Embedded Files
When evaluating quality assessment tasks, consider the question: Is this suite of tasks fit for purpose? and then use the following criteria.
When evaluating quality assessment tasks, consider the question: Is this suite of tasks fit for purpose? and then use the following criteria.
Criterion 1: Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses
Criterion 2: Reliability
Criterion 3: Bias Awareness
Criterion 4: Levels of Thinking
Criterion 5: Student Engagement
Criterion 6: Academic Integrity
A glossary of terms can be found here: GLOSSARY
A glossary of terms can be found here: GLOSSARY
Validity
Validity
Consider:
Is this suite of tasks fit for purpose?
Do the methods of assessing knowledge, understanding and skills suit the intentions of the assessment?
Criterion 1: Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses
Criterion 1: Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses
Coverage of the curriculum refers to assessment that measures key knowledge, understandings and skills conveyed in the unit goals, content descriptions and Achievement Standards.
1. Outstanding Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses – Assessment tasks are strategically planned for alignment with Achievement Standards, unit goals and content descriptors. Assessments are not too big: assessing irrelevant content or criteria; nor too small: missing important content or criteria.
2. High Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses - Assessment tasks are thoughtfully planned. Assessments are not too big: assessing irrelevant criteria; nor too small: missing important criteria.
3. Satisfactory Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses - Assessment tasks are appropriately planned. Assessments are not too big: assessing irrelevant criteria; nor too small: missing important criteria.
4. Minimum Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses – Assessment tasks require refinement. Assessments are uneven. Some tasks are either too big: assessing irrelevant criteria; or too small: missing important criteria.
5. No Coverage of BSSS Accredited Courses – Assessment tasks are unplanned. Assessments are uneven. Some tasks are either too big: assessing irrelevant criteria; or too small: missing important criteria.
Criterion 2: Reliability
Criterion 2: Reliability
Reliability of assessment refers to minimising variance of non-relevant factors in assessment measurements through clarity of instructions, standardisation of assessment conditions, comprehensive and clear marking guides, school-based moderation and consensus of grade level evidence.
1. Outstanding Reliability - Assessment tasks and marking are strategically designed to remove all sources of non-relevant variation in measurements.
2. High Reliability - Assessment tasks and marking are thoughtfully designed to remove sources of large variation in measurements except for the key knowledge, skills and understandings of the student in the unit.
3. Satisfactory Reliability - Assessment tasks and marking are designed with some consideration of reducing variation in measurements caused by factors other than the key knowledge, skills and understandings of the student in the unit.
4. Minimal Reliability - Assessment tasks and marking are designed with minimal consideration of reducing variation in measurements caused by factors other than the key knowledge, skills and understandings of the student in the unit.
5. No Reliability - Performance in the assessment tasks is largely determined by factors other than the key knowledge, skills and understandings of the student in the unit.
Criterion 3: Bias Awareness
Criterion 3: Bias Awareness
Bias awareness in assessment refers to reducing assessment that marginalises or favours students or student groups on factors such as gender, socio-economic status, disability, ethnicity, or which privileges a view of knowledge.
1. Outstanding Bias Awareness – The suite of assessment tasks is strategically designed to be sensitive and empowering for all students, catering for the diverse needs of gender, socio-economic status, disabilities and/or cultures, and that do not marginalise or favour a student or group of students, or advantage or disadvantage certain background knowledge or ways of thinking.
2. High Bias Awareness - The suite of assessment tasks is designed that promote the diverse needs of gender, socio-economic status, disabilities and/or cultures, and that do not marginalise or favour a student or group of students, or advantage or disadvantage certain background knowledge or ways of thinking.
3. Satisfactory Bias Awareness - The suite of assessment tasks is designed to meet the needs of the dominant culture, socio-economic group or gender, with evidence of minor alterations for genders, socio-economic status and/or cultures, and doesn’t overly advantage or disadvantage certain background knowledge or ways of thinking.
4. Minimal Bias Awareness - The suite of assessment tasks is designed to meet the needs of the dominant culture, socio-economic group or gender.
