical words, when used, are used correctly; information is organized to easily lead the reader through the ideas; pacing is good—the author takes his/her time on important or confusing points, and speeds up when detail is not necessary; there is an inviting opening; the ending sums up the ideas.

10 points Style and Voice: The style shows that the writer is interested in the topic and wants the reader to be as well. Sentences are varied in beginnings and lengths and enhance the flow of the work.

20 points Format: The writer has used the format usual in this type of writing.

10 points Conventions: Spelling, grammar, punctuation, and paragraphing show very few errors, none of which interfere with the meaning or the style of the report. In fact, conventions are sometimes used purposefully to enhance the meaning of the text.

10 points References: At least 10 references that are relevant and comprehensive.

______/100 TOTAL

Rubric for Rubrics, Criterion 1: Coverage/Organization; Indicator 1C: Number of Levels Fits Target and Uses

This is an example of a rubric which has points assigned that add to 100. This is generally done for perceived ease of weighting dimensions of performance that are more important, and grading.

We don’t recommend doing this: First, there are accuracy concerns—would two teachers give the same number of points?

Second, there are concerns about formative usefulness—would students understand the difference between, say, 40 and 41 on Content/Organization?

Neither students nor instructor can distinguish between more than about 8 levels.


Rubric Clarity

General notes about rubric clarity. Rubric for Rubrics, Criterion 2: Clarity, Indicator 2A: Levels Defined, and Indicator 2B: Levels Parallel.

Common Pitfall: Using vague, relative quality words. Why is it good to have lots of description in a formative rubric?

Common Pitfall: Counting the number of something. Why should you be careful of using the number of something (counts) to indicate level of quality?

Discuss: What procedures can you use to make sure your rubrics have descriptive detail? (See page 12.)


Rubric for Musical Performance (partial)

Tone Quality

Superior Excellent Good Fair Poor

Intonation


Rhythm


Technique (facility/accuracy)


Interpretation, Musicianship


Rubric for Research Report (partial)

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Thesis Statement

Very relevant thesis statement

Adequate thesis statement

Thesis statement is present, but is only partially relevant

Irrelevant thesis statement; or, thesis statement is missing

Information Information shared shows insightful understanding of the topic

Information shared shows adequate understanding of the topic

Information shared shows partial understanding of the topic

Information shared shows little understanding of the topic

Conclusion Conclusion clearly states your opinion on the issues; opinion is thoroughly supported.

Conclusion states your opinion on the issues; opinion is adequately supported

Conclusion is present but doesn't state your opinion; or, opinion is only partially supported.

Conclusion is missing; or, opinion is not supported

Rubric for Rubrics, Criterion 2: Clarity; Indicator 2A: Levels Defined

These are examples of rubric using vague, relative quality words. We don’t recommend such use in classroom rubrics for formative uses because, although instructors might be able to agree on “scores,” students wouldn’t understand the basis for a rating nor what to do to perform better next time.


6+1 Trait Writing Assessment Scoring Guide Education Northwest, 101 SW Main, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97204. Used with permission.

VOICE

5: The writer speaks directly to the reader in a way that is individual, compelling and engaging. The writer crafts the writing with an awareness and respect for the audience and the purpose for writing. A. The tone of the writing adds interest to the message and is appropriate for

the purpose and audience. B. The reader feels a strong interaction with the writer, sensing the person

behind the words. C. The writer takes a risk by revealing who he or she is consistently throughout

the piece. D. Expository or persuasive writing reflects a strong commitment to the topic by

showing why the reader needs to know this and why he or she should care. E. Narrative writing is honest, personal, and engaging and makes you thing

about and react to, the author's ideas and point of view.

3: The writer seems sincere but not fully engaged or involved. The result is pleasant or even personable, but not compelling. A. The writer seems aware of an audience but discards personal insights in

favor of obvious generalities. B. The writing communicates in an earnest, pleasing, yet safe manner. C. Only one or two moments here or there intrigue, delight, or move the reader.

These places may emerge strongly for a line or two, but quickly fade away. D. Expository or persuasive writing lacks consistent engagement with the topic

to build credibility. E. Narrative writing is reasonably sincere, but doesn't reflect unique or

individual perspective on the topic.

1: The writer seems indifferent, uninvolved, or distanced from the topic and/or the audience. As a result, the paper reflects more than one of the following problems. A. The writer is not concerned with the audience. The writer's style is a

complete mismatch for the intended reader or the writing is so short that little is accomplished beyond introducing the topic.

B. The writer speaks in a kind of monotone that flattens all potential highs or lows of the message.

C. The writing is humdrum and "risk-free." D. The writing is lifeless or mechanical; depending on the topic, it may be

overly technical or jargonistic. E. The development of the topic is so limited that no point of view is present--

zip, zero, zilch, nada.

5: STRONG: shows control and skill in this trait; many strengths present

4: COMPETENT: on balance, the strengths outweigh the weaknesses; a small amount of revision is needed 3: DEVELOPING: strengths and need for revision are about equal; about half-way home

2: EMERGING: need for revision outweighs strengths; isolated moments hint at what the writer has in mind

1: NOT YET: a bare beginning; writer not yet showing any control


Introduction to Sampling

If one is sampling from a population composed of an infinite number of elements, a sample selected in such a manner that the selection of any member of the population does not affect the selection of any other member, and each member has the same chance of being included in the sample, is called a random sample. If one is sampling from a finite population with replacement (each member is returned to the population after being selected, and might be selected more than once), a random sample is defined exactly as above.

If one is sampling from a finite population without replacement (the elements are not returned to the population after they have been observed), then we say that a sample is a random sample if all other samples of the same size have an equal chance of being selected. No sample is any more likely to be selected than any other.

The word "random" indicates that the sample is selected in such a way that it is impossible to predict which members of the population will be included and that it is simply a matter of chance that any particular member is selected. In order to apply the statistical techniques explained in this book in analyzing sample data, it is necessary that the sample be a random one (with very few exceptions). The statistical techniques are justified by statistical theory, which in turn rests on probability theory, and we must have random samples before the probability theory is applicable. From: H.T. Hayslett, Jr. Statistics Made Simple, Doubleday, 1968.

Why Mosquitoes Suck

. . . The nipping's done with a proboscis, a sort of springy syringe with a hollow needle formed by interlocking mouthparts and an outer sheath that rides up when the needle slides through your skin and probes for blood. But hitting the sweet spot isn't so easy--ask any intern drawing blood from a patient for the first time. Or ask Jose Ribeiro, a medical entomologist at the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who will gladly give you the gory details. "Less than 5 percent of skin is blood vessel, so the mosquito has to fish. It casts its proboscis back and forth under your skin, sawing through tissue and probing an area ten seconds at a time" After several such "search castings" and no luck, the insect withdraws completely and tries another patch of skin.

But if it gets a good probe into one of your small blood vessels, it freezes and sucks from the hemorrhage, pumping in little spitballs of vessel dilators and blood thinners to keep its meal running freely. (An allergic reaction to mosquito drool is what produces those itchy red lumps, if you've wondered.) A mosquito can suck two to three times its weight in blood, no trouble. That's tantamount to a 150-pound human vacuuming up 300 to 400 pounds of food.

At this points, stretch receptors in the mosquito's hugely bloated abdomen, sensing imminent blowout, initiate an urgent message to the brain, saying in effect, "Whoa there, skeeter--pull out." It's a pretty mechanical reflex, apparently. You can get mosquitoes to quite feeding by pumping them up--how can I put this delicately?--from the other end, with saltwater enemas or air. Marc Klowden, the entomologist at the University of Idaho who did these insufflating experiments, also has videos showing what happens when you prevent the signal from the abdominal receptors from reaching the brain: too much is never enough for these mosquitoes, and they eat until they explode.

Even under normal circumstances, once a mosquito has eaten its fill, "it's so heavy it can barely fly," according to Ribeiro. Stuporous and swollen as a blimp, it looks for a place to lie low and do what anyone would do after going on the mother of all drinking binges--it excretes like crazy. After a few hours the mosquito has reduced its blood meal by half into a supernutritious slush. From: Patricia Gadsby, Why mosquitoes suck. Discover, August 1997, pp. 42-45.


Junk Food (Grade 8)

Everything in the world has to have food may it be good food or junk food. Junck food is one of the more populare food. Most people like soda pops, hambriger, popcorn, shakes itc. Some of the places you can get these at is at 7 eleven stores, Mcdonalds, Dariy Queen etc.

