Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Standards-Based Assessment     and Rating System         SECONDARY LEVEL  BUREAU OF SECONDARY EDUCATION     DEPARTMENT OF ...
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION Philosophy of Assessment Features of the Standards-Based Assessment Nature of Assessment and It...
Philosophy Assessment shall be used primarily as a quality assurance tool to track student’s progress in the attainment o...
Features Holistic   Diagnostic (assessment for learning)   Formative/Developmental (assessment for and assessment as   ...
Nature of Assessment     Purpose  Assessment      Being summative, it measures  of Learning     student’s attainment of st...
Performance Standard                                        Performance                                                   ...
Levels of Assessment Knowledge refers to the substantive content of the  curriculum namely the facts and information that...
Assessment Tools Knowledge – traditional tools e.g. paper-&-pencil  tests using multiple choice, true-or-false or matchin...
Assessment Tools Understandings – facets of understandings Products & Performances – authentic products or performance t...
Facets of Understanding       Concept
Products and Performances Students demonstrate conceptual understanding, and  content and skill acquisition or show evide...
At the Level of Understanding Do products and/or performances reflect evidence  of students’ learning?At the Level of Per...
Levels of Proficiency  The student at this level possesses the  minimum knowledge and skills and core  understandings, but...
(90% &The student at this level exceeds the core                                           above)                         ...
Final Grade and Honor Students Final Grade - to be reported as the average of the four quarterly ratings, expressed in te...
Feedback Results of the assessment across levels should be fed back immediately to the students, so that they know what t...
Factors for Rating
Knowledge • (8%) Relevance of   (15%) -     data/information to the acquisition   development of      of       understandi...
Rubric for Assessing Knowledge   Relevance of data/information acquired (8%)    8%   - Data/information acquired are     ...
Rubric for Assessing Knowledge   Relevance of data/information acquired (8%)    2-3% - Data/information are of very      ...
Rubric for Assessing Knowledge Adequacy of data/information to firm up and deepen understanding (7%) 7% - Data/informatio...
Rubric for Assessing Knowledge Adequacy of data/information to firm up and deepen understanding (7%) 1-2% - Data/informat...
Skills (25%) -   meaning   making as evidenced by     •(10%) the student’s   ability to                   Understanding  p...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Understanding of Content (10%) Strong (8-10%) – The student understands   co...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Understanding of Content (10%)     Strong (8-10%) – The student understands ...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making)    Developing (5-7%) – The student understands the    minimum content require...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making)Developing (5-7%) – The student understands theminimum content required by the...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making)    Weak (2-4%) – The student struggles to understand    the minimum content r...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making)Weak (2-4%) – The student struggles to understandthe minimum content required ...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Strong (13-15%) -The student demonstrates deep analy...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Moderately Strong (10-12%) -The student demonstrates...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Developing (7-9%) -The student demonstrates little a...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Weak (4-6%) -The student demonstrates very little an...
Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Very Weak (1-3%) -The student can barely demonstrate...
Understanding(s)     (30%)- as        • Breadth of expressed using  the six facets of     understanding  understanding:   ...
Rubric for Assessing Understanding Strong (26-30%) -The student demonstrates accurate, very extensive, and very deep unde...
Rubric for Assessing Understanding Moderately Strong (21-25%) -The student demonstrates accurate, extensive, and deep und...
Rubric for Assessing Understanding Developing (16-20%) -The student strives to demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep ...
Rubric for Assessing Understanding Weak (11-15%) -The student can barely demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep unders...
Rubric for Assessing Understanding Very Weak (6-10%) -The student cannot demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep unders...
• Products- outputs which are                    reflective of learner’s creative   Transfer of      application of unders...
Rubric for Assessing Products and              Performances Strong ( 26-30%) – The student (or the team) independently de...
 The entire process from planning to execution was  carried out by the student (or the team), with little or  no guidance...
Moderately Strong (21-25%) – – The student (or the team) demonstrates the ability to create, add value and transfer his/he...
 There is some evidence of value added by the  student (or team) in the execution of the process.  There are attempts at ...
Developing (16-20%)- The student (or team) strives to use understanding or learning creatively in producing products or pe...
 There is little evidence of value added by the  student (or team) in the execution of the process.  There are limited at...
Weak (11-15%)- The student (or team) shows inadequacy in using understanding or learning creatively in producing products ...
 There is almost no evidence of value added by the  student (or team) in the execution of the process  or in the use of u...
Very Weak (6-10%)- The student (or the team) shows great difficulty in using understanding or learning creatively in produ...
 There is no evidence of value added by the student  (or team) in the execution of the process. There  are no attempts at...
