Difference between revisions of "Designing with Assessment Patterns/OG"
Sfrancisco (talk | contribs) (Added category) |
Sfrancisco (talk | contribs) m (Edited format) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|image= <!-- Provide the filename of the image to be displayed (e.g., Design_pattern.png) --> | |image= <!-- Provide the filename of the image to be displayed (e.g., Design_pattern.png) --> | ||
|contributor= [[Steven Warburton]], [[Joseph Bergin]], [[Christian Kohls]], [[Christian Köppe]], [[Yishay Mor]] | |contributor= [[Steven Warburton]], [[Joseph Bergin]], [[Christian Kohls]], [[Christian Köppe]], [[Yishay Mor]] | ||
|source= Warburton et al. (2016)<ref name='Warburton">Pattern published in Warburton, S., Bergin, J., Kohls, C., Köppe, C., & Mor, Y. (2016). [http://koeppe.nl/publications/Warburton_VikingPLoP16_AssessmentPatterns.pdf Dialogical Assessment Patterns for Learning from Others]. In ''Proceedings of the 10th Travelling Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (VikingPLoP 2016)''. ACM.</ref> | |source= Warburton et al. (2016)<ref name='Warburton">Pattern published in Warburton, S., Bergin, J., Kohls, C., Köppe, C., & Mor, Y. (2016). [http://koeppe.nl/publications/Warburton_VikingPLoP16_AssessmentPatterns.pdf Dialogical Assessment Patterns for Learning from Others]. In ''Proceedings of the 10th Travelling Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (VikingPLoP 2016)''. New York:ACM.</ref> | ||
|dataanalysis= <!-- If applicable, list of data analyses used for mining the pattern separated by a " , "comma --> | |dataanalysis= <!-- If applicable, list of data analyses used for mining the pattern separated by a " , "comma --> | ||
|domain= <!-- Learning domain the design pattern belongs to (e.g., General, Math, Algebra) --> | |domain= <!-- Learning domain the design pattern belongs to (e.g., General, Math, Algebra) --> | ||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
[[Category:Design_patterns]] [[Category:Full_Pattern]]<!-- List of other categories the design pattern belongs to. The syntax for linking to a category is: [[Category:<Name of category]] --> | [[Category:Design_patterns]] [[Category:Full_Pattern]] [[Category:Assessment Patterns]] [[Category:Traditional Classroom]]<!-- List of other categories the design pattern belongs to. The syntax for linking to a category is: [[Category:<Name of category]] --> | ||
Latest revision as of 11:58, 17 May 2017
| Designing with Assessment Patterns | |
| Contributors | Steven Warburton, Joseph Bergin, Christian Kohls, Christian Köppe, Yishay Mor |
|---|---|
| Last modification | May 17, 2017 |
| Source | Warburton et al. (2016)[1] |
| Pattern formats | OPR Alexandrian |
| Usability | |
| Learning domain | |
| Stakeholders | |
The example below is an assessment scenario that was designed by a teacher using the ‘assessment driven course design’ pattern set. It is presented in the form of a lesson plan. This was delivered to two classes of Year 8 students and was targeted at improving their self-evaluation skills.
Context
Assessment design scenario as used in a lesson plan
The text below was written by the teacher. The design patterns that were used in this scenario are indicated in [square brackets]:
“…
This is a simple lesson idea that can have a positive impact in learner's understanding of the assessment criteria for writing, peer assessment, self-assessment and improvement of their work. I'm going to try this with my two Y8 classes today:
- sharing of the objectives of the lesson [ Constructive Alignment (Constructive Alignment)];
- distribution of the writing assessment grid that learners glue in their books [ Rubric (Rubric)];
- distribution of two assessment templates per learner;
- distribution of one exemplar of anonymized work, chosen by the teacher for its’ outstanding qualities;
- learners read the piece all together, and guided by the teacher they learn to apply the writing assessment grid: I start with the conditions under which it has been prepared, go to word count making remarks about the value of repetition against a varied piece, then we checkmark each different idea or piece of information "à la ‘ level", then the number of topics, then with a highlighter we outline opinions explaining that adjectives, comparisons, superlatives can also be a form of personal opinion, then we go to the connectives outlined in a different color, then finally to identify the tenses, including possible modal verbs. [ Peer Assessment with Confidence Indicator (Peer Assessment with Confidence Indicator)]
- in pairs the learners agree on a mark for that piece discussing their points of view. Results are shared in class. [ Peer Review (Peer Review)]
- Individually they assess their own piece. Of course the assessment of the accuracy is always difficult but they could eventually hand the piece to a partner to see how easy to read and understand is. They use a paper clip to attach the self-assessment to the writing piece then hand to the teacher at the end of the lesson.
- In pairs they discuss what would be the most important thing to improve their writing. Each learner writes on a post-it and puts the post-it in a corresponding place on the whiteboard, that will be filled with as many ‘post-its’ as there are learners.
- The teacher finishes the grouping (all post-its addressing similar issues together), commenting, discussing, and asking questions. [ Showcase (Showcase), This Is Feedback (This Is Feedback)]
- Finally the learners answer in their books in silence: "what am I going to do to improve my writing" giving explanations based on the analysis of their own piece. [ Act on Feedback (Act on Feedback)]
…”
References
- ↑ Pattern published in Warburton, S., Bergin, J., Kohls, C., Köppe, C., & Mor, Y. (2016). Dialogical Assessment Patterns for Learning from Others. In Proceedings of the 10th Travelling Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (VikingPLoP 2016). New York:ACM.