Some Health food nut say that you will get fat if you eat hamburgere. You will but if you just at health food al the time, your body will get to meny vitimens and you can die. Health food is a food that will give your vitemans and cleans out yore iners.

Eny whay you nead junk food to get your adrental gland working. Junk food like hamburger is good food. Some people say that it is bad for you or is it. I don’t think it is so bad for you because you get tomatos, lettice, musterd, relish and meat. Shakes. Shakes are made out of mile, ice, and aritvial flaver and suger.

Some people say that fried chiken is good for you but is it. the chiken is fried in nothing but oil. It is one of my favorit food so I don’t care what eny one thinkes. If it is food it is food.

If you just had a candy bare out in the desert would you just throw it a way hec no. If you were out on the dessert you would take one bite of it and keep it in your mouth for days.

If you don’t eat eny food you will die in 63 days of what is called starvation. Starvaison ocures wen you don’t get enough food and you don’t get eny oxegen to your bones.

The Redwoods Last year, we went on a vacation and we had a wonderful time. The weather was sunny and warm and there was lots to do, so we were never bored.

My parents visited friends and took pictures for their friends back home. My brother and I swam and also hiked in the woods. When we got tired of that, we just ate and had a wonderful time.

It was exciting and fun to be together as a family and to do things together. I love my family and this is a time that I will remember for a long time. I hope we will go back again next year for more fun and an even better time than we had this year.

FOX I don't get along with people to good, and sometimes I am alone for a long time. When I am alone, I like to walk to forests and places where only me and the animals are. My best friend is God, but when I don't believe he's around sometime's, my dog stands in. We do every thing together. Hunt, fish, walk, eat and sleep together. My dog's name is Fox, 'cause he looks like an Arctic Fox. Fox and I used to live in this house with a pond behind. That pond was our property. The only thing allowed on it (that we allowed) was ducks & fish. If another person or dog would even look like going near that place, Fox and I would run them off in a frenzy. There was a lot of rocks around, so I would build forts and traps for any body even daring to come near. The pond had a bridge that was shaded by willows, so on a hot day me and Fox would sit on that bridge & soak our feet, well, I would soak my feet, Fox just kinda jumped in. At night, the pond was alive with frogs, so I would invite this kid over, (he was a guy like me) and catch frogs. After we had a couple each, we would pick the best looking one out of our group and race them. The winner gets the other guys frog. In the winter, the pond would freeze over, and I got my iceskates out. The pond was now an ice skating rink. Fox would chase me as I went round & round the pond. After about a year, I was riding my bike patroling the area around the pond. With Fox at my side, I raced downhill toward the pond. I tried to stop, but my back tire went into a skid. I went face first into murky, shadowy waters. When I went down, a minute later I felt something pull on my shirt, I grabbed it, not knowing what to think, when I hit the surface, I saw that it was Fox, pulling on my shirt as if he was trying to save me. He was to little to save me if I was really drowning, but it was the thought that counts, I owe him one. Another year passed. One day my mom got home from the store, and she bought me a rubber raft. It was just a cheap one, but it was mine. I blew it up with a tire pump. It was just the right size for me & Fox. Out of respect for Fox, I named it the USS Fox and christened it right in the pond. On sunny days, I would take the raft out & lay in the sun with Fox on my legs. One day, when I was asleep in the raft, the wind blew pretty hard and blew my raft right into a bunch of sticks and rocks, the USS Fox was given a sad salute, and then was no more. Another year passed, and this would be our last year by the pond. I admired and respected that pond more than I ever did that year. But, at long last, all good things must come to an end, we moved to another town. Fox & I still visit the pond, but it'll never be like them 3 years when she was mine.


Rubric Development Process1

You don’t always need to begin from scratch when developing a rubric; there are many examples already available that can either be used as is or refined. We advise begging and borrowing. If you are in the situation of having to develop an instructional rubric, the following steps are what you do. Remember, the goal with an instructional rubric is to accurately reflect the learning target and describe levels of quality with descriptive detail. 1. Choose a reasoning, performance skill, or product learning target:

• That is important, and/or • That is fuzzily defined, and/or • That students always have trouble with, and/or • For which it would be useful to have consistency in vocabulary and evaluation across teachers.

