NWREL Logo Toolkit98

Activity 3.5
Performance Tasks & Criteria:A Mini-Development Activity

beavers working

Purposes:

  1. 1. To understand that good assessment is also good instruction and vice versa

  2. 2. To experience the issues in using and designing performance assessments

  3. 3. To practice developing performance assessments

Uses:

This is an advanced level activity that can be used in Chapter 3 as a summary of issues related to performance assessment design, and in Chapter 2 to illustrate the integration of assessment and instruction.

Prerequisites might include: (a) an activity on the rationale for alternative assessment (e.g., Activities 1.1—Changing Assessment Practices..., 1.6—Comparing Multiple-Choice and Alternative Assessment, or 1.12—Assessment Principles); (b) Chapter 1 text and Activities 1.2—Clear Targets and 1.7—Target-Method Match; (c) Chapter 2 text and Activities 2.1—Sorting Student Work or 2.3—Ms. Toliver and 2.4—Is Less More?, illustrating integrating assessment tasks and criteria into instruction; (d) one of the activities providing a gentle introduction to quality issues, such as 1.5—Clapping Hands or 1.11—Assessment Principles; and (e) the assessment quality activities in this chapter: 3.1—Performance Criteria, Keys to Success and 3.3—Performance Tasks, Keys to Success or 3.6—How to Critique an Assessment.

Rationale:

Educators recommend experiential learning as a powerful tool for learning. It works well for adults too! This activity in developing performance tasks and performance criteria elicits myriad questions related to instruction and assessment.

Developing a performance assessment is a complex task in which a wide range of skills and knowledge are blended together. Initially, it can seem daunting to a teacher who wants to use performance assessment in his or her instruction. It is important to validate what accomplished teachers already do in their classes and to provide participants with the opportunity to see how a structured approach to developing alternative (performance) assessments can strengthen teaching and better link learning objectives to instructional activities and assessment. As one teacher put it, "I am beginning to understand that there is a blurring between what is good assessment and good instruction."

Materials:

Time Required:

2-3 hours

Facilitator’s Notes:

  1. (2 minutes) Use A3.5,O1—Performance Tasks and Criteria Purposes to describe the purposes of the activity, as needed.

  2. (10 minutes) Begin the activity by asking participants to do a word association game to help define performance task. In pairs, have them write down three words that they associate with the words performance task. Make a group list of these words and then ask participants to talk to their partners and come up with examples of performance tasks that they use or have seen used in a class. Add these examples to the list and then help the group reach a shared definition of performance task.

    Performance Task: Whatever activity, project, problem, or assignment that is given to students to do. For example, a particular math problem to solve, a lab to do, or a paper to write.

    Refer to the Overhead A3.5,O2—How Tasks Differ to talk briefly about how performance tasks may differ (also Handout A3.5,H1).

  3. (5 minutes) The remainder of the steps in this activity revolve around having participants actually develop a performance task and a scoring system. Use Overhead A3.5,O3—Overview of the Steps to review with the group the steps in developing an alternative (performance) assessment.

    Overview of the Steps for Developing an Assessment

    • Step 1: Determine or clarify what you want to assess (see Chapter 1, Keys to Quality Assessment, Key 1—Clear Targets). What do you want to know about your students? As a reminder, participants can consult the National Standards, state documents, district objectives, or departmental guidelines when thinking about what to assess. Since we are discussing alternative assessment in this activity, participants should pick targets best assessed using this method. (See Chapter 1, Key 3—Target Method Match and Activities 1.2—Clear Targets and 1.7—Target-Method Match.) Such targets tend to be complex, like skills, products, application of knowledge, and reasoning.
    • Step 2: Develop or select a task (activity) that is well matched to what you want to assess. By this we mean that the task elicits the desired performance on the part of the student. For example, to assess critical thinking, the task must require students to think critically.
    • Step 3: Identify the performance criteria. For example, if the purpose of the assessment is to assess critical thinking, there should be criteria for judging the quality of the critical thinking in student responses. What are the indicators and components of critical thinking? If the target to be assessed is conceptual understanding, what would students look like who really understand the concept?
    • Step 4: Develop a scoring system. For this activity this means a rubric with several different performance levels for each performance criterion. Develop these or choose from the samples provided (see that suggestions in the Activity 3.5 Index in Appendix B—Sampler).
    • Step 5: Decide on how feedback will be provided (e.g., grading, student self evaluation, verbal report, etc.)
    • Step 6: Pilot test and revise

    Although these are listed as distinct steps, it is important to note that some of these steps should be done in concert. For example as you are developing a performance task, you must also be thinking about the criteria you will use for assessment. In this way, identifying the criteria can inform the development of the task and vice versa.

