Another benefit that is mentioned in the same breath as this passage is the opportunity to differentiate the end product. Allowing for students to use the method that best leads to their individual successes.

In the article Tame the Beast: Tips for Designing and Using Rubrics, the author states not to use too many columns. While scales are slightly different, I think having 1-7 convolutes the assessment and leaves too much room for personal bias to take place in the grading of students. If it is 1-3 or even 1-5, it is going to be a more accurate representation of if the student had succeeded or not.

A major problem I have seen in secondary education, is that when some teachers assign performance-based assessments, they allow students to use any resources they can find online. In some cases, this isn't necessarily bad as students learn how to conduct research independently. However, not providing students with resources can reduce the quality of the end product.

Psychologist William Glasser refers to this concept as "competent work" in his Choice Theory in Schools idea. Stating that students are more likely to choose to learn if they deem the work as worthy of doing.

I'd like to note that a growth portfolio is probably the easiest to pull off. Just having students place all of their work in a binder accomplishes this goal.

One highlight of portfolios is that it helps build metacognitive strategies that are useful for students in all contents. While building these skills need to be taught to students to succeed, using digital portfolios allow for modern students to use skills that they already possess.

To me, this is the biggest drawback of a portfolio. The amount of time that has to be devoted to just instructing students on how to organize the portfolio seems daunting.

This reminds me of the article we read this week for our digital power up. Teach students where they are going, assess where they are, and together teacher and student can work to close the gap between the two.

With the prevalence of AI in today's classroom this is a good prediction. It would be very helpful for teachers to be able to grade lengthy constructed assessments in the blink of an eye, with the help of these tools.

I adamantly disagree with the assertion that giving students an option on essay questions is a bad practice. If I am assigning more than one essay question on an assessment I am either differentiating or expanding a concept beyond the target of the lesson. Therefore it shouldn't be an exact target such as a DOK 2 (or 3 in some cases) but building on concepts through DOK 3 or 4.

I hope when we start to address rubrics that the text addresses how to more easily assess deeper reasoning. As it seems like a very difficult for students to know EXACTLY what is expected here.

In other Education courses we have addressed EL strategies , more specifically sentence stems. Which I find interesting that the text does not use the same terminology as completion items seem to be one in the same.

Applications such as EdPuzzle and Nearpod, have really expanded what can be done with interpretive assessments. While utilizing digital media.

I feel that this should be in the "what not to do" section. I understand that the point the author had was hat it has nothing to do with pollution, but as a teacher, if I wrote this question it would have been time wasted as there are 5 sentences that were unnecessary.

I understand that we are trying to reach past rote-memorization. However, I think in the right context it makes sense to use the same word for word correct answer. For example if we are trying to teach specific content heavy vocabulary.

I highlighted this section because it illustrates the importance of the use of formative assessments in proactively shaping future instruction. As well as effective assessments.

This is easier said than done. It is difficult to shut off the nurturing nature of the classroom. It is also very difficult to not answer a question about what is meant by a question.

This should really be listed as #1 or #2, as collaboration with parents is crucial to a students success. Ensuring that parents know what is going on, better helps the teacher know what they need from the students.

Interesting, to focus on "minimally competent" students (sounds insulting). Though setting a baseline helps gauge actually improvement vs. who passed or failed.

In Secondary, readiness tests could be particularly effective in tasks that require knowledge across contents. For example algebra in physics or writing skills in history.

This relates to the idea of grading and reviewing assessments with students as soon as possible. If you wait too long after the assessment, the answers that have been guessed will be just that, guesses. However, if you grade the assessment with students immediately, it becomes a learning opportunity as the student sees it was the correct or not-correct answer.

I think this is the best strategy to mitigate test anxiety. If the teacher provides clear objectives and isn't vague with their expectations. Students should succeed, given that they try.

These are great rules of thumb for me to keep in mind going forward. Time management is not always my strong suit.

I see this a lot as a student. I can prepare and prepare for an exam, get all of the "easy" questions correct, but come up short on the final two hard questions. Professors sometimes like to weigh these heavier and the easier questions lower.

This is an interesting concept to me, I think if we as teachers have a way to track data easier. Less time can be spent on coming up with assessments and more time spent on adjusting instruction. I'd love to learn more about these "new types of items and reporting systems".

In Pedagogy/Microteaching, I felt the biggest shortcoming was to put yourself in the shoes of the teacher for 10 minutes. Sure, you were teaching to a standard, but most had no idea what the objective of their lesson was, or the intended outcome that they wanted to assess.

