Introduction (Objective):

Analyze and critique how student learning is assessed in a course syllabus.

Description (Assignment):

Assessment of student knowledge and ability is not only challenging, it is also complex. As Hager & Gonczi (1996) write, “assessment of competence will inevitably be based on inference from a sample of performance.” The question is whether or not the demonstration of ability from the student on the assessment is a good enough inference of overall ability or knowledge if applied to a situation outside of the classroom. In Module 4 of OL 2050 we talked at length about how to plan assessments, why it is important to think about assessments at the beginning of the course rather than as an afterthought to the content, and the kind of feedback that we can offer student to help them learn.

You may be teaching a course where these activities are already developed. In this case you may be working with assignments and assessments that have already been created. Understanding how to use those tools effectively in order to maximize student learning is essential. Linked below is an example syllabus. Analyze the way that the course describes the way students will be assessed. Look at the course objectives and see whether or not there is an alignment of those objectives with how students are being assessed. Offer a critique of the syllabus that:

  1. Argues why the course demonstrates an effective or ineffective model for assessing student learning. Is there an alignment with assessments and the course objectives?
  2. Offers corrections or alternatives to the assessments in order for students to offer the best demonstrations of their learning.
  3. Overall length of submitted work should be 300-400 words.

Hager, P., & Gonczi, A. (1996). What is competence?. Medical Teacher, 18(1), 15.

Material:

Download the syllabus that you will be analyzing.

Rubric

Assessment Analysis Rubric

Assessment Analysis Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe work is a critique of the provided syllabus’ assessment model.

4.0 pts

The assignment maintains focus as a critique of how the syllabus assesses student learning.

2.0 pts

Assignment loses focus on how the course syllabus assesses student learning or offers an evaluation that is not clear.

0.0 pts

The assignment does not evaluate the assessment plan in the course syllabus.

4.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeArgues why the course demonstrates an effective or ineffective model for student learning.

4.0 pts

Why the course does nor does not demonstrate an effective assessment plan is clearly argued with sound reasoning that is grounded in student learning outcomes.

2.0 pts

An argument is presented, but the reasoning lacks clarity or focus with respect to student learning.

0.0 pts

An argument is not presented or student learning is not articulated that is grounded in student learning.

4.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOffers correctives or alternatives to the assessments to offer the best demonstrations of learning.

4.0 pts

Alternatives or correctives to the assessment plan in the syllabus are presented pursuant to the evaluation offered. These are clearly related to improved student learning outcomes and how student learning will be measured.

2.0 pts

Alternatives are presented, but it is unclear how these alternatives will improve student learning or how student learning will be measured as a result.

0.0 pts

No alternatives or correctives are presented or articulated.

4.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe work uses specific examples and draws on relevant theories or principles.

4.0 pts

The critique is supported by clear examples from learning and cognitive principles and theories as a foundation to the alternatives and correctives suggested.

2.0 pts

Theories and principles of learning are presented, but the connection between the assignment alternatives or correctives is not clearly articulated or presented.

0.0 pts

No learning theories or principles are included.

4.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall length of submitted work is 300-400 words.

2.0 pts

The assignment falls within the 300-400 word limit.

1.0 pts

Work is less than 300 words, but more than 200.

0.0 pts

Work is less than 200 words.

2.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRules of grammar, usage, spelling and punctuation are followed.

2.0 pts

Work is error free.

1.0 pts

Work contains fewer than 5 errors.

0.0 pts

Work contains 5 or more errors.

2.0 pts

Total Points: 20.0