Performance Task Analysis: Summative Assessment Preparation

Performance Task Analysis Summative Assessment Preparationthis Weeks

This week's assignment is to revisit your own summative assessment design for the course. You will analyze the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium website to inform your response, focusing on understanding its assessment development process, sample items, rubrics, and overall structure. Specifically, you are to examine the Grandma Ruth 6th grade writing performance task and its corresponding rubric by exploring the "About this item" tab. You should also review the "Claim" and "Target" to see how they align with standards, objectives, and Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels. Additionally, you must analyze the sample items and rubrics available through the website to inform your understanding of effective summative assessments. Following this analysis, you will evaluate how the observed elements relate to course learning outcomes regarding Learning and Assessment for the 21st Century. You are required to present evidence of this alignment, include a reflection on your learning process, and consider potential applications to your assessment design process. All findings should be documented in a provided template that includes the course learning outcome, evidence of alignment, and a personal reflection on how this knowledge will impact your ability to create high-quality summative assessments. The reflection should also consider how the alignment of standards, objectives, instructional strategies, student engagement, and assessment rigor contribute to effective summative assessment development. The assignment must be formatted according to APA style guidelines.

Paper For Above instruction

Designing effective summative assessments is fundamental to measuring student learning and informing instruction, especially within the context of 21st-century education standards. The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) provides a comprehensive framework for developing such assessments, emphasizing alignment with standards, cognitive rigor, and clear rubrics. This paper critically analyzes the SBAC's approach—specifically focusing on the 6th grade Grandma Ruth writing performance task—to understand how their assessment design principles can inform my own practices.

The Grandma Ruth writing task exemplifies how to integrate standards-based claims, targeted objectives, and rigorous rubrics to evaluate student performance. The claim associated with this task reflects the grade-level standard regarding narrative writing, emphasizing coherence, organization, voice, and grammar skills aligned with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for writing. The task prompt requires students to craft a narrative based on a picture prompt, which aligns with literacy standards related to narrative structure and language conventions (SBAC, 2023). The 'Target' component clarifies the specific objectives and sub-objectives, resonating with Bloom’s taxonomy and Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels, which specify the cognitive demand of the task, ranging from recall to analysis and creation.

The sample rubric provided on the SBAC site evaluates key aspects such as idea development, organization, word choice, sentence fluency, and conventions. Each criterion is accompanied by a clear scoring guide that differentiates levels of student performance from novice to advanced. This explicit criteria structure facilitates fair, consistent scoring and provides students with transparent expectations. The rubric aligns with the course outcome of designing assessments that measure mastery through established criteria and supports teacher decision-making regarding student progress.

In analyzing this assessment, I observed that high-quality rubrics should include specific, measurable criteria that articulate the cognitive and content objectives. The integration of DOK levels into rubric design ensures that assessments not only measure surface-level recall but also deeper understanding and application, vital for 21st-century skills. For example, the narrative task evaluates students' ability to synthesize ideas creatively and structure their writing cohesively. Such tasks extend beyond rote memorization, requiring students to demonstrate critical thinking, organization, and language proficiency.

This analysis directly relates to my course learning outcome (CLO 1): "Assess individual and group performance through use of established criteria for student mastery (including rubrics) in order to design instruction to meet learners' needs." The SBAC sample exemplifies how detailed, standards-aligned rubrics can enable educators to assess not only correctness but also cognitive processes, linguistic skills, and creativity. The explicit criteria and descriptors help identify specific areas of strength and growth, informing targeted instructional strategies.

Reflecting on my learning, I realize the importance of designing assessments that incorporate clear alignment between standards, objectives, and instructional activities. The SBAC model demonstrates that rigorous rubrics with explicit criteria promote fairness and transparency, motivating students to meet high expectations. Moreover, integrating cognitive rigor through DOK levels ensures that assessments challenge students to perform at higher levels of thinking, fostering skills essential in the 21st-century learning landscape.

In practical application, I plan to adopt the SBAC's approach by developing rubrics that are criterion-referenced, measurable, and inclusive of cognitive levels. These practices will support differentiated instruction by providing detailed feedback and guiding instructional adjustments. Additionally, I will ensure my assessments promote higher-order thinking by embedding tasks that require analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, aligned with curriculum standards. The combined use of well-defined claims, targets, and rubrics will enhance the validity and reliability of my summative assessments, ultimately supporting student mastery and growth in meaningful ways.

References

• Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2023). Grandma Ruth Narrative Writing Task. Retrieved from https://www.smarterbalanced.org
• Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). English Language Arts Standards. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy
• Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company.
• Popham, W. J. (2014). Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know. Pearson.
• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. Longman.
• Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2014). Educational Assessment of Students. Pearson.
• Marzano, R. J., & Marzano, J. S. (2003). The Key Elements of Classroom Instruction. Aurora, CO: McREL.
• Shepard, L. A. (2000). The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture. Educational Leadership, 57(8), 8-13.
• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. ASCD.
• Stiggins, R., & Chappuis, J. (2012). An Introduction to Student-involved Assessment FOR Learning. Pearson.