The document discusses depth of knowledge (DOK) and its importance in education. DOK refers to the complexity of thinking required to complete a task, not its difficulty. It is assessed on a scale from 1 to 4, with higher levels requiring more strategic and extended thinking. The document notes that while tests like FCAT aim for 10-20% of questions to be at DOK level 1, instruction should focus more on developing higher-order thinking at DOK levels 3 and 4 in order to better prepare students. Aligning standards, instruction, and assessments based on DOK is key to promoting deeper understanding.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework, which is used to align academic standards and assessments based on cognitive complexity. The DOK has four levels ranging from simple recall to extended strategic thinking. Level 1 involves recall tasks, Level 2 focuses on skills and concepts, Level 3 requires strategic thinking, and Level 4 deals with complex reasoning. The DOK level is determined by the intended learning outcome rather than the difficulty of tasks or verbs used. Teachers must ensure instruction matches the DOK level of standards to promote student achievement.
The document discusses depth of knowledge (DOK) and Webb's four levels of cognitive complexity. It provides examples of tasks at each DOK level, from simple recall (Level 1) to more complex strategic thinking (Level 3) and extended thinking (Level 4). The key points are that DOK focuses on the complexity of thinking required rather than task difficulty, and that the intended learning outcomes determine the DOK level, not the verbs used.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework for categorizing the cognitive complexity of standards, objectives, and assessment items. It explains that DOK is a scale from 1-4 that measures the depth of understanding and processing required rather than just the difficulty of verbs or topics. Level 1 involves recall of facts, Level 2 basic skills and concepts, Level 3 strategic thinking, and Level 4 extended thinking such as analyzing and synthesizing across sources. Examples are provided for each DOK level to illustrate the distinction between levels. The document emphasizes that DOK is about the complexity of thinking demanded rather than just vocabulary words.
This presentation has/will be used with K-12 Math teachers to explore the concept of Depth of Knowledge in order to apply this information to resources and assessments in order to insure there is an appropriate level of DOK in our courses.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) model, which is used to align academic standards and assessments. It describes the four DOK levels - recall and reproduction (Level 1), skills and concepts (Level 2), strategic thinking (Level 3), and extended thinking (Level 4) - and provides examples of assessment items for each level. The key points are that DOK focuses on the cognitive demand required by an assessment item or standard, not its difficulty, and is used to ensure standards and assessments match in complexity as required by No Child Left Behind.
1) The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework for classifying standards, objectives, tasks and assessments based on the complexity of thinking required.
2) DOK has four levels - recall and reproduction, skills and concepts, strategic thinking, and extended thinking. It is important to ensure standards, instruction and assessments are aligned to the DOK levels.
3) While verbs used may signal complexity, the real determiner is the cognitive demand of the task - what students are asked to do. DOK is not about difficulty but about the depth of understanding required.
The document discusses Depth of Knowledge (DOK), a model that classifies standards and assessment items based on cognitive complexity and depth of understanding required. It has 4 levels that range from basic recall to extended strategic thinking. Levels focus on aligning what students must do to demonstrate mastery of a standard with what is assessed. The DOK model ensures standards, teaching, and assessments all require sufficient depth of knowledge. Verbs alone don't determine DOK level - the context and cognitive demand of the entire item or standard must be considered.
The document discusses shifting assessments to higher levels of cognitive complexity known as depth of knowledge (DOK). It describes four levels of DOK and provides examples of each for math assessments. Levels 1 and 2 involve recall and skills while levels 3 and 4 involve strategic thinking, extended reasoning, and real-world application. While previous assessments like CST only measured the lower levels, newer assessments like SBAC aim to measure higher levels by including more complex, multi-step items requiring explanation and justification. The examples illustrate the increasing cognitive demand from levels 1 to 4.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework, which is used to align academic standards and assessments based on cognitive complexity. The DOK has four levels ranging from simple recall to extended strategic thinking. Level 1 involves recall tasks, Level 2 focuses on skills and concepts, Level 3 requires strategic thinking, and Level 4 deals with complex reasoning. The DOK level is determined by the intended learning outcome rather than the difficulty of tasks or verbs used. Teachers must ensure instruction matches the DOK level of standards to promote student achievement.
The document discusses depth of knowledge (DOK) and Webb's four levels of cognitive complexity. It provides examples of tasks at each DOK level, from simple recall (Level 1) to more complex strategic thinking (Level 3) and extended thinking (Level 4). The key points are that DOK focuses on the complexity of thinking required rather than task difficulty, and that the intended learning outcomes determine the DOK level, not the verbs used.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework for categorizing the cognitive complexity of standards, objectives, and assessment items. It explains that DOK is a scale from 1-4 that measures the depth of understanding and processing required rather than just the difficulty of verbs or topics. Level 1 involves recall of facts, Level 2 basic skills and concepts, Level 3 strategic thinking, and Level 4 extended thinking such as analyzing and synthesizing across sources. Examples are provided for each DOK level to illustrate the distinction between levels. The document emphasizes that DOK is about the complexity of thinking demanded rather than just vocabulary words.
This presentation has/will be used with K-12 Math teachers to explore the concept of Depth of Knowledge in order to apply this information to resources and assessments in order to insure there is an appropriate level of DOK in our courses.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) model, which is used to align academic standards and assessments. It describes the four DOK levels - recall and reproduction (Level 1), skills and concepts (Level 2), strategic thinking (Level 3), and extended thinking (Level 4) - and provides examples of assessment items for each level. The key points are that DOK focuses on the cognitive demand required by an assessment item or standard, not its difficulty, and is used to ensure standards and assessments match in complexity as required by No Child Left Behind.
1) The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework for classifying standards, objectives, tasks and assessments based on the complexity of thinking required.
2) DOK has four levels - recall and reproduction, skills and concepts, strategic thinking, and extended thinking. It is important to ensure standards, instruction and assessments are aligned to the DOK levels.
3) While verbs used may signal complexity, the real determiner is the cognitive demand of the task - what students are asked to do. DOK is not about difficulty but about the depth of understanding required.
The document discusses Depth of Knowledge (DOK), a model that classifies standards and assessment items based on cognitive complexity and depth of understanding required. It has 4 levels that range from basic recall to extended strategic thinking. Levels focus on aligning what students must do to demonstrate mastery of a standard with what is assessed. The DOK model ensures standards, teaching, and assessments all require sufficient depth of knowledge. Verbs alone don't determine DOK level - the context and cognitive demand of the entire item or standard must be considered.
