CS471: Computer Science Pedagogy - Assessment Plan (10 Points)

Assignment Goals

The goals of this assignment are:
  1. Understand the principles of assessment in education
  2. Design a comprehensive assessment plan, including a rubric and contract grading specifications
  3. Reflect on the importance of aligned and transparent assessment in computer science education
  4. Provide both formative and summative assessment goals and criteria

The Assignment

For this assignment, you will develop a comprehensive assessment plan for your chosen lesson topic. This will include creating a rubric, contract grading specifications, and an overview of your formative and summative assessments.

Instructions

  1. Choose a lesson topic and draft learning objectives. These can align with your chosen lesson topic throughout the semester. Make sure your objectives cover multiple levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.

  2. Describe at least 2 formative assessments you will use during the lesson. Explain how they will assess progress towards objectives.

  3. Explain your plan for the summative assessment. How will it comprehensively assess the learning objectives?

  4. Create one or more rubrics that aligns with your learning objectives. The rubric should have 3-5 criteria with graduated performance descriptors.

  5. Develop one or more contract grading specifications that outline requirements for A, B, C, and D grades. Specifications should be based on meeting objectives from your rubric.

You should have at least one rubric or contract grading specification for each assessment you plan. Your assessments should cover all of your learning objectives. You should have at least one rubric and at least one contract specification.

Submission

Submit your entire assessment plan as a single report document.

Design Questions to Help You Begin

Please answer the following questions in your README file before you begin writing your program.
  1. What are the key principles of assessment in education?
  2. How can a rubric be designed to align with lesson objectives?
  3. What are the benefits and challenges of using contract grading specifications in computer science education?
  4. How does your assessment utilize each layer of Bloom's Taxonomy?

Submission

In your submission, please include answers to any questions asked on the assignment page in your README file. If you wrote code as part of this assignment, please describe your design, approach, and implementation in your README file as well. Finally, include answers to the following questions:
  • Describe what you did, how you did it, what challenges you encountered, and how you solved them.
  • Please answer any questions found throughout the narrative of this assignment.
  • If collaboration with a buddy was permitted, did you work with a buddy on this assignment? If so, who? If not, do you certify that this submission represents your own original work?
  • Please identify any and all portions of your submission that were not originally written by you (for example, code originally written by your buddy, or anything taken or adapted from a non-classroom resource). It is always OK to use your textbook and instructor notes; however, you are certifying that any portions not designated as coming from an outside person or source are your own original work.
  • Approximately how many hours it took you to finish this assignment (I will not judge you for this at all...I am simply using it to gauge if the assignments are too easy or hard)?
  • Your overall impression of the assignment. Did you love it, hate it, or were you neutral? One word answers are fine, but if you have any suggestions for the future let me know.
  • Using the grading specifications on this page, discuss briefly the grade you would give yourself and why. Discuss each item in the grading specification.
  • Any other concerns that you have. For instance, if you have a bug that you were unable to solve but you made progress, write that here. The more you articulate the problem the more partial credit you will receive (it is fine to leave this blank).

Assignment Rubric

Description Pre-Emerging (< 50%) Beginning (50%) Progressing (85%) Proficient (100%)
Alignment with Learning Objectives (25%) Learning objectives are not clearly defined or aligned with the chosen lesson topic. Bloom's Taxonomy levels are not considered. Learning objectives are defined but lack clear alignment with the chosen lesson topic. Limited consideration of Bloom's Taxonomy levels. Learning objectives are well-defined and aligned with the chosen lesson topic. Some levels of Bloom's Taxonomy are considered. Learning objectives are comprehensive, clearly aligned with the chosen lesson topic, and cover multiple levels of Bloom's Taxonomy.
Formative Assessments (25%) Formative assessments are not described or do not align with the learning objectives. At least one formative assessment is described, but the explanation lacks clarity on how it assesses progress towards objectives. Two formative assessments are described, with some explanation of how they assess progress towards objectives. Two or more formative assessments are thoroughly described, with clear explanations of how they assess progress towards objectives.
Summative Assessment Plan (25%) Summative assessment plan is not provided or lacks coherence with the learning objectives. Summative assessment plan is provided but lacks detailed explanation of how it comprehensively assesses the learning objectives. Summative assessment plan is well-explained, with some insight into how it comprehensively assesses the learning objectives. Summative assessment plan is thoroughly explained, with clear insight into how it comprehensively assesses the learning objectives.
Rubrics and Contract Grading Specifications (25%) Rubrics and contract grading specifications are missing or do not align with learning objectives. Rubrics and contract grading specifications are present but lack clarity or alignment with learning objectives. Rubrics and contract grading specifications are well-developed, with some alignment to learning objectives and grading requirements. Rubrics and contract grading specifications are thoroughly developed, clearly aligned with learning objectives, and outline requirements for A, B, C, and D grades.

Please refer to the Style Guide for code quality examples and guidelines.