Frequency of Assessment Knowledge, skills, understanding and transfer shall be assessed formatively (daily; weekly; score...
Standards based assessment under the k to12
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Standards based assessment under the k to12

15,431

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
28 Comments
32 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
15,431
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
17
Comments
28
Likes
32
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • (75-79%)
  • Transcript of "Standards based assessment under the k to12"

    1. 1. Standards-Based Assessment and Rating System SECONDARY LEVEL BUREAU OF SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
    2. 2. OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION Philosophy of Assessment Features of the Standards-Based Assessment Nature of Assessment and Its Purpose Levels of Assessment Assessment Tools Levels of Proficiency Rating System Assessment Rubric Frequency of Assessment
    3. 3. Philosophy Assessment shall be used primarily as a quality assurance tool to track student’s progress in the attainment of standards, promote self-reflection and personal accountability for one’s learning and provide a basis for the profiling of student performance.
    4. 4. Features Holistic  Diagnostic (assessment for learning)  Formative/Developmental (assessment for and assessment as learning)  Summative/Evaluative (assessment of learning) Standards-based  Content- what the student knows, can do, and understands  Performance- how the student transfers his/her understanding to life situations
    5. 5. Nature of Assessment Purpose Assessment Being summative, it measures of Learning student’s attainment of standards. Assessment The student reflects on results of as Learning assessment, charts his/her own progress, and plans next steps to improve performance; buildsAssessment metacognition as it involves theof Learning student in setting and monitoring own learning goals. Assessment Determines student’s for Learning background knowledge and skills; tracks student’s progress in understanding
    6. 6. Performance Standard Performance APPROACHING PROFICIENCY PRODUCTS/L E V E L S OF A S S E S S M E N T PERFORMANCES (30%) PROFICIENT ADVANCED DEVELOPING BEGINNING UNDERSTANDING(S) (30%) Understanding PROCESS(SKILLS) (25%) KNOWLEDGE (15%) Content Standard L E V E L S OF P R O F I C I E N C Y
    7. 7. Levels of Assessment Knowledge refers to the substantive content of the curriculum namely the facts and information that the student acquires. Process refers to the cognitive operations that the student performs on facts and information for the purpose of constructing meanings and understandings. Understandings refers to enduring big ideas, principles and generalizations inherent to the discipline which are assessed using the facets of understandings. Products/Performances refers to real-life application of understanding as evidenced by the student’s performance of authentic tasks.
    8. 8. Assessment Tools Knowledge – traditional tools e.g. paper-&-pencil tests using multiple choice, true-or-false or matching type tests and constructed response tests Process or Skills - outline, organize, analyze, interpret, translate, convert or express information in another form or format; draw analogies,; construct graphs, flowcharts and mind maps or graphic organizers; or transform a textual presentation into a diagram
    9. 9. Assessment Tools Understandings – facets of understandings Products & Performances – authentic products or performance tasks that a student is expected to do to demonstrate his/her understanding
    10. 10. Facets of Understanding Concept
    11. 11. Products and Performances Students demonstrate conceptual understanding, and content and skill acquisition or show evidence of their learning through products and performances. Products and performances promote self-understanding, self-monitoring, and self-assessment. They include opportunities for authentic audiences to experience and critique results They permit choices and combinations of oral, written, visual, and kinesthetic modes
    12. 12. At the Level of Understanding Do products and/or performances reflect evidence of students’ learning?At the Level of Performance Do products and/or performances demonstrate students conceptual understanding, and content and skill?
    13. 13. Levels of Proficiency The student at this level possesses the minimum knowledge and skills and core understandings, but needs help Developing throughout the performance of authentic tasks. (75-79%)(75-79%) The student at this level struggles with his/her understanding; Beginning prerequisite and fundamental knowledge and/or skills have not been acquired or developed adequately to aid understanding.below) (74% &
    14. 14. (90% &The student at this level exceeds the core above) Advancedrequirements in terms of knowledge, skills andunderstandings, and can transfer them automaticallyand flexibly through authentic performance tasks.The student at this level has developed thefundamental knowledge and skills and core (85-89%) Proficientunderstandings, and can transfer themindependently through authentic performance tasks.The student at this level has developed thefundamental knowledge and skills and core Approachingunderstandings and, with little guidance from Proficiencythe teacher and/or with some assistance frompeers, can transfer these understandingsthrough authentic performance tasks. (80-84%)
    15. 15. Final Grade and Honor Students Final Grade - to be reported as the average of the four quarterly ratings, expressed in terms of the level of proficiency Honor Students – to be drawn among those who performed at the advance level
    16. 16. Feedback Results of the assessment across levels should be fed back immediately to the students, so that they know what to improve further, and then they can plan strategically how they can address any learning deficiency.