The document discusses shifting assessments to higher levels of cognitive complexity known as depth of knowledge (DOK). It describes four levels of DOK and provides examples of each for math assessments. Levels 1 and 2 involve recall and skills while levels 3 and 4 involve strategic thinking, extended reasoning, and real-world application. While previous assessments like CST only measured the lower levels, newer assessments like SBAC aim to measure higher levels by including more complex, multi-step items requiring explanation and justification. The examples illustrate the increasing cognitive demand from levels 1 to 4.
This document discusses effective questioning techniques for instructors. It presents a taxonomy that categorizes questions as either high or low order and convergent or divergent. High order questions require deeper thinking while divergent questions have open-ended answers. Research shows that most teacher questions are low-level convergent, focusing on recall. The document outlines techniques for crafting higher-order, divergent questions like wait time and probing responses. When these techniques are used, students provide more thoughtful answers and teachers ask a greater variety of questions.
This document discusses effective questioning techniques for instructors. It presents a taxonomy that categorizes questions as either high or low order and convergent or divergent. High order questions require deeper thinking while divergent questions have open-ended answers. Research shows that most teacher questions are low-level convergent, focusing on recall. The document outlines techniques for crafting higher-order, divergent questions like wait time and probing responses. When these techniques are used, students provide more thoughtful answers and teachers ask a greater variety of questions.
This document summarizes best practices and tools for teaching in multilingual classrooms. It discusses both general tools like considering learning environments and emotions, as well as specific tools such as note-taking, summarizing, questioning techniques, and cooperative learning. Both general and specific tools can become second nature for effective teachers. The document recommends choosing one unfamiliar tool to apply in teaching, such as using organizers, reinforcing effort, or providing feedback.
This document discusses classroom questions. It defines classroom questions and outlines their main purposes, which include checking student understanding and eliciting information. It describes seven "deadly sins" of classroom questioning and different types of questions like display vs referential, open vs closed. The document also discusses Bloom's taxonomy and how different levels of thinking can be elicited through different types of classroom questions.
This document provides an introduction and overview of a proposed dissertation examining the effects of instruction emphasizing fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration on vocabulary achievement, reading comprehension, and creativity in 3rd through 6th grade students. It presents 3 research questions and reviews relevant professional literature on traditional vs. nontraditional instruction, the need for creativity and vocabulary instruction, creative thinking instruction methods, and how fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration can enhance vocabulary development and creativity. The proposed mixed methods study and research methods utilizing various assessments are also summarized.
This document discusses assessment and provides information about various assessment topics. It begins by outlining an agenda for a workshop on assessment competencies, knowledge, process, understanding and product/performance. It then defines key terms related to assessment such as authentic assessment, alternative assessment, and performance assessment. The document discusses the shift toward alternative and performance-based assessments that measure higher-order skills through open-ended tasks rather than lower-level discrete skills. It provides characteristics and examples of performance-based assessments and discusses constructing performance-based tasks.
1) Bloom's Taxonomy outlines six levels of thinking skills - knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
2) These levels progress from basic recall of facts to more complex thinking skills such as applying knowledge to solve problems or create new ideas.
3) Each level involves different types of thinking and can be assessed through varying question cues that require different cognitive processes.
Developing Essential (Power) Standards With RbtJerrie Brown
The document discusses the development of essential standards in North Carolina using Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. It outlines criteria for identifying priority standards and describes how standards can be written as objectives using verbs to specify cognitive processes. Tables show how standards have been organized based on knowledge dimensions and cognitive process levels to ensure emphasis on higher-order thinking.
The document discusses Bloom's Revised Taxonomy, which organizes thinking skills into six levels from basic to more complex. It provides an overview of the original taxonomy and changes made in the revision, including renaming categories from nouns to verbs and emphasizing explanation over lists. Examples are given of classroom activities and assessments for each of the six levels: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating.
Application of Bloom Taxanomy in TeachingFreelanced
The document outlines a workshop on applying Bloom's taxonomy in teaching. It discusses the six levels of Bloom's taxonomy - knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. For each level, it provides examples of how to assess students' learning, typical tasks, and descriptive verbs to indicate skills expected at that level. It includes sample test questions targeting different levels to help teachers design assessments. The workshop aims to help educators understand and apply Bloom's taxonomy in their classrooms.
The document discusses learning outcomes and best practices for writing them. It defines learning outcomes as formal statements that articulate what students will be able to do after instruction and why it is important for them to do so. Developing clear learning outcomes is important for accountability, accreditation, and continuous improvement by showing evidence of student learning. The document provides guidance on writing measurable outcomes using verbs and aligning them with different levels of Bloom's taxonomy. It emphasizes the importance of outcomes being clear, integrated, developmental, and measurable.
This document discusses dynamic assessment, which involves assessing students with instruction. It distinguishes between latent and developed abilities, noting that conventional tests only measure developed abilities. Dynamic assessment aims to bridge this gap by using techniques like test-teach-test. The goal is to see how much a student can improve with learning opportunities. It was influenced by Vygotsky and aims to create more fair and developmental tests, especially for disadvantaged students. It assesses language responsiveness and growth rather than language alone.
In this presentation, you will learn about what a taxonomy is, what the two-dimensional taxonomy means for you in your classroom, and how to write student learning outcomes (SLOs) using Bloom's Revised Taxonomy.
Critical thinking is one of the major and rapidly growing concepts in education. Today, its role in second and foreign language learning and teaching is of great importance. Critical thinking skills and the mastery of the English language are expected to become essential outcomes of university education. To become fluent in a language and must be able to think critically and express thoughts, students need practise speaking activities using critical thinking skills. In this article, we define the concept “critical thinking” and discuss the role of critical thinking in the development of speaking skills through some practical activities that can be used in the classroom for students to practice critical thinking skills H. Muhammadiyeva, D. Mahkamova, Sh. Valiyeva and I. Tojiboyev 2020. The role of critical thinking in developing speaking skills. International Journal on Integrated Education. 3, 1 (Mar. 2020), 62-64. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31149/ijie.v3i1.41 Pdf Url : https://journals.researchparks.org/index.php/IJIE/article/view/41/39 Paper Url : https://journals.researchparks.org/index.php/IJIE/article/view/41
The document provides an overview of Bloom's Taxonomy and higher-order thinking. It discusses the original and revised taxonomy, including changes in terms and emphasis. Each of the six cognitive levels (Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analyzing, Evaluating, and Creating) are defined and example classroom activities are provided. The document also discusses how Bloom's Taxonomy can be applied practically in the classroom with different approaches for individual students or groups.