I annotated this section because it is something I had seen my CT use in my JI. Specifically, she used it for a pretest that was for the district-wide assessment. Giving that feedback immediately was crucial for them to correct any misconceptions and be able to succeed the next class period.

As a college student, I enjoy a pretest as it allows me to understand the full objectives of the course. However when we are discussing a pretest for a high school physical science test, I do not see it going very well and causing anxiety from the start.

Working in a Secondary SPED department, I have seen this firsthand. Many of the students have learned helplessness from years of low expectations or have given up because of the high expectations.

In Pedagogy, we discussed the "Cadillac Model" of assessment. Which is backed by quantitative or qualitative data. Yet, here we are talking about how useful the "Ford Pinto Model" can be. It still gets you from A-B and has importance in the classroom.

A really interesting notion. As negative as people are towards this profession. It is refreshing to be coming into teaching at a time that emphasis is being placed on teacher assessment vs. standardized testing. As it was at the height of NCLB.

I highlighted this portion because I feel it emphasizes the importance of culturally responsive teaching and real-world connections. Returning to Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development, if a concept is too far out of a students' ZPD we are only setting them up for failure. Formative assessment allows us to be able define this Zone.

The most difficult part of weighting the final summative. Is that if it is weighted too heavily, if the student fails the summative none of their other work may be able to save their grade. However, if all assessments are weighted equally, the final summative has less merit.

In Classroom Management, we studied William Glasser and his Choice Theory being used in the classroom. Part of his theory is that students are only motivated when they choose to do so. This is why he recommends what he calls "competent work", work that is based on real-life experiences and projects that show understanding past memorization of rote facts.

As I mentioned in the discussion board for this week I enjoyed the article The Case Against Zeroes in Grading. I had honestly never thought about the unfairness in the A-F system.

I am an Assistant Archery Coach and one aspect of our training is through the National Archery in Schools Program. Is that we compliment what the Archer is doing correctly before we ever point out what they doing wrong.

I thought that this notion is interesting, because traditionally we relate the former assessments with higher DOK levels and deeper understanding. However, from the perspective of gaining data and those positive consequences for our future instruction, selected response may be more beneficial to the students' overall understanding.

As teachers, we must put ourselves in the shoes of the student constantly. Before making instruction decisions, we should always ask ourselves: "how would I feel doing this assessment?". While also taking into consideration that we are not always going to have the same perspectives as everyone else.

Being a Science major, lab activities are critical. Although online science resources have come a long way, I would think that science will still use more resources than some other areas of content.

Going through a teaching program, we are taught to think about our procedures, rules, lessons, learning objectives, and entire teaching philosophies. However, our first line of support are in fact the goals, procedures, and philosophies of our respective state, district, and buildings. Our perspectives should add to these supports, not ignore or contradict them.

One of my favorite theories in education is that of Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development. The approach being to essentially meet students at where they are at academically or socially and scaffolding from there. If you start to teach outside of the students' ZPD, they are unable to succeed.

I highlighted this section because I think that it points out a critical issue in assessments today. Students are taught to retain information for short periods of time to be able to pass an upcoming summative assessment, rather than being taught how to apply those concepts to other areas of content, assessments, and situations that may present themselves in life.

Sometimes I feel as educators we over complicate things. However, looking back at the two charts on this page between Bloom's and Marzano & Kendall's taxonomies. The more complicated of the two: Bloom's makes more sense to me.

I am grateful to the author for including NGSS in the text, as I am very familiar with the resource already. I think it can be a very valuable resource to all Science educators. One thing that I enjoy about NGSS is the inclusion of cross-cutting concepts on all of their standards, highlighting how all of the realms of science relate and the skills that students are learning throughout.

Assessment should be used as a tool to better not only student understanding, but our understanding of the students. When we have quantitative date can make informed decisions going forward that result in quantitative gains.

I chose to annotate this section because from an outside perspective looking in, people often do not understand the importance of the individual teacher's philosophies on learning when we talk about the chance of success a student has in a classroom.

In my studies I have only ever seen or understood differentiation as using different mediums for students to show the same understanding as others. It's refreshing to see an example that shows that we can differentiate that understanding as well.

My own personal philosophy on the effective teacher is that of one that ensures students know what is needed behaviorally and academically to succeed in their classroom. The Cognitive Theory of Goal Setting, is naturally the theory I gravitate towards because of my own beliefs.