    17. 17. Factors for Rating
    18. 18. Knowledge • (8%) Relevance of (15%) - data/information to the acquisition development of of understandinginformation as • (7%) Adequacy of evidenced data/information to by the firm up and deepen following: understanding
    19. 19. Rubric for Assessing Knowledge Relevance of data/information acquired (8%) 8% - Data/information acquired are completely relevant to the development of understanding. 6-7% - Data/information acquired are to a great extent relevant to the development of understanding. 4-5% - Data/information are to some extent relevant to the development of understanding.
    20. 20. Rubric for Assessing Knowledge Relevance of data/information acquired (8%) 2-3% - Data/information are of very little relevance to the development of understanding.
    21. 21. Rubric for Assessing Knowledge Adequacy of data/information to firm up and deepen understanding (7%) 7% - Data/information are completely adequate to firm up and deepen understanding 5-6% - Data/information are to a great extent adequate to firm up and deepen understanding 3-4% - Data/information are to some extent adequate to firm up and deepen understanding
    22. 22. Rubric for Assessing Knowledge Adequacy of data/information to firm up and deepen understanding (7%) 1-2% - Data/information are very inadequate to firm up and deepen understanding.
    23. 23. Skills (25%) - meaning making as evidenced by •(10%) the student’s ability to Understanding process and of Contentmake sense of information, •(15%) Criticaland is assessed based on the Thinking following criteria:
    24. 24. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Understanding of Content (10%) Strong (8-10%) – The student understands completely the full content required by the task and can undertake with a great deal of competence all of the following processes relative to the content:  Distinguish (whatever is appropriate to the subject) between relevant and irrelevant content/ between fact and fiction/ between fact and opinion/ between fact and hearsay/ between truth and propaganda/ between what is important and unimportant/ between accurate and inaccurate content
    25. 25. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Understanding of Content (10%) Strong (8-10%) – The student understands completely the full content required by the task and can undertake with a great deal of competence all of the following processes:  Outline the content at the required level of detail  Organize the information coherently, logically
    26. 26. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Developing (5-7%) – The student understands the minimum content required by the task and can undertake with some competence the following processes: Distinguish (whatever is appropriate to the subject) between relevant and irrelevant content/ between fact and fiction/ between fact and opinion/ between fact and hearsay/ between truth and propaganda/ between what is important and unimportant/ between accurate and inaccurate content
    27. 27. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making)Developing (5-7%) – The student understands theminimum content required by the task and canundertake with some competence the followingprocesses : Outline the content at the required level of detail Organize the information coherently, logically
    28. 28. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Weak (2-4%) – The student struggles to understand the minimum content required by the task and has great difficulty undertaking the following processes: Distinguish (whatever is appropriate to the subject) between relevant and irrelevant content/ between fact and fiction/ between fact and opinion/ between fact and hearsay/ between truth and propaganda/ between what is important and unimportant/ between accurate and inaccurate content
    29. 29. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making)Weak (2-4%) – The student struggles to understandthe minimum content required by the task and hasgreat difficulty undertaking the following processes: Outline the content at the required level of detail Organize the information coherently, logically
    30. 30. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Strong (13-15%) -The student demonstrates deep analytical processing of information and can perform with a great deal of competence the following processes:  Interpret; translate; convert, or express the information (such as a set of statistics) into another form or format or transform a textual presentation into a flowchart, diagram, advance organizer, etc.  Draw insights; see beyond the data; read between the lines  Reason logically, coherently
    31. 31. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Moderately Strong (10-12%) -The student demonstrates fairly analytical processing of information and can perform with some competence the following processes:  Interpret; translate; convert, or express the information (such as a set of statistics) into another form or format or transform a textual presentation into a flowchart , diagram, advance organizer, etc.  Draw insights; see beyond the data; read between the lines  Reason logically, coherently
    32. 32. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Developing (7-9%) -The student demonstrates little analytical processing of information and strives to perform the following processes:  Interpret; translate; convert, or express the information (such as a set of statistics) into another form or format or transform a textual presentation into a flowchart , diagram, advance organizer, etc.  Draw insights; see beyond the data; read between the lines  Reason logically, coherently
    33. 33. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Weak (4-6%) -The student demonstrates very little analytical processing of information and has great difficulty performing the following processes:  Interpret; translate; convert, or express the information (such as a set of statistics) into another form or format or transform a textual presentation into a flowchart , diagram, advance organizer, etc.  Draw insights; see beyond the data; read between the lines  Reason logically, coherently
    34. 34. Rubric for Assessing Skills (Meaning-Making) Critical Thinking (15%) Very Weak (1-3%) -The student can barely demonstrate analytical processing of information and cannot perform the following processes:  Interpret; translate; convert, or express the information (such as a set of statistics) into another form or format or transform a textual presentation into a flowchart, diagram, advance organizer, etc.  Draw insights; see beyond the data; read between the lines  Reason logically, coherently
    35. 35. Understanding(s) (30%)- as • Breadth of expressed using the six facets of understanding understanding: (connection to a wide Explanation, Interpretation, range of contexts) Application, Empathy, Perspective, and • Depth of Self-knowledge, and are assessed understanding (use of based on the insights, reflection)following criteria:
    36. 36. Rubric for Assessing Understanding Strong (26-30%) -The student demonstrates accurate, very extensive, and very deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are clearly evident.
    37. 37. Rubric for Assessing Understanding Moderately Strong (21-25%) -The student demonstrates accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.
    38. 38. Rubric for Assessing Understanding Developing (16-20%) -The student strives to demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.
    39. 39. Rubric for Assessing Understanding Weak (11-15%) -The student can barely demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self- Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.
    40. 40. Rubric for Assessing Understanding Very Weak (6-10%) -The student cannot demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.
    41. 41. • Products- outputs which are reflective of learner’s creative Transfer of application of understanding; understanding and to lifesituations(30%) • Performances- skilful as exhibition or creative demonstrated execution of a process, through reflective of masterful application of learning or understanding
    42. 42. Rubric for Assessing Products and Performances Strong ( 26-30%) – The student (or the team) independently demonstrates the ability to create, add value and transfer his/her/their understanding to life situations in the form of products and performances. This means that the product or performance reflects the following attributes:
    43. 43.  The entire process from planning to execution was carried out by the student (or the team), with little or no guidance from the teacher. The product or performance is well thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. Potential problems have been identified and appropriate remediation has been put in place should problems arise. There is evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. The product or performance is a demonstration of creative application of enduring understanding in a new or novel context or situation.
    44. 44. Moderately Strong (21-25%) – – The student (or the team) demonstrates the ability to create, add value and transfer his/her/their understanding to life situations in the form of products and performances, but the product or performance can still stand improvement in a number of areas, namely: The entire process from planning to execution was carried out by the student (or the team), with some guidance/ coaching from the teacher. The product or performance is fairly well thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution.
    45. 45.  There is some evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. There are attempts at novelty (e.g., formatting, organization, packaging, presentation). The product or performance is a demonstration of creative application of enduring understanding, but the context or situation in which the understanding is applied is a little ordinary or common.
    46. 46. Developing (16-20%)- The student (or team) strives to use understanding or learning creatively in producing products or performances as manifested in the following: The student or the team attempts to do the task entirely on their own, but seeks the teacher’s help for the major part of the process. The product or performance has some flaws in the design that the student (or the team) has addressed with some help from the teacher.
    47. 47.  There is little evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. There are limited attempts at novelty (e.g., formatting, organization, packaging, presentation). A little creative application of enduring understanding is shown in the product or performance. The context or situation in which the understanding is applied is ordinary or common.
    48. 48. Weak (11-15%)- The student (or team) shows inadequacy in using understanding or learning creatively in producing products or performances. The inadequacy is manifested in the following: The entire process from planning to execution could not have been carried out by the student (or the team), without the teacher’s guidance and coaching. The product or performance is poorly thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. There are marked flaws in the design that the student (or the team) is not even aware of.
    49. 49.  There is almost no evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process or in the use of understanding or learning. Every aspect (e.g., formatting, organization, packaging, presentation ) of the product or performance is just a copy of what has been taught in class.
    50. 50. Very Weak (6-10%)- The student (or the team) shows great difficulty in using understanding or learning creatively in producing products or performances. The difficulty is manifested in the following: The entire process from planning to execution was poorly carried out by the student (or the team), even with the teacher’s guidance and coaching. The product or performance is very poorly thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. There are many obvious flaws in the design that the student (or the team) has ignored .
    51. 51.  There is no evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. There are no attempts at novelty (e.g., in formatting, organization, packaging, presentation). The product or performance does not show creative application of enduring understanding. The context or situation in which the understanding is applied is very ordinary or common.
    52. 52. Frequency of Assessment Knowledge, skills, understanding and transfer shall be assessed formatively (daily; weekly; scored and recorded, but not graded) and summatively (scored, recorded and graded) at the end of the unit, quarter, or school year.

    ×