Why are Assessments in Indonesia are directed tothe Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS)?
First: Internal & External Challenge
Internal Challenge:
8 (eight) National Education Standards including management standards, cost standards, infrastructure standards, educator standards and education personnel, content standards, process standards, assessment standards, and graduate competency standards.
External Challenge:
Environment, Technology and Information, Creative Industries and International Education Development...etc
Bergenfield workshop on common core and parccpattymcgee
This document discusses aligning literacy work with Common Core standards, depths of knowledge (DOK), and PARCC assessments. It provides an overview of DOK, which ensures assessment items match the intent and demonstration required by standards. DOK is determined by the context and depth of thinking, not just verbs. Examples show how the same verb can be different DOK levels. It also outlines the four DOK levels from recall to extended thinking. The document then examines understanding the Common Core standards and exploring the PARCC assessment framework.
This document discusses literacy work aligned to Common Core standards, depths of knowledge (DOK), and PARCC assessments. It explains that DOK looks at the complexity of thinking required, not just verbs used, and provides examples of different DOK levels using the same verb. DOK levels include recall and reproduction (level 1), skills and concepts (level 2), strategic thinking (level 3), and extended thinking (level 4). The document also discusses understanding Common Core standards through analyzing what they say, inferring their intent, and considering how they align with and differ from current instructional practices.
This document discusses Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and how it can be applied in the classroom. DOK refers to the cognitive demand or rigor required to correctly answer test questions or complete classroom activities. There are 4 levels of DOK, with higher levels requiring greater conceptual understanding and cognitive processing from students. The document provides examples of classroom activities and assessments at each DOK level for various subjects. It also discusses how teachers can help students develop higher-order thinking skills through strategies like think-alouds, where teachers model their thinking process for students.
The document discusses learning outcomes, which are formal statements that articulate what students are able to do after instruction and why. Assessing learning outcomes allows teachers to show evidence of student learning and use that evidence for accountability, accreditation, and continuous program improvement. Effective learning outcomes should be measurable, clear, integrated, use appropriate Bloom's Taxonomy levels, and articulate what students need to know and be able to do and why.
This document discusses effective questioning techniques for instructors. It presents a taxonomy that categorizes questions as either high or low order and convergent or divergent. High order questions require deeper thinking while divergent questions have open-ended answers. Research shows that most teacher questions are low-level convergent, focusing on recall. The document outlines techniques for crafting higher-order, divergent questions like wait time and probing responses. When these techniques are used, students provide more thoughtful answers and teachers ask a greater variety of questions.
This document discusses effective questioning techniques for instructors. It presents a taxonomy that categorizes questions as either high or low order and convergent or divergent. High order questions require deeper thinking while divergent questions have open-ended answers. Research shows that most teacher questions are low-level convergent, focusing on recall. The document outlines techniques for crafting higher-order, divergent questions like wait time and probing responses. When these techniques are used, students provide more thoughtful answers and teachers ask a greater variety of questions.
This document summarizes best practices and tools for teaching in multilingual classrooms. It discusses both general tools like considering learning environments and emotions, as well as specific tools such as note-taking, summarizing, questioning techniques, and cooperative learning. Both general and specific tools can become second nature for effective teachers. The document recommends choosing one unfamiliar tool to apply in teaching, such as using organizers, reinforcing effort, or providing feedback.
This document discusses classroom questions. It defines classroom questions and outlines their main purposes, which include checking student understanding and eliciting information. It describes seven "deadly sins" of classroom questioning and different types of questions like display vs referential, open vs closed. The document also discusses Bloom's taxonomy and how different levels of thinking can be elicited through different types of classroom questions.
This document provides an introduction and overview of a proposed dissertation examining the effects of instruction emphasizing fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration on vocabulary achievement, reading comprehension, and creativity in 3rd through 6th grade students. It presents 3 research questions and reviews relevant professional literature on traditional vs. nontraditional instruction, the need for creativity and vocabulary instruction, creative thinking instruction methods, and how fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration can enhance vocabulary development and creativity. The proposed mixed methods study and research methods utilizing various assessments are also summarized.
This document discusses assessment and provides information about various assessment topics. It begins by outlining an agenda for a workshop on assessment competencies, knowledge, process, understanding and product/performance. It then defines key terms related to assessment such as authentic assessment, alternative assessment, and performance assessment. The document discusses the shift toward alternative and performance-based assessments that measure higher-order skills through open-ended tasks rather than lower-level discrete skills. It provides characteristics and examples of performance-based assessments and discusses constructing performance-based tasks.
1) Bloom's Taxonomy outlines six levels of thinking skills - knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
2) These levels progress from basic recall of facts to more complex thinking skills such as applying knowledge to solve problems or create new ideas.
3) Each level involves different types of thinking and can be assessed through varying question cues that require different cognitive processes.
Developing Essential (Power) Standards With RbtJerrie Brown
The document discusses the development of essential standards in North Carolina using Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. It outlines criteria for identifying priority standards and describes how standards can be written as objectives using verbs to specify cognitive processes. Tables show how standards have been organized based on knowledge dimensions and cognitive process levels to ensure emphasis on higher-order thinking.
The document discusses Bloom's Revised Taxonomy, which organizes thinking skills into six levels from basic to more complex. It provides an overview of the original taxonomy and changes made in the revision, including renaming categories from nouns to verbs and emphasizing explanation over lists. Examples are given of classroom activities and assessments for each of the six levels: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating.
Application of Bloom Taxanomy in TeachingFreelanced
The document outlines a workshop on applying Bloom's taxonomy in teaching. It discusses the six levels of Bloom's taxonomy - knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. For each level, it provides examples of how to assess students' learning, typical tasks, and descriptive verbs to indicate skills expected at that level. It includes sample test questions targeting different levels to help teachers design assessments. The workshop aims to help educators understand and apply Bloom's taxonomy in their classrooms.
The document discusses learning outcomes and best practices for writing them. It defines learning outcomes as formal statements that articulate what students will be able to do after instruction and why it is important for them to do so. Developing clear learning outcomes is important for accountability, accreditation, and continuous improvement by showing evidence of student learning. The document provides guidance on writing measurable outcomes using verbs and aligning them with different levels of Bloom's taxonomy. It emphasizes the importance of outcomes being clear, integrated, developmental, and measurable.
This document discusses dynamic assessment, which involves assessing students with instruction. It distinguishes between latent and developed abilities, noting that conventional tests only measure developed abilities. Dynamic assessment aims to bridge this gap by using techniques like test-teach-test. The goal is to see how much a student can improve with learning opportunities. It was influenced by Vygotsky and aims to create more fair and developmental tests, especially for disadvantaged students. It assesses language responsiveness and growth rather than language alone.
In this presentation, you will learn about what a taxonomy is, what the two-dimensional taxonomy means for you in your classroom, and how to write student learning outcomes (SLOs) using Bloom's Revised Taxonomy.
Critical thinking is one of the major and rapidly growing concepts in education. Today, its role in second and foreign language learning and teaching is of great importance. Critical thinking skills and the mastery of the English language are expected to become essential outcomes of university education. To become fluent in a language and must be able to think critically and express thoughts, students need practise speaking activities using critical thinking skills. In this article, we define the concept “critical thinking” and discuss the role of critical thinking in the development of speaking skills through some practical activities that can be used in the classroom for students to practice critical thinking skills H. Muhammadiyeva, D. Mahkamova, Sh. Valiyeva and I. Tojiboyev 2020. The role of critical thinking in developing speaking skills. International Journal on Integrated Education. 3, 1 (Mar. 2020), 62-64. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31149/ijie.v3i1.41 Pdf Url : https://journals.researchparks.org/index.php/IJIE/article/view/41/39 Paper Url : https://journals.researchparks.org/index.php/IJIE/article/view/41
The document provides an overview of Bloom's Taxonomy and higher-order thinking. It discusses the original and revised taxonomy, including changes in terms and emphasis. Each of the six cognitive levels (Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analyzing, Evaluating, and Creating) are defined and example classroom activities are provided. The document also discusses how Bloom's Taxonomy can be applied practically in the classroom with different approaches for individual students or groups.
Why are Assessments in Indonesia are directed tothe Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS)?
First: Internal & External Challenge
Internal Challenge:
8 (eight) National Education Standards including management standards, cost standards, infrastructure standards, educator standards and education personnel, content standards, process standards, assessment standards, and graduate competency standards.
External Challenge:
Environment, Technology and Information, Creative Industries and International Education Development...etc
Bergenfield workshop on common core and parccpattymcgee
This document discusses aligning literacy work with Common Core standards, depths of knowledge (DOK), and PARCC assessments. It provides an overview of DOK, which ensures assessment items match the intent and demonstration required by standards. DOK is determined by the context and depth of thinking, not just verbs. Examples show how the same verb can be different DOK levels. It also outlines the four DOK levels from recall to extended thinking. The document then examines understanding the Common Core standards and exploring the PARCC assessment framework.
This document discusses literacy work aligned to Common Core standards, depths of knowledge (DOK), and PARCC assessments. It explains that DOK looks at the complexity of thinking required, not just verbs used, and provides examples of different DOK levels using the same verb. DOK levels include recall and reproduction (level 1), skills and concepts (level 2), strategic thinking (level 3), and extended thinking (level 4). The document also discusses understanding Common Core standards through analyzing what they say, inferring their intent, and considering how they align with and differ from current instructional practices.
This document discusses Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and how it can be applied in the classroom. DOK refers to the cognitive demand or rigor required to correctly answer test questions or complete classroom activities. There are 4 levels of DOK, with higher levels requiring greater conceptual understanding and cognitive processing from students. The document provides examples of classroom activities and assessments at each DOK level for various subjects. It also discusses how teachers can help students develop higher-order thinking skills through strategies like think-alouds, where teachers model their thinking process for students.
The document discusses learning outcomes, which are formal statements that articulate what students are able to do after instruction and why. Assessing learning outcomes allows teachers to show evidence of student learning and use that evidence for accountability, accreditation, and continuous program improvement. Effective learning outcomes should be measurable, clear, integrated, use appropriate Bloom's Taxonomy levels, and articulate what students need to know and be able to do and why.
This was a 45-minute presentation on Depth of Knowledge to Secondary Principals on 2/27/2014 as a preview of training to be delivered to Northshore School District teachers.
Transitioning to the Common Core is not going to be easy. Hear what we've learned from educators across the country about what's different and what you should look for in new materials.
This document discusses how Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and Bloom's Taxonomy can be used as tools to increase cognitive rigor in the classroom and better align instruction and assessments with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). It defines DOK as referring to the complexity of thinking required rather than difficulty, and outlines the four DOK levels - from basic recall to extended thinking. The document provides examples of how to create tasks at higher DOK levels and emphasizes the need to routinely operate students at the higher levels of thinking to prepare them for 21st century jobs.
This document provides an overview of performance assessment for educators. It begins with introductions and norms for the discussion. It then examines the elements of performance assessment, exploring a framework for developing English Language Arts performance assessments. Key points made include that performance assessments closely resemble real-life situations, are student-centered, integrate teaching, learning and assessment, and use transparent evaluation criteria. The document provides examples of how performance assessments differ from traditional assessments and outlines a framework for developing performance assessments including standards, essential questions, culminating products, sources, and formative steps.
Test Construction and Teacher-made Test.pptGLENNMENDOZA10
The document discusses assessment in education. It provides observations from student performance on tests, such as boys and girls performing similarly in science and math, and students performing poorly on open-ended questions. It also discusses current trends in assessment, such as emphasizing process skills over content and shifting from teacher-centered to student-centered learning. New roles for teachers include developing thinking skills over memorization and using performance-based evaluation over only tests. The document provides guidance on constructing different assessment item types, such as multiple choice, short answer, and essays, as well as on developing performance-based assessments.
Making the Transition to Classroom Success: Culturally Responsive Teaching f...Andrea DeCapua
Participants develop requisite knowledge and skills for effective teaching of struggling adult language learners using a culturally responsive instructional model, MALP, the Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm. This model promotes classroom success for students having difficulties in traditionally structured programs. Using the principles of MALP, attendees examine samples of student work, guidelines and strategies, classroom activities, and the MALP Teacher Planning Checklist.
The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of "rubric" in language testing and assessment and to highlight the parts of a rubric through various dimensions. Moreover, it sets forth in creating awareness of the effective use of rubrics in measuring multiple dimensions of students' learning and in reflecting robustness of this critical assessment process.
This document summarizes a seminar on fostering a culture shift in assessment and feedback through TESTA (Transforming the Experience of Students Through Assessment). The seminar addressed four key themes: 1) variations in assessment patterns between programs, 2) an over-reliance on high-stakes summative assessment and underuse of formative assessment, 3) disconnected feedback that does not support learning, and 4) a lack of clarity about learning goals and standards. The seminar discussed case studies of integrating more effective formative assessment and strategies like developing shared understanding of goals and criteria to address these issues.
1) The document discusses PUHSD's vision for mathematics curriculum, instruction, and assessment which is aligned with college and career expectations and prepares students for success in graduating high school and the global economy.
2) It explains concepts of rigor and relevance in curriculum, which includes rigorous content and higher-order skills that build on strengths of standards while emphasizing conceptual understanding over procedural skills.
3) Research-based instructional strategies are recommended to create a learning plan meeting CCSS demands, such as those outlined in QualityCore which provide resources, assessments, and reports to support instruction and evaluate student progress.
This document discusses strategies for effective information literacy instruction for upper-level students. It covers faculty outreach, instructional design using the ADDIE model, classroom teaching techniques, and assessment. The document emphasizes adapting instruction to higher-order thinking skills as students progress beyond introductory levels.
2 Writing Behavioral Objectives Taxonomy of educational objectives (2).pdfHafiz20006
This document provides information on writing behavioral objectives according to Bloom's Taxonomy. It discusses the domains of learning - cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. The cognitive domain focuses on knowledge and thinking skills. Bloom's Taxonomy outlines six levels of complexity within this domain from basic recall to higher-order thinking. The affective domain addresses attitudes and values. The psychomotor domain involves physical skills ranging from reflexes to complex coordinated movements. Guidelines are provided for writing clear, measurable behavioral objectives using action verbs from each domain.
The document provides an overview of effective test construction and evaluation. It discusses principles of test construction, the steps to prepare test questions, and examples of different question formats including multiple choice, true/false, matching, and essay. The presentation emphasizes designing valid and reliable assessments that accurately measure student learning.
The document provides an agenda and notes for a professional development session on preparing for the RICA exam. It includes an overview of the exam format and content areas assessed. Sample instructional strategies are presented for differentiating instruction to meet the needs of all learners such as English learners. Participants engage in practice analyzing sample exam questions and writing responses. Key areas covered in the RICA competencies are defined, such as planning reading instruction, assessing reading levels, and teaching phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.
The document outlines a workshop on developing learning outcomes, including summarizing the role of learning outcomes in assessment, recognizing Bloom's Taxonomy to select verbs for objectives, and constructing assessable learning outcomes from objectives using a formula involving verbs and explaining why the skill or knowledge is needed. The workshop also provides examples of good and bad learning outcomes and guides attendees in writing their own learning outcomes.
This document provides information on learning outcomes and how to write them effectively. It begins with definitions of learning outcomes and discusses how they differ from teaching objectives by focusing on what students can do upon completion of learning. Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives is introduced as a useful framework for writing outcomes across cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains. Verbs associated with different levels of Bloom's Taxonomy are provided. The document also discusses linking learning outcomes to teaching and learning activities as well as assessment, providing examples of how to align the three. Overall, the document offers guidance on conceptualizing and implementing a learning outcomes approach in an educational context.
The document discusses Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework which categorizes learning objectives into four levels of cognitive complexity: recall and reproduction (Level 1), skills and concepts (Level 2), strategic thinking (Level 3), and extended thinking (Level 4). It provides examples of questions and tasks for each level. The document also notes that a significant portion of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) assesses higher order thinking at Levels 2-4 to promote strategic and complex cognitive skills needed for success beyond standardized tests.
Andreas Schleicher presents PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Thinking - 18 Jun...EduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher, Director of Education and Skills at the OECD presents at the launch of PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Minds, Creative Schools on 18 June 2024.
Gender and Mental Health - Counselling and Family Therapy Applications and In...PsychoTech Services
A proprietary approach developed by bringing together the best of learning theories from Psychology, design principles from the world of visualization, and pedagogical methods from over a decade of training experience, that enables you to: Learn better, faster!
Level 3 NCEA - NZ: A Nation In the Making 1872 - 1900 SML.pptHenry Hollis
The History of NZ 1870-1900.
Making of a Nation.
From the NZ Wars to Liberals,
Richard Seddon, George Grey,
Social Laboratory, New Zealand,
Confiscations, Kotahitanga, Kingitanga, Parliament, Suffrage, Repudiation, Economic Change, Agriculture, Gold Mining, Timber, Flax, Sheep, Dairying,
Temple of Asclepius in Thrace. Excavation resultsKrassimira Luka
The temple and the sanctuary around were dedicated to Asklepios Zmidrenus. This name has been known since 1875 when an inscription dedicated to him was discovered in Rome. The inscription is dated in 227 AD and was left by soldiers originating from the city of Philippopolis (modern Plovdiv).
Elevate Your Nonprofit's Online Presence_ A Guide to Effective SEO Strategies...TechSoup
Whether you're new to SEO or looking to refine your existing strategies, this webinar will provide you with actionable insights and practical tips to elevate your nonprofit's online presence.
This presentation was provided by Racquel Jemison, Ph.D., Christina MacLaughlin, Ph.D., and Paulomi Majumder. Ph.D., all of the American Chemical Society, for the second session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session Two: 'Expanding Pathways to Publishing Careers,' was held June 13, 2024.
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
This presentation was provided by Rebecca Benner, Ph.D., of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, for the second session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session Two: 'Expanding Pathways to Publishing Careers,' was held June 13, 2024.
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
إضغ بين إيديكم من أقوى الملازم التي صممتها
ملزمة تشريح الجهاز الهيكلي (نظري 3)
💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
تتميز هذهِ الملزمة بعِدة مُميزات :
1- مُترجمة ترجمة تُناسب جميع المستويات
2- تحتوي على 78 رسم توضيحي لكل كلمة موجودة بالملزمة (لكل كلمة !!!!)
#فهم_ماكو_درخ
3- دقة الكتابة والصور عالية جداً جداً جداً
4- هُنالك بعض المعلومات تم توضيحها بشكل تفصيلي جداً (تُعتبر لدى الطالب أو الطالبة بإنها معلومات مُبهمة ومع ذلك تم توضيح هذهِ المعلومات المُبهمة بشكل تفصيلي جداً
5- الملزمة تشرح نفسها ب نفسها بس تكلك تعال اقراني
6- تحتوي الملزمة في اول سلايد على خارطة تتضمن جميع تفرُعات معلومات الجهاز الهيكلي المذكورة في هذهِ الملزمة
واخيراً هذهِ الملزمة حلالٌ عليكم وإتمنى منكم إن تدعولي بالخير والصحة والعافية فقط
كل التوفيق زملائي وزميلاتي ، زميلكم محمد الذهبي 💊💊
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
2. “He who learns but does
not think, is lost.
He who thinks, but does
not learn is in great
danger.”
Confucious
3. Factors that Correlate to
Student Achievement Rates
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
• Parent Education
• Economics (poverty -
affluence)
• Language Acquisition
• Ethnicity
4. Efforts to Improve Student Learning
Class Size Reduction
Whole School Reform
Re-vamp Class time
(varied bell schedules, year-round schools, block schedules)
Innovative Curriculum
Traditional Curriculum (Back to Basics)
Remediation Programs (Tracking, two-year algebra, etc.)
Standards Based Education
(Pacing Guides, Benchmark Test, Data Driven, etc.)
High-stakes Accountability
(Rewards, Sanctions, Differentiated Accountabilty)
Choice (charter schools, magnet schools, etc.)
Centralize Leadership and Policies (state or national)
Professional Learning Communities
5. So...what is the most
significant factor in student
learning?
...the teacher
6. Teachers are the Key
“Teachers must be the primary
driving force behind change. They
are best positioned to understand
the problems that students face
and to generate possible
solutions.”
James Stigler and James
Hiebert,
The
Teaching Gap
7. Quality Instruction Makes A
Difference
“Good teaching can make a
significant difference in student
achievement, equal to one effect
size (a standard deviation), which
is also equivalent to the affect
that demographic classifications
can have on achievement.”
Paraphrase Dr. Heather Hill, University of Michigan
8. Differences in
Instruction
“Our research indicates that there is
a 15% variability difference in
student achievement between
teachers within the same schools.”
Deborah Loewenberg Ball, Dean of Education, University of Michigan
9. “What Matters Very Much is
Which Classroom?”
“If a student is in one of the most
effective classrooms he or she will learn
in 6 months what those in an average
classroom will take a year to learn. And
if a student is in one of the least
effective classrooms in that school, the
same amount of learning take 2 years.”
10. Research has indicated
that... “teacher quality
trumps virtually all other
influences on student
achievement.”
(e.g., Darling-Hammond, 1999; Hamre and Pianta,
2005; Hanushek, Kain, O'Brien and Rivken, 2005;
Wright, Horn and Sanders, 1997)
11. Making Sense &
Worthwhile Tasks
“What are our Kids really being
asked to do?”
“How are we keeping up with
Cognitive Demand (man)?”
12. Cognitive Demand
• The kind and level of thinking
required of students to successfully engage
with and solve a task
• Ways in which students interact with
content
13. Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requires
assessments to “measure the depth
and breadth of the state academic
content standards for a given grade
level”. (U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 12)
14. Why Depth of
Knowledge?
Focuses on complexity of content
standards in order to successfully
complete an assessment or task. The
outcome (product) is the focus of the
depth of understanding.
15. Why Use a Depth of
Knowledge?
•Used to determine the level of the
expected outcomes of the Sunshine
State Standards and benchmarks
•Determines the complexity of FCAT
items (success with items leads to
AYP)
16. Why Depth
of Knowledge (DOK)?
Mechanism to ensure that the intent of the
standard and the level of student
demonstration required by that standard
matches the assessment items
(required under NCLB)
To ensure that teachers are teaching to
a level that will promote student
achievement
17. DOK is NOT...
• a taxonomy (Bloom’s)
• the same as difficulty
• about using “verbs”
18. It’s NOT about the verb...
The Depth of Knowledge is NOT
determined by the verb (Bloom’s
Taxonomy), but by the context in
which the verb is used and the
depth of thinking required.
19. Verbs are not always used
appropriately...
Words like explain or analyze have to be
considered in context.
• “Explain to me where you live” does not raise
the DOK of a simple rote response.
• Even if the student has to use addresses or
landmarks, the student is doing nothing more
than recalling and reciting.
20. DOK is about what follows the
verb...
What comes after the verb is more
important than the verb itself.
“Analyze this sentence to decide if the commas have
been used correctly” does not meet the criteria for
high cognitive processing.”
The student who has been taught the rule for using
commas is merely using the rule.
21. Same Verb—Three Different DOK
Levels
DOK 1- Describe three characteristics of metamorphic
rocks. (Requires simple recall)
DOK 2- Describe the difference between metamorphic
and igneous rocks. (Requires cognitive processing to
determine the differences in the two rock types)
DOK 3- Describe a model that you might use to represent
the relationships that exist within the rock cycle.
(Requires deep understanding of rock cycle and a
determination of how best to represent it)
22. DOK is about intended outcome,
not difficulty
DOK is a reference to the complexity of mental
processing that must occur to answer a question,
perform a task, or generate a product.
• Adding is a mental process.
• Knowing the rule for adding is the intended
outcome that influences the DOK.
• Once someone learns the “rule” of how to add, 4 +
4 is DOK 1 and is also easy.
• Adding 4,678,895 + 9,578,885 is still a DOK 1 but
may be more “difficult.”
23. DOK is not about difficulty...
• Difficulty is a reference to how many students answer a
question correctly.
“How many of you know the definition of exaggerate?”
DOK 1 – recall
If all of you know the definition, this question is an easy question.
“How many of you know the definition of prescient?”
DOK 1 – recall
If most of you do not know the definition, this question is a
difficult question.
24. DOK is about complexity
• The intended student learning outcome
determines the DOK level.
• Every objective in the science and
mathematics frameworks has been assigned
a DOK level.
• Instruction and classroom assessments
must reflect the DOK level of the objective or
intended learning outcome.
25. Quick Quiz
1) Give an example of a statement that
uses a verb that “sounds” like a high
DOK but is used inappropriately.
2) Fill in the blanks: What _____ the verb
is more _____ than the verb itself when
deciding the DOK level.