5. No Bias Awareness - Assessment tasks are openly skewed to favour or marginalise a student or group of students.
1. Outstanding Levels of Thinking – Comprehensive assessment tasks are designed that allow students to engage at progressively higher cognitive demands. The suite of assessments demonstrates that there are high expectations for all learners at all levels of learning and opportunities for extending all learners are strategically planned for. Assessment tasks are flexible and varied, promoting a range of assessment modes.
2. High Levels of Thinking – Clear assessment tasks are designed that allow students to engage at progressively higher cognitive demands. The suite of assessments demonstrates that there are expectations for all learners at all levels of learning and opportunities for extending all learners are planned for. Assessment tasks are flexible and varied, covering a range of assessment modes.
3. Satisfactory Levels of Thinking – Assessment tasks are designed around the thinking progression of the Achievement Standard. The suite of assessments demonstrates that there are some expectations for most learners to extend their thinking at all levels of learning. Assessment demonstrates some assessment modes.
4. Minimal Levels of Thinking - Assessment tasks are limited for the top students who are unable to show the extent of their thinking. The suite of assessments demonstrates that there are minimal expectations for learners to extend their thinking. Assessment is generally in one mode with some small changes to make each task different.
5. No Levels of Thinking – Assessment tasks are one dimensional and do not encourage a range of thinking levels. The suite of assessments demonstrates that there are no expectations for learners to extend their thinking. Assessment is in one mode only.
Criterion 5: Student Engagement
Criterion 5: Student Engagement
Student engagement refers to assessment that promotes student involvement and ownership.
1. Outstanding Student Engagement – Assessment tasks are strategically planned to engage students. Assessment tasks are explicitly and purposefully connected to contemporary issues or student lived experiences, interests, or prior knowledge. The suite of assessment tasks clearly supports student ownership.
2. High Student Engagement – Assessment tasks are thoughtfully planned to engage students. Assessment tasks are explicitly connected to contemporary issues or student lived experiences, interests, or prior knowledge. The suite of assessment tasks supports student ownership.
3. Satisfactory Student Engagement – Assessment tasks are appropriately planned to engage students. Assessment tasks are implicitly connected to contemporary issues or student lived experiences, interests, or prior knowledge. The suite of assessment tasks supports student ownership.
4. Minimal Student Engagement – Assessment tasks require refinement. Assessment tasks are connected minimally to contemporary issues or student lived experiences, interests, or prior knowledge. The suite of assessment tasks supports student ownership but are not aligned to unit goals, content descriptions and Achievement Standards.
5. No Student Engagement - Assessment tasks are unplanned. Assessment tasks lack connection to contemporary issues or student lived experiences, interests, or prior knowledge. The suite of assessment tasks does not support student ownership through choice, decision making opportunities and procedural choices and are not aligned to unit goals, content descriptions and Achievement Standards.
Criterion 6: Academic Integrity
Criterion 6: Academic Integrity
Academic Integrity refers to assessment that promotes genuine and original work from students.
1. Outstanding Academic Integrity - Students are required to engage in genuine deep learning at a level of challenge appropriate to the student and tasks make provision for sense making or knowledge construction. Assessment is designed to ensure authenticity from students and requires individualised responses.
2. High Academic Integrity - Academic integrity is discussed with students with expectations with respect to academic integrity and the consequences of cheating or plagiarising made clear. Assessment is designed to encourage original thinking from students and require individualised responses that will be different.
3. Satisfactory Academic Integrity - Assessment is designed so that a majority of the assessment encourages original thinking from students or requires individualised responses. Expectations in regard to plagiarism, assistance by others and referencing are referred to in the assessment task description.
4. Minimal Academic Integrity – Minimal evidence of academic integrity processes are in place. Assessment allows for the possibility of identical responses from students. Expectations in regard to plagiarism and referencing are inconsistent or applied inconsistently.
5. No Academic Integrity - Academic integrity is not mentioned in any documentation.
Assessment requires identical responses from students. Expectations in regard to plagiarism and referencing are not addressed.
You can complete your evaluation using this form: Evaluation Form
You can complete your evaluation using this form: Evaluation Form
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse