[Year 12 SofDev] [Year 12 IT Apps] curriculum and assessment

Sat Aug 6 07:55:24 EST 2011

Thanks Robert for pointing out the missing text - there is only one word and it is 'decision'.

Schools should have a policy that states in what circumstances further evidence is permissible and the timeframe within which it can be acquired. For example, if in an assessment task a student performs poorly on one aspect, which in effect means that he or she has not demonstrated the outcome, for satisfactory completion purposes the school can allow the student to supply additional evidence to help them get over the line! This could be in the form of the teacher setting an additional task focusing on the problem area; it could mean drawing on work that the student has previously done etc. But, of course, if the task is also being used for graded assessment, then you can only grade what they did in the SAC - no other opportunities are available.

Regards

Paula

________________________________
From: itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au [itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au] on behalf of Robert Hind [robert at yinnar.com]
Sent: Friday, 5 August 2011 6:40 PM
To: Year 12 IT Applications Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 IT Apps] curriculum and assessment

Thanks Paula for your clear statement re assessment tasks

BUT

This statement was not complete and  something got missed out

•         School assessment is used to determine if a student has satisfactorily completed a unit, and to provide graded assessment for each outcome at units 3 and 4 levels. If the assessment tasks are used to fulfil both of these purposes, then they must afford students the opportunity to demonstrate the outcomes. Note: for S/N decisions further evidence can be used to make the decision (extent is a school d (??? what went here?)

----- Original Message -----
From: Christophersen, Paula P<mailto:christophersen.paula.p at edumail.vic.gov.au>
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List(sofdev at edulists.com.au)<mailto:sofdev at edulists.com.au)> ; Year 12 IT Applications Teachers' Mailing List (itapps at edulists.com.au)<mailto:itapps at edulists.com.au)> ; Year 11 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List(yr11it at edulists.com.au)<mailto:yr11it at edulists.com.au)>
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 6:16 PM
Subject: [Year 12 IT Apps] curriculum and assessment

Dear colleagues

Over the past week there has been some discussion about the extent to which an assessment task should cover the key knowledge and key skills associated with each area of study. I would like to add to this conversation.

I will start by stating the obvious. School-assessed coursework and examinations have different summative assessment purposes. In a nutshell:

•         School assessment is used to determine if a student has satisfactorily completed a unit, and to provide graded assessment for each outcome at units 3 and 4 levels. If the assessment tasks are used to fulfil both of these purposes, then they must afford students the opportunity to demonstrate the outcomes. Note: for S/N decisions further evidence can be used to make the decision (extent is a school d

•         External assessment is primarily used to provide a common ground to enable comparisons within a total cohort. A student’s performance on an examination does not contribute to satisfactorily completing a unit.

School-assessed coursework
Each outcome statement succinctly identifies what a student is expected to know and is able to do within an area of study. This succinct statement is elaborated through the key knowledge and key skills. Each set of key knowledge identifies the content essential to the outcome, and each key knowledge point defines the scope of teaching. Each key skill identifies what is expected to be done with the key knowledge in order to demonstrate the outcome.

If we work on the assumption that a task performs the dual functions as stated above, then the following applies: when designing an assessment task students should have to draw on their knowledge of the content stated in the key knowledge. This does not mean that a separate question has to be asked on each KK nor does it mean that you individually assess each KK as a separate task. But what it does mean is that you cannot design a task that does not require students to draw on the body of knowledge deemed essential for the outcome. For example, SofDev, Unit 3, area of study 1 – if you did not include in the assessment task any requirements to demonstrate knowledge of networks (there are several KK related to networks), then the students could not demonstrate the outcome because it states ‘that operates in a networked environment’. . Sometimes a ‘nested’ approach to content needs to be taken, where the sum of several KK is required to demonstrate one aspect of an outcome.

The key skills state what needs to be done with the content in order to demonstrate the outcome. Again, if you do not require all of the skills to be demonstrated in a task, then the outcome cannot be demonstrated. For example, for the same outcome, if you do not require the writing of ‘an SRS to document …’ (final KS) then the outcome cannot be demonstrated.

However, there will always be a difference between the scope of what is taught and the scope of what is assessed. And herein lies the cause of some confusion. Assessment tasks should require students to draw of their knowledge of all KK, but within each key knowledge, its scope can be reduced. For example, while learning should focus on ‘functions, technical underpinnings and sources of worms, Trojans and spyware, (page 41), the assessment task might just require an understanding of functions and technical underpinnings of worms and spyware – not the lot. Conversely, the task would be non-compliant from an audit perspective, if students were not asked to …’determine the solution requirements, constraints including vulnerability to security threats, and scope …’

Examinations
This is an entirely different situation, because it is not premised on the fact that judgments are made about satisfactory completion (hence demonstration of outcomes). This means that KK and KS can be randomly selected from any area of study as the basis for questions. It is quite feasible that in any one examination that only 40% of the KK and KS is assessed.

In conclusion (this feels like a chapter in a book!)
In every study design there is a statement about assessing of KK and KS (for example, page 28). It states that KK and KS should not be assessed separately, because it is the outcome that is being assessed, not just the capacity to demonstrate isolated knowledge and skills. For school assessment, tasks should require students to draw on the knowledge of the area of study, and demonstrate the key skills, but within the KK, the scope can be reduced.

Enjoy the weekend!

Regards
Paula

Paula Christophersen
ICT Curriculum Manager
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
Authority
(03) 9651 4378

Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

________________________________

_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
IT Applications Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/itapplications3-4.html - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au  - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers Association Inc

Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20110805/9eadf720/attachment-0001.html 