Abstract. Thinking about assessing process:
- interaction, long term investigation, collaborative process,
- group process
big issues:
- what collaboration can do
- implement larger scale
assessments for teacher vs.
embed in the software
tools for formative vs. summative assessment
using technology vs. effectiveness of technology
------
Rob: War story -- Math probelm solving product. Assess quality of problem solving process. INtricate story system. Died a horrible death. Became clear what the system would tell them. The output needs to be clear to teachers to scale. Log's of student compared to expert.
Allow for multiple possible solutions.
Jim: Was the data telling you something?
Incomplete understandings.
Start with conceptual tasks. Break into facets -- good and problemmatic understandings.
Creating high quality multiple choice:
- having good questions where foils correspond with novice understandings
- asking for explanations
Report structure:
- which clusters Ss are at what level
- particular problemmatic facets
- attached instructional responses
Range of kinds of problems:
- well-structured vs. ill-structured
[Problem: God is in the details. Does it really takes very careful domain analysis?]
High level:
explan: descrip of phen, procedure, identifying a relevant concept, id'ing a mechanisms & rel b/t vars, a modeling explanation possibly in a formalisms
[HOw to put existing rubrics into an on-line assessment?]
Challenges:
- Tools for providing feedback. Other models for how tech might be useful. Long term open-ended inquiry processes. Develop tools that provide scaffolding of inquiry. Scaffold the self-assessment process.
How to support self-reflection? A space for portfolio collection. What kinds of prompts & scaffolds should there be for self-reflection? What aspects of inquiry should be prompted for self-reflection?
Edutech: Scaffold kids planning. Coming up with those categories.
How develop a way to give feedback.
How to use existing tech tools for assessment?
Problem: You still need a rubric. How do you develop a rubric?
How can we work together -- scientific inquiry assessment
Donna: Pragmatic perspective from publishing: Benefit from efforts at synthesis. Assessment used to take us backward. Embedding the assessment into the instruction. Helping teachers & public to see what is going on -- again the need for simplied methods of communication.
Dilemma: Need for simplicity, yet what capture essence of process in context, concepts in addition to procedures.
Britte: Have some tools: Pull the data together into an assessment manager. Providing a default rubric. Put this in a form. In ways that are useful.
Rob: Some generalizations & specific diagnostic statements.
Exception reporting: SHow me all kids that had needed 3 hints on a particular competency.
Kathleen: Understanding the content area vs. general issues of process. Planning for a long term project, how to use resources,
Group Contact: Ken Koedinger.
Contacting process and product.
Assessing product
Thinking about assessing process:
- interaction, long term investigation, collaborative process,
- group process
big issues:
- what collaboration can do
- implement larger scale
assessments for teacher vs.
embed in the software
tools for formative vs. summative assessment
using technology vs. effectiveness of technology
------
Rob: War story -- Math probelm solving product. Assess quality of problem solving process. INtricate story system. Died a horrible death. Became clear what the system would tell them. The output needs to be clear to teachers to scale. Log's of student compared to expert.
Allow for multiple possible solutions.
Jim: Was the data telling you something?
Incomplete understandings.
Start with conceptual tasks. Break into facets -- good and problemmatic understandings.
Creating high quality multiple choice:
- having good questions where foils correspond with novice understandings
- asking for explanations
Report structure:
- which clusters Ss are at what level
- particular problemmatic facets
- attached instructional responses
Range of kinds of problems:
- well-structured vs. ill-structured
[Problem: God is in the details. Does it really takes very careful domain analysis?]
High level:
explan: descrip of phen, procedure, identifying a relevant concept, id'ing a mechanisms & rel b/t vars, a modeling explanation possibly in a formalisms
[HOw to put existing rubrics into an on-line assessment?]
Challenges:
- Tools for providing feedback. Other models for how tech might be useful. Long term open-ended inquiry processes. Develop tools that provide scaffolding of inquiry. Scaffold the self-assessment process.
How to support self-reflection? A space for portfolio collection. What kinds of prompts & scaffolds should there be for self-reflection? What aspects of inquiry should be prompted for self-reflection?
Edutech: Scaffold kids planning. Coming up with those categories.
How develop a way to give feedback.
How to use existing tech tools for assessment?
Problem: You still need a rubric. How do you develop a rubric?
How can we work together -- scientific inquiry assessment
Donna: Pragmatic perspective from publishing: Benefit from efforts at synthesis. Assessment used to take us backward. Embedding the assessment into the instruction. Helping teachers & public to see what is going on -- again the need for simplied methods of communication.
Dilemma: Need for simplicity, yet what capture essence of process in context, concepts in addition to procedures.
Britte: Have some tools: Pull the data together into an assessment manager. Providing a default rubric. Put this in a form. In ways that are useful.
Rob: Some generalizations & specific diagnostic statements.
Exception reporting: SHow me all kids that had needed 3 hints on a particular competency.
Kathleen: Understanding the content area vs. general issues of process. Planning for a long term project, how to use resources,
Go back to the Breakout Report Index.