3) What is the difference between
difficulty and complexity?
4) What really determines the DOK level?
26. Quick Quiz Answers
1) Give an example of a statement that uses a verb
that “sounds” like a high DOK but is used
inappropriately. answers vary
2) Fill in the blanks: What follows the verb is more
important than the verb itself when deciding the
DOK level.
3) What is the difference between difficulty and
complexity? answers vary, but do not rely on the
verb
4) What really determines the DOK level? the
intended learning outcomes
27. What is Depth
of Knowledge (DOK)?
• A scale of cognitive demand (thinking) to align
standards with assessments
• Based on the research of Norman Webb,
University of Wisconsin Center for Education
Research and the National Institute for
Science Education
• Defines the “ceiling” or highest DOK level for each
Core Content standard for the state assessment
• Guides item development for state assessments
28. • Level 1: Recall and Reproduction
• Level 2: Skills & Concepts
• Level 3: Strategic Thinking
• Level 4: Extended Thinking
Webb’s Four Levels of
Cognitive Complexity
"To be, or
not to be:
that is the
question"
29. • Requires recall of information, such
as a fact, definition, term, or
performance of a simple process or
procedure
• Answering a Level 1 item can involve
following a simple, well-known
procedure or formula
DOK Level 1:
Recall and Reproduction
30. Recall and Reproduction DOK
Level 1
Examples:
• List animals that survive by eating other
animals
• Locate or recall facts found in text
• Describe physical features of places
• Determine the perimeter or area of
rectangles given a drawing or labels
• Identify elements of music using music
terminology
• Identify basic rules for participating in
simple games and activities
31. Skills/Concepts: DOK Level 2
• Includes the engagement of some mental
processing beyond recalling or reproducing a
response
• Items require students to make some
decisions as to how to approach the question
or problem
• Actions imply more than one mental or
cognitive process/step
32. Skills/Concepts: DOK 2
Examples
• Compare desert and tropical environments
• Identify and summarize the major events,
problems, solutions, conflicts in literary text
• Explain the cause-effect of historical events
• Predict a logical outcome based on information in
a reading selection
• Explain how good work habits are important at
home, school, and on the job
• Classify plane and three dimensional figures
• Describe various styles of music
33. Strategic Thinking: Level
3
• Requires deep understanding exhibited
through planning, using evidence, and more
demanding cognitive reasoning
• The cognitive demands are complex and
abstract
• An assessment item that has more than one
possible answer and requires students to justify
the response would most likely be a Level 3
34. DOK Level 3: Strategic Thinking
Examples:
• Compare consumer actions and analyze how these
actions impact the environment
• Analyze or evaluate the effectiveness of literary
elements (e.g., characterization, setting, point of view,
conflict and resolution, plot structures)
• Solve a multiple-step problem and provide support
with a mathematical explanation that justifies the
answer
35. DOK Level 3 Examples
• Develop a scientific model for a complex idea
• Propose and evaluate solutions for an
economic problem
• Explain, generalize or connect ideas, using
supporting evidence from a text or source
• Create a dance that represents the
characteristics of a culture
36. Extended Thinking: Level 4
• Requires high cognitive demand and is very
complex
• Students are expected to make connections, relate
ideas within the content or among content areas, and
select or devise one approach among many
alternatives on how the situation can be solved
• Due to the complexity of cognitive demand, DOK 4
often requires an extended period of time
37. Extended Thinking: DOK 4
Examples
• Gather, analyze, organize, and interpret
information from multiple (print and non print)
sources to draft a reasoned report
• Analyzing author’s craft (e.g., style, bias, literary
techniques, point of view)
• Create an exercise plan applying the “FITT
(Frequency, Intensity, Time, Type) Principle”
39. How Does FCAT use
Cognitive Complexity Levels?
Taken from: FCAT Test Design Summary: July 2008 FLorida Department of Education (
http:fcat.fldoe.org/pdf/fc05designsummary.pdf)
41. Depth of Knowledge Levels - Science
Cognitive Complexity of Knowledge Rating
for
Math and Science
42. Percentage of Points by
Cognitive Complexity Level
for FCAT Math
Grades Low Level
Moderate
Level
High Level
3-4 25-35 50-70 5-15
5* 10-20 50-70 20-30
6-7 10-20 60-80 10-20
8* 10-20 50-70 20-30
9 10-20 60-80 10-20
10* 10-20 50-70 20-30
43. Percentage of Points by
Cognitive Complexity Level
for FCAT Science
Grades Low Level
Moderate
Level
High Level
5* 15-25 40-60 25-35
8* 15-25 40-60 25-35
11* 15-25 40-60 25-35
44. Writing
The FCAT Writing prompt
is a high cognitive
performance task
administered at Grades
4,8, and 10
45. Questions to think about...
• If 10-20% of the questions on FCAT are low
Level of Complexity...How much class time
would we devote to DOK Level 1 thinking?
• If 80% of the question on FCAT (and in life)
require Moderate to High levels of
Complexity....What are we doing to promote
these complex levels of higher order thinking?
46. Depth of Knowledge
and the
Florida’s Next Generation Standards available at:
http://www.floridastandards.org/
47. Aligning DOK levels of standards and assessments
Standards ratings may serve as a “ceiling” for assessment
48. Depth of Knowledge/Level of Cognitive
Complexity on the FCAT
Information available on http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcatrelease.asp
53. Key Points
• DOK 1 + DOK 1 + DOK 1 = 1
• Depths of knowledge classification is based
on the task, not the student
• DOK is different from task/item difficulty
• DOK ratings aid in alignment of standards
and assessment, and therefore instruction
54. The alignment between tasks, standards, and
assessments allows for cognitive complexity
with a deeper understanding.
“A mile wide and an inch deep”
55. Remember DOK is...
…descriptive
…focuses on how deeply a
student has to know the
content in order to respond
…NOT the same as difficulty.
…NOT the same as Bloom’s
Taxonomy
56. The Heart of the
Matter is the Depth of
Knowledge
Editor's Notes
Many Factors Contribute to the Achievement Gap
The achievement gap stems from both home- and school-based factors. It exists before students ever cross the school threshold, and this disadvantage can greatly affect their educational progress and success.
Students living in poverty tend to be less successful in school
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) conducted a national longitudinal study of children entering kindergarten in 1998. It found that students whose mothers had not graduated from high school, whose families received public assistance or were headed by single parents, and/or whose parents’ primary language was not English were disproportionately represented among low performers. All of these factors correlate highly with poverty.
