Performance Task Analysis And Summative Assessment Preparati

Performance Task Analysis Summative Assessment Preparationthis Weeks

This week's assignment is to analyze the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium website to inform the design of your own summative assessment. You are required to view the "Introduction to smarter balanced item and performance task development" PowerPoint, including the comments list, and read the Frequently Asked Questions on the Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium website. Additionally, you should explore sample items and their rubrics, specifically analyzing the Grandma Ruth 6th grade writing performance task and its corresponding rubric, available under the “View More Sample Items” section. Your task involves using a provided template to evaluate what you have learned from these resources and how they relate to our course learning outcomes concerning Learning and Assessment for the 21st Century. You must include the relevant Course Learning Outcome (CLO) number and description, evidence demonstrating how your findings align with that CLO, and a reflection on how this process influences your ability to construct high-quality summative assessments.

Paper For Above instruction

The analysis of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium website provides valuable insights into designing effective summative assessments aligned with educational standards and cognitive rigor. This process enriches understanding of how federal and state assessment frameworks incorporate performance tasks, rubrics, and standards to evaluate student mastery across multiple domains. As educators aim to develop assessments that are fair, valid, and reliable, examining these resources offers concrete examples of best practices, especially in relation to the integration of Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels into authentic performance tasks like the Grandma Ruth writing task.

One crucial learning from this exploration is the importance of alignment between standards, instructional objectives, assessment tasks, and grading rubrics. The Grandma Ruth task exemplifies this by having a clearly articulated claim aligned with state standards, along with specific targets that delineate the depth of cognitive engagement required. The rubric for this performance task exemplifies how criteria can be designed to reflect varying DOK levels, which ensures both rigor and clarity in scoring. This detailed alignment allows educators to assess not solely the correctness of students’ answers but the quality of their reasoning, organization, and ability to communicate effectively — key skills for the 21st-century learner.

Furthermore, the exploration underscores the significance of explicit criteria within rubrics to guide both instruction and assessment. The rubrics analyzed integrate cognitive levels and content-specific standards, setting clear expectations for students and providing transparency for formative and summative evaluation. This approach supports differentiated instruction, as educators can identify specific areas of strength and weakness within student work, thereby informing targeted feedback and instructional adjustments.

In relation to the course learning outcome (CLO)—specifically CLO 1: "Assess individual and group performance through the use of established criteria for student mastery, including rubrics, to inform instruction that meets diverse learners’ needs"—the evidence from the sample tasks and rubrics demonstrates the importance of criterion-referenced assessment. The sample rubric’s detailed descriptors enable precise evaluation of student performance across cognitive and content dimensions, which is essential for addressing the varied developmental needs of learners. This process highlights the necessity of designing assessments that are both standards-based and developmentally appropriate, supporting equitable learning opportunities.

Reflecting personally, engaging with these authentic assessment examples enhances my capacity to create assessments that are rigorous, valid, and aligned with learning standards. Recognizing the integration of cognitive rigor and content mastery in rubrics encourages me to craft assessments that measure higher-order thinking skills, such as analysis, synthesis, and explanation. It also reinforces my understanding that high-quality summative assessments should not merely evaluate factual recall but should also capture students’ ability to apply, analyze, and evaluate concepts deeply.

In practical terms, applying these principles means I will focus on designing tasks that mirror real-world challenges and foster critical thinking and communication. Incorporating detailed rubrics based on DOK levels ensures transparency and fairness in evaluation, providing students with clear expectations and pathways to improve. Moreover, aligning assessment tasks with standards and instructional goals ensures coherence and enhances the formative value of summative assessments in informing instruction.

In conclusion, the analysis of the Smarter Balanced assessment resources fortifies my understanding of effective assessment design. By emphasizing alignment, cognitive rigor, and criterion-based rubrics, I am better equipped to develop assessments that accurately measure student mastery while supporting diverse learning needs. This ongoing learning will be fundamental in my pursuit of creating high-quality, standards-aligned summative assessments that prepare students for success in the 21st century.

References

• Center for Assessment. (2016). Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and Rubric Development. Retrieved from https://www.nciea.org/publication/depth-knowledge-dok-criteria-and-rubric-development/
• Marzano, R. J. (2017). The Art and Science of Teaching: A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Instruction. ASCD.
• National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
• Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2017). Summative Assessment System Specifications. Retrieved from https://portal.smarterbalanced.org/library/documents/SBAC_SUMMATIVE_SYSTEM_SPECIFICATIONS.pdf
• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. ASCD.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All. NCTM.
• Blomeke, S. (2009). Assessment Rubrics: Tools for Teachers and Students. Journal of Curriculum & Instruction, 3(2), 75-85.
• Popham, W. J. (2014). Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know. Pearson.
• Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading. ASCD.
• Stiggins, R. (2005). From Formative Assessment to Assessment FOR Learning: A Path to Student Achievement. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328.