2. For the learning target you have chosen, brainstorm the characteristics of a good-quality student performance or product. What do you look for in student responses? (If you have trouble brainstorming such characteristics, it’s time to hit the literature.)

3. Gather student performances or products that you think illustrate various levels of quality on the learning target of interest. Sort them into at least three stacks representing various levels of proficiency. While sorting describe your reasons for your placement of the performances or products. Why did you think that the product or performance was strong (or middle, or weak)? Hints: • Don’t wait until you’re done sorting to write down your reasons. People have a tendency to

forget. • Be as descriptive as possible. Dig below general statements like “logical” or “organized” to the

features of the product or performance that made you judge the work to be “logical” or “organized.” The more descriptive detail you can specify, the better able students will be to understand the rubric.

• Pretend you are giving specific descriptive feedback to students on what they did well and where they might improve. For example, specifically what might a student do to make the work more "organized?" This is another way to capture descriptive detail.

• Write down everything. You want a broad, rich list of descriptors.

While you're sorting, you might find you can distinguish between more than three levels of quality. Great! You're beginning to define how many levels will be on your rubric.

4. Draft the rubric. Begin by grouping descriptors that seem to go together. This is the beginning of the criteria (trait) structure of your rubric. Label the categories that seem to be emerging and sort the descriptors into them. If such categories don’t emerge, then you may end up with a rubric that is holistic.

5. Develop a student-friendly version of the rubric. Identify the words, phrases, and ideas students might have trouble understanding, define them, and rewrite them using words students will understand. You might even be able to have students help.

6. Select samples of student products or performances to illustrate all the levels on each trait. Try out the draft rubric with colleagues and try out the draft student-friendly version with students. Revise the rubric based on your experiences; let students help. Rubrics are always works in progress—they become refined as our understanding of the learning target becomes refined.

1 From the book: Creating and Recognizing Quality Rubrics, ETS-ATI, 2006, Chapter 3, and the DVD Performance Assessment for Learning, ETS-ATI, 2006, Handout 13.


Sources of Performance Assessment Tasks, Rubrics, and Samples of Student Work

Site Rubric(s) Task(s) Work

Samples Judy Arter and Jay McTighe (2001) www.ets.org/ati “Scoring Rubrics in the Classroom”

• Lots in various content areas and grades

British Columbia Performance Standards www.bced.gov.bc.ca/perf_stands

• Numbercy • Reading • Writing • Social Responsibility

X X

Central Kitsap School District, Washington State • Math Problem Solving (includes SF versions)

Ruth Culham Series of “6+1 Trait” books Put “Ruth Culham” into Google search engine

• Writing (includes SF versions)

X X

Exemplars www.exemplars.com/resources/rubrics/index.html

• Mathematics • Science • Developmental Writing

Idaho State Engineering Department, www.webs1.uidaho.edu/led/verbal%20rubric%20final%20edit.doc

• Group Collaboration

Illinois Department of Education www.isbe.state.il.us/assessment.

• Math Problem Solving • Reading (Includes SF versions)

X X

Paul Kimpton and Delwyn Harnisch “Scale Your Way to Music Assessment” ISBN 978-1-57999-636-9

• Music

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics www.nctm.org/catalog/product “Mathematics Assessment A Practical Handbook”

X X

New Zealand Ministry of Education http://nemp.otago.ac.nz

X

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory www.nwrel.org/assessment/scoring.php

• Writing • Interpersonal

Communication • Group Discussion • Oral Presentation • Reading (Includes SF versions)

Ontario Provincial Ministry of Education www.edu.gov.on.ca Put “exemplars” into the search engine.

X X

Pearson Mentor www.ncementor.com

• Writing (includes SF versions)

X

Performance Assessment Links in Science (PALS) http//pals.sci.com

X

Vicki Spandel “Creating Writers,” Pearson, ISBN 0-205-41032-4 “Creating Young Writers,” Pearson ISBN 0-205-37953-2

• Writing (includes SF versions

X X

Wawautosa School District, Michigan • Writing Developmental Continuum

FINDING AND CREATING - Portland Community College · Student Assessment For Student Learning ......

Documents

Transcript of FINDING AND CREATING - Portland Community College · Student Assessment For Student Learning ......