Although poverty does not cause low achievement, it does set the conditions for it. Students living in poverty are more likely to be exposed to factors known to affect achievement, such as:
Lack of access to proper nutrition, health care, and decent housing; and
Exposure to substance abuse and high-crime communities.
Risk factors have a synergistic effect on school performance—children with one risk factor typically do not fare as well as those with none. Children with two or more of these factors generally lag far behind those with only one.
Not to be overlooked are social factors and processes that play an enormous role in determining a child’s later learning and future academic success. High family stress levels, maternal depression, little interaction with the child, and family illiteracy all have a negative impact on a child’s developing capacity to learn.
Because African Americans and Latinos in California represent disproportionate numbers of children living in poverty, they are also more likely to begin school at a disadvantage.
Cultural factors can also affect student performance
The cultural background of both students and educators can also play a role in student achievement. First, it is well documented that some educators have lower academic expectations for students of color. This has been a topic of much discussion over the past decades, and attempting to change teachers’ attitudes and practices is at the heart of the standards-based reform movement.
Beyond this complex and pervasive problem is another issue—how the values and expectations of students’ backgrounds and communities influence their attitudes about schooling and academic performance.
The extent to which culture affects attitude and achievement is a politically sensitive and controversial subject. The variables most consistently correlated with low student achievement are poverty and low parent education level. Yet even among students coming from poor families, some cultural groups generally outperform others in school. And among wealthier students, some groups of students—for example, middle-class African American males—consistently lag behind their white classmates.
Researchers differ regarding the causes of these gaps. Temple University professor Laurence Steinberg has found that although Asian students associate negative life consequences with poor school performance, African American and Hispanic students do not. University of California-Berkeley professor John Ogbu argues that community-based “folk theories” contribute to self-defeating behaviors. (An example of a folk theory would be that because of the history of discrimination against African Americans, even those who work hard will never reap the rewards that whites do.) Others theorize that the efforts of even the most supportive parents and communities can be undermined by teens’ need for peer approval.
Schools can play a role in narrowing the gap
A driving force in education reform for decades has been optimism that schools can help students overcome the disadvantages they bring with them into the classroom. For more than 40 years, researchers have conducted extensive investigations to determine which school factors influence student achievement. However, results of this research point to complex interactions among multiple factors, indicating that the solutions are neither simple nor straightforward.
The state and federal movement toward a standards-based approach to school improvement begins with the assumption that all students can meet high academic expectations. Based on that assumption, a fundamental strategy has been to shed light on the achievement gaps that exist between groups of students. Evaluating what combination of educational strategies, resources, capacity-building, and incentives can contribute to better academic performance among low-performing students continues to be a focus for educators and researchers. Meanwhile, policymakers have crafted accountability systems that put increased pressure on the schools and school districts that are currently falling short in helping all their students meet rigorous new achievement goals.
http://www.edsource.org/stu_achivegap.html
It is important to understand that the DOK classification scheme was adopted because it does not require an inference about the skill knowledge, and background of the student, but is based solely on what is being asked cognitively. The Depth of Knowledge classification scheme classifies assessment items or tasks, not students or student work.
This classification scheme was developed originally for assessment items. The intention for use was to align learning objectives with assessments. The Depths of knowledge were developed by Norman L. Webb at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research and the National Institute for Science Education.
Florida’s Next Generation Standards were rated for depth of knowledge to help align learning goals with instruction and assessment.
Many on-demand assessment instruments will not include any assessment activities that could be classified as Level 4. However, standards, goals, and objectives can be stated in such a way as to expect students to perform extended thinking. “Develop generalizations of the results obtained and the strategies used and apply them to new problem situations,” is an example of a Grade 8 objective that is a Level 4. The extended time period is not a distinguishing factor if the required work is only repetitive and does not require applying significant conceptual understanding and higher-order thinking.
The levels of low, moderate, and high are those used by FCAT and are based on a similar scheme developed by the National Assessment for Educational Progress. These 3-level schemes differ only slightly from Norman Webb’s 4-level scheme. In the FCAT 3-level scheme, Webb’s DOK levels 3 and aspects of level 4 are combined in the “high.”
Florida’s Next Generation standards were rated in terms of DOK by pulling together a large group that included DOK experts, scientists, science curriculum specialists, teachers, and the Department of Education. This process was facilitated by FCRSTEM and FDOE Office of Math & Science.
The result: All of Florida’s Math and Science Next Generation Standards have been assigned a DOK rating. These ratings are available through the Florida Standards Database.
In general, the ratings of the benchmarks set a ceiling for assessment. Thus, a benchmark that is rated at a moderate level, could be assessed at a low level or a moderate level. Ideally, the benchmark rating aligns with the assessment level – this was a purpose for rating benchmarks. This helps teachers know to what depth students are expected to master the benchmarks. It helps to build a common understanding of the expectations of the benchmark, though a great deal of interpretation and consensus building is required.
This example item was provided by the FCAT developers as an example of a moderate complexity item. The item asks students to bring together understanding of multiple forces (friction and gravity) along with the properties of the materials that the blocks are made of, and finally to make a comparison. The requirements to bring together understanding of properties and forces and then to make a comparison between the different blocks are what make this item a moderate complexity task.
This example item was provided by the FCAT developers as an example of a high complexity item. This item takes the requirements of the last item up one more step by requiring students to consider an additional variable, the inclination of the plane and therefore requires them to consider multiple variables and explain, in terms of forces, how these variable affect the movement of the blocks. The student is required to predict the effect of a change within the system which requires them to think beyond the image provided.
Keep in mind that the moderate level item that this item was built upon can be raised to a high level in many ways. What are some other ways that one could bring the moderate level task up to a high level task? An example would be to provide a set of data and then require students to explain the experiment.
This example item was provided by the FCAT developers as an example of a low complexity item. The item asks students to recall/recognize which force causes objects to move down an inclined plane. If a student identifies the correct force, the answer is found. It does not require further processing of the information.
Tasks, standards, and assessments are classified in terms of DOK to ensure alignment between these activities and to ensure that a common understanding of these activities is established for the teachers, students, and administrators.
These alignments can be used to indicate how well instruction or a test reflects the intended standards.
These alignments also help to ensure that standards, instruction, and assessment result in student understanding that goes deeper than “an inch”