Link to Assessment Construction Project
(EDI 637) Assessment: K-12 Models and Practices
Common Course Assessment: Assessment Position Paper
(EDI 637) Assessment: K-12 Models and Practices
Common Course Assessment: Assessment Position Paper
Common Course Standards:
NBPTS Proposition #4 – Teachers think systematically about their practice
- Make difficult choices that affect their judgment
- Seek advice of others, draw on research and others to improve their practice.
Directions: Students will write a position paper based on a controversial topic regarding assessment. The goal of the position paper is to convince the audience that your opinion about a controversial topic regarding assessment is valid and worth listening to. Ideas that you are considering need to be carefully examined in choosing a topic, developing your argument, and organizing your paper. Your job is to develop a thesis statement for one side of the argument and persuade your audience that you have well-founded knowledge of the topic being presented. It is very important to ensure that you are addressing several sides of the argument and presenting it in a manner that is easy for your audience to understand. It is important to support your argument with evidence to ensure the validity of your claims, as well as to address the counterclaims to show that you are well informed about both sides.
Rubric for the Position Paper
Elements / Distinguished(3) / Proficient
(2) / Progressing
(1) / Unsatisfactory(0)
Introduction / *The paper begins with a strong introduction that lays out the thesis, as well as the sequence of what follows clearly enough that even a person unfamiliar with the topic will clearly understand what the problem is and why it is important. / *The paper begins with an introduction, describes the thesis and the sequence that follows, however it is difficult to understand what the problem is and why it is important. / *Lacks an introduction that takes an overview and that states the objectives of the paper. The thesis statement is absent, unfocused or very weak. / *The introduction is missing.
Counter Argument / *Clearly summarizes the counterclaims to the position taken.
*Provides strong supporting information for the counterclaims.
*Refutes the counterclaims, giving clear evidence for the argument. / *Somewhat summarizes the counterclaims to the position taken.
*Provides some supporting information for the counterclaims.
*Refutes the counterclaims, but does not give enough evidence for the argument. / *Weakly summarizes the counterclaims.
*Provides little supporting information for the counterclaims.
*Does not refute the counterclaims and does not give evidence for the argument. / *The counterclaims are missing.
Argument /Position
Development / *Takes a strong, well-defined position.
*Uses at least three appropriate reasons with strong supporting detail for each reason. / *Clear position taken and defined.
*Some reasons and some details present, but not fully developed. / *Position not clearly stated.
*Development is brief.
*Unrelated, unsupported general statements, reasons and details.
*Minimal facts used. / *The arguments are missing.
Conclusion / *Restates the position on the issue based on a thorough understanding of the issue.
*Provides a complete plan of action. / *Restates the position based on a basic understanding of the issue.
*Provides a incomplete plan of action. / *Restates the position based on an incomplete understanding of the issue.
*Does not provide a plan of action. / *The conclusion is missing.
Use of Resources / *Uses appropriate information from a variety of sources to support the position.
*Uses a range of primary and secondary sources.
*Correctly identifies all sources of information through in-text citations and reference list following APA citation style. / *Demonstrates subject knowledge using limited resources.
*Cites most information obtained form other sources following APA citation style. / *Little evidence of resources used.
*Does not completely or correctly identify sources of information through in-text citation and reference list.
*Does not correctly follow APA citation style. / *No evidence of resources used.
Mechanics / *Error free paper.
*Accurate spelling and punctuation, capitalization and usage.
*Variety of sentence structure.
*Rich vocabulary. / *Few errors present in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and usage.
*Some attempt at sentence variety.
*Occasional use of rich vocabulary. / *Incorrect sentence structure.
*Spelling, punctuation, capitalization errors present.
*Repetitious vocabulary, weak language usage. / *Multiple errors present in sentence structure, punctuation, and capitalization.
*Weak vocabulary and incorrect language usage.
(EDI 637) Assessment: K-12 Models and Practices
Common Course Assessment: Assessment Construction Project
Common Course Standards:
NBPTS Proposition #1: Teachers are committed to students and their learning
- Teachers Recognize Individual Differences in Their Students and Adjust Their Practice.
- Teachers Have an Understanding of How Students Develop and Learn
- Teachers Treat Students Equitably
- Teachers’ Mission Extends Beyond Developing the Cognitive Capacity of Their Students
Directions: Students will construct 3 different classroom assessments from the following categories: selected response extended written response and performance task assessments. Include a clear purpose for the assessment, clear targets, a sound assessment design, and a student involvement section. Also, include all necessary assessment supplies/materials, instructions, and scoring guidelines for assessing the examinee’s performance.
