|
Main Topic(s): Rubrics & Scoring Guides |
|
√
|
20': debrief last Thursday - what the sessions aimed to do (small group summaries from AL and FL)
|
|
√
|
20': validity, reliability, norm- vs. criterion-referenced, backwash
|
|
√
|
5': Follow-up about major project (but we won't move into that seriously for at least another week); here's more about the Atkinson possibility
|
|
√
|
(10) Break: Go get your coffee or your snack, but bring it back. We'll start promptly after 10 minutes, with or without you!
|
|
√
|
Spread of rubrics in the educational system
Rubrics and similar assessments in other areas of life
|
|
√
|
Underlying philosophy of education: seat-time & bell-curve vs. need to bring as many learners along as possible to reach a standard of sufficiency
|
|
√
|
Reasons for using rubrics: clarity of evaluation (specification of features and precision in levels - a good example of the difference between precision and accuracy: What does a "B" mean, or "83", or "very good"?
|
|
+
|
Principles of rubrics and scoring guides: common 6-level scale; 4 as "sufficient" (vs. proficient, vs. sufficient sample, vs. efficient rubric, which are all quite something else); to weight or not to weight?
|
|
-
|
Small groups draft rubrics for non-language-related assessments (blank form): properly-tied shoes; hand-made wooden canoe paddles; √as group discussion: home-made pie-crusts; two groups per topic develop their rubrics in two steps, with comparisons after each step: 1) determination of features to be assessed; (intermezzo: function and content/context, and only THEN accuracy); 2) some level descriptors for some features
|
|
-
|
Now some language-related rubrics / scoring guides (PSU First-Year German): a writing test (K10); a personalized project (introduce family); the first in-take assignment (get in touch with instructor and use some German)
|
|
-
|
If time: Examples of "high-stakes" use of rubrics: Oregon University System standards and descriptors for mathematics; Portland Public Schools World Languages Standards (2006) - wonder how these compare to the new Washington math standards and assessment?
|
|
+
|
Now the scoring guide for your Assignment 1 (newspaper article reflection): What features do YOU think should be evaluated?
The culminating activity will be for people to self-score their own assignments, to be put then into a sealed envelope. Sara and I will have the SGs we filled out for your assignments, also in sealed envelopes. Then in each case we'll swap envelopes, so that the two parties, instructors and student, can see how similar (or different?) the evaluations are. The underlying goal is to illustrate (and instill) the principle that students deserve to know how they are being evaluated (much more than just "There are 100 possible points, and 90 gets you an 'A'."), that students should become conscious of what they are being asked to learn and how much progress they have made in doing that, and that - this is a big step - the products can be revised and rescored, which is true so often in the outside world.
|
|
-
|
(10) More about the FL and AL "cultures": the background and pursuits of the course instructors
|