Author: admin

The graduate analyzes assessment data to draw conclusions about students’ progress and address any gaps in learning.
In this task, you will analyze the data set provided via the attached “Data Set
Assignment Form” by reporting summative proficiency scores for students, explaining the method used to determine those scores, and disaggregating the data based
on student subgroups. Then, you will evaluate the data to draw conclusions
about individual student and whole-class proficiency, aberrant patterns or
outliers, and student learning at the subgroup level.
A. Analyze the assessment data from the attached “Data Set Assignment Form” by doing the following:
1. Submit a table reporting an overall summative proficiency score for each student for the measurement topic.
2. Explain how the summative proficiency scores in part A1 were determined.
3. Disaggregate the data according to student subgroups.
B. Evaluate students’ summative scores by doing the following:
1. Draw conclusions about student learning based on patterns of scores at the
individual student and whole-class level.
2. Draw conclusions about any outliers or aberrant patterns present in the data set
at the individual student level.
3. Draw conclusions about student learning at the subgroup level based
on the disaggregated data.
Revision
B3 subgroups
The work duly notes the proficiency level of each subgroup. The evaluation is insufficient because noting the proficiency levels of subgroups does not meet the criteria for conclusions about student learning.

The graduate designs assessments that measure how well students have mastered
specific knowledge and skills described in local, state, or national learning standards.
In this task, you will create a proficiency scale.
Using that proficiency scale, you will design an assessment blueprint and create sample items for that assessment.
Part I: Create a Proficiency Scale
A. Complete the “Proficiency Scale Template” section of the attached “Proficiency Scale and Assessment Blueprint Template” by doing the following:
Note: The work you completed for Task 1 could be incorporated into this task.
While this is recommended, it is not required.
1. Identify the subject, grade level, and standard that will be used for the proficiency scale.
Note: Remember to cite the source of each identified standard.
2. Write a focus statement and measurement topic related to the standard identified
in part A1.
3. Create a proficiency scale for one specific measurement topic (e.g., organisms, samples, reading strategies, the sun and earth, body control, federal taxes, landscape patterns, personal health goals).
4. Identify whether the proficiency scale was designed to measure declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, or both.
Part II: Design an Assessment
B. Create an assessment blueprint using
the “Assessment Blueprint Template” section of the attached “Proficiency Scale and Assessment Blueprint Template” for the proficiency scale from part A by doing the following:
1. Identify the taxonomy level of the specific skills or content knowledge for each level
of the proficiency scale.
2. Identify which types of items (e.g., matching,
multiple choice, short written response, essay) are logical for each level considering
the complexity of the specific skills or content knowledge for that level of the scale.
3. Identify the number of items for each level of the selected proficiency scale to prompt the best evidence of student knowledge.
4. Write one sample assessment item for each level of the selected proficiency scale.
REVISION
You do a nice job providing the type of knowledge needed by noting the procedural knowledge needed to master content in the existing proficiency scale. You demonstrate an effective understanding of the type of items that should be assessed at various levels by incorporating essays and more complex tasks at higher proficiency levels and multiple-choice tasks at lower proficiency levels. Please see the comments in the rubric for needed revisions.
A3 proficiecy scale
The work provides a sufficient overview of a proficiency scale with
four different levels. The submission is not accurate because the proficient (target) level
should align with the expectation of the standard and focus statement, and it is not clear
why the learning target proficient level is written differently in Part I and Part II.
A4
The response clearly identifies that procedural knowledge will be measured. The
work is not complete because revisions to the proficiency scale could impact the development of this aspect.
B1 skills or content knowledge
The submission adequately outlines a
variety of taxonomy levels that will be addressed. The work is not complete because
specific taxonomy levels for some learning targets may need to be adjusted after revisions to the proficiency scale are made.
B2 item types
The work provides a sufficient overview of a proficiency scale with four
different levels. The submission is not accurate because the proficient (target) level
should
align with the expectation of the standard and focus statement, and it is not clear why the
learning target proficient level is written differently in Part I and Part II.
B3 number of items
The response clearly outlines the number of items for each existing
proficiency level. The submission is incomplete because revisions to the proficiency scale
may impact the number of items needed to assess the learning targets.
B4 items
The sample assessment items are briefly identified in the graphic organizer. The submission is not complete because revisions to the proficiency scale are needed.