Rubric for the Assessment Construction Project
Elements / Distinguished(3) / Proficient
(2) / Progressing
(1) / Unsatisfactory (0)
Clear Purpose / *The intended users and uses are identified.
*It is clear that this assessment can accomplish its intended purpose. / *The intended users and uses can be inferred.
*This assessment can partially accomplish its intended purpose. / *The intended users and uses are not identified and cannot be accurately inferred.
*It is clear that this assessment cannot accomplish its intended purpose. / *The statement of clear purpose is missing.
Clear Targets / * Learning targets measured by the assessment are stated.
*The learning targets are clear.
*The match between stated learning targets and what is on the assessment is clear.
*Learning targets are clearly connected to the state content standards. / *Learning targets measured by the assessment are stated or can be inferred easily from the assessment.
*Learning targets may be somewhat unclear.
*There is a partial match between stated learning targets and what is on the assessment.
*Learning targets are partially or loosely connected to the state content standards. / *Learning targets measured by the assessment are not stated and cannot be accurately inferred.
*Learning targets are stated, but vague or unclear.
*There is no apparent match between stated learning targets and what is on the assessment.
*There is not apparent connection between learning targets and the state content standards. / *The learning targets are missing.
Sound Design / *The method chosen is capable of accurately reflecting the learning target(s) to be assessed.
*The learning targets tested represent what was taught (in the case of diagnostic assessment, they represent what is intended to be taught).
*The relative importance of each learning target on the assessment matches the relative importance given to it during instruction.
*Selected response items adhere standards of quality for developing sound selected response assessments (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Extended written response items adhere to standards of quality for developing sound extended written response assessments (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Extended written response scoring procedures adhere to guidelines for quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Performance task assessments adhere to standards of quality for developing sound performance task assessments (Popham, Stiggins, etc.).
*Performance assessment scoring guides/rubrics adhere to guidelines for quality (Popham, Stiggins, etc.).
*There is nothing in the assessment itself or in the conditions under which it is administered that could lead to inaccurate estimates of student learning.
*Instructions are present, clear, and concise. / *The method chosen to assess the learning targets may have been better if assessed using another method.
*The learning targets partially represent what was taught (In the case of diagnostic assessment, they partially represent what is intended to be taught).
*The relative importance of each learning target on the assessment partially matches the relative importance to it during instruction
*Selected response items partially adhere to standards of quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Extended written response items partially adhere to standards of quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Extended written response scoring procedures partially adhere to guidelines for quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Performance assessment tasks partially adhere to standards of quality (Popham, Stiggins, etc.).
*Performance assessment scoring guides/rubrics partially adhere to guidelines for quality (Popham, Stiggins, etc.).
*There are a few things in the assessment itself or in the conditions under which it is administered that could lead to inaccurate estimates of student learning.
*Instructions are present, but not as clear or concise as they could be. / *The method used is not capable of accurately reflecting the learning targets in question.
*The learning targets tested do not represent what is taught. (in the case of diagnostic assessment, they do not represent what is intended to be taught.)
*The relative importance of each learning target on the assessment does not match the relative importance given to it during instruction.
*Selected response items do not adhere to standards of quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Extended written response items do not adhere to standards of quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Extended written response scoring procedures do not adhere to guidelines for quality (Popham, Stiggins, Wahlstrom).
*Performance assessment tasks do not adhere to standards of quality (Popham, Stiggins, etc.).
*Performance assessment scoring guides/rubrics do not adhere to guidelines for quality (Popham, Stiggins, etc.).
*There are many things in the assessment itself or in the conditions under which it is administered that could lead to inaccurate estimates of student learning.
*Instructions are not present, or are difficult to follow. / *The assessment is missing.
Communication / *There is a mechanism in place for students to track their own progress on learning targets and what they need to do to improve. / *There is a mechanism in place for students to track their own progress on learning targets, but they do not know what to do to improve. / *There is not a mechanism in place for students to track their own progress on learning targets and what they need to do to improve. / *The student involvement section is missing.
Writing Style / *Easy to read with few or no grammatical or typographical errors. / *Minimal grammatical or typographical errors that are not significant enough to interfere with ease of reading. / *A number of grammatical or typographical errors that interfere with ease of reading.
Popham, W. J. (2007). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.
Stiggins, R. J., Arter, J. A., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2006). Classroom assessment for student learning. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Services.
Wahlstrom, D. (2005). Designing high-quality paper-and-pencil tests. Suffolk, VA: Successline, Inc.