    For the purpose of this activity, participants will not be doing Steps 1 and 5. See other activities in the Toolkit98 to further develop these ideas.

  4. (20-30 minutes) In groups of 3-6, participants will develop a mini performance task (see Step 2 above) based on a given learning target (Step 1). The task must be something that another group of teachers would be able to try out using the miscellaneous materials available and 20 minutes time. (Sometimes a quick [5 minute] scavenger hunt provides additional materials quickly.)

    You may want to choose a learning target that is specifically matched to the needs of the group or you may use the sample objectives provided (see Overhead A3.5,O4—Science and Math Student Learning Targets).

    To illustrate what participants must do, a sample performance task developed by teachers in another workshop, is shown on Overhead A3.5,O5—Sample Performance Task: How Does Grass Get Energy to Grow? The group can evaluate this task using Handout A3.5,H2—Criteria for Performance Tasks (introduced in Activity 3.1). This handout will be useful as the participants develop and evaluate their own performance assessments.

    Participants can use Handout 3.5,H3—Task Description Form to design their assessment.

  5. (15-20 minutes) Exchange the activities developed by each group. The new group tries out the activity. This means actually following the instructions given to them and producing what is required (Step 6—Pilot Testing).

  6. (20-30 minutes) Each small group can share with the whole group what the performance task was that they undertook, and explain what they did. This is a good chance for participants to ask questions of each other.

    Don’t be surprised if a group interpreted the instructions differently than was intended. In an experiential way these conversations inform participants about what it is like to be a student and what information is important when doing an activity. This is the point of pilot testing—to ensure that tasks accomplish what we want.

    The key to the success of this activity is using the learning opportunities that arise and making teachers aware of broader issues through the examples that surface.

  7. (10 minutes) Next, refine the performance criteria that were originally identified in the task design (Assessment Development Steps 2 and 3). If necessary, brainstorm some possible performance criteria and come to a shared definition of performance criteria. (e.g., science process skills, communication skills, knowledge of XXX, group process, etc.)

    Performance criteria: a description of the characteristics that define how the performance on a task will be judged.

    Give an explanation of how to develop a rubric with various criteria for quality and several (3-5) performance levels (see Activity 2.1—Sorting Student Work). Use the sample rubrics chosen using the Activity 3.5—Index in Appendix A—Sampler to discuss the different approaches that can be taken.

    Describing performance levels is not a trivial task. Having to formalize criteria into a scoring rubric will highlight the difficulties of distinguishing between performances. For example, you might notice that the highest performance levels are described in a positive way, whereas the performance levels described below it use more negative language (e.g., "plotted two of the graph coordinates wrongly and ....."). You can use this as a learning opportunity to discuss how a student might feel to have negatively worded feedback rather than a positively worded statement.

  8. (15-20 minutes) Have the groups that did the performance task give their resulting work back to the group that designed the task. In their original small groups, participants can re-visit the performance criteria they had hoped could be assessed and, using the example response provided by the other group, see if the evidence of the criteria was present in the response (Step 6—Pilot Testing). The group should then determine if any changes to the criteria or to the performance task are necessary.

    (Note: The group will not actually give a score to the work produced when another group tried out their activity, however looking at this work is very useful in refining a scoring rubric. With actual work in front of them, participants will be able to see what information can truly be assessed and what can not. They can also talk about what is valued in the performance and perhaps what additional information would be helpful for their "students" to know in order to have the best opportunity to succeed on the task.)

  9. (10-20 minutes) Many questions come up as a result of this activity, so it is helpful to have a whole group sharing of questions/issues. A group debriefing also provides a forum for clarifying issues and summarizing major ideas about developing alternative assessments. The following questions can be used to facilitate the conversation, or ask the participants to generate a list of their own questions.

    • What are some of the challenges of developing a performance task and/or performance criteria?

    • What are some lessons learned?

    • It is time consuming to develop a scoring rubric that is specific to each performance task. What are some ways to maintain clear criteria without spending so much time for each task? (This can link to Activity 3.3—Performance Criteria, Keys to Success or 1.9—Going to School and task-specific criteria versus general criteria. By comparing different sample rubrics, teachers can easily see how they differ and how a general rubric can be used for a variety of performance tasks.)

    • Has this activity changed any of your thoughts about performance assessments and how you can integrate them with your curriculum?


This document's URL is:

Home | Up & Coming | Programs & Projects: Assessment | People | Products & Publications | Topics

© 2001 Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory


Email Webmaster
Tel. 503.275.9500
NW Lab Home