For my grade 7 students learning about ancient civilizations, I chose to use a quiz as a formative assessment tool and a test as a summative assessment tool. “Modules 1 and 2 Quiz” is designed both to get students accustomed to taking a timed assessment within the LMS environment and to get students to test how well they have absorbed the information from the first two modules. The quiz is specifically set up such that students can take it multiple times and receive instant feedback on select questions when they submit the entire quiz. While Gibbs and Simpson find that “the quality of [student] learning has been shown to be higher in the assignment-based courses [than in exam based courses]” (p.7), I feel that students do require some exam style assessments in order to focus attention on the important aspects of the subject, give students opportunities to practice skills and consolidate learning and help students to monitor their progress (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004, p.11-12). Additionally, the last question of the quiz provides several examples of short essay questions that may be asked on the test later on in the unit.
“Modules 1, 2 and 3 Test – Ancient Rome” is the summative assessment tool for the first third of the ancient Rome unit. The test utilizes a variety of question formats and, for the short essay questions, draws upon understandings that students would have directly gained from their experience doing other assignments in the previous modules. Programming meaningful feedback is difficult as feedback should tell students “exactly where they have gone wrong and what they can do about it” (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004, p. 18). In order to ensure that feedback is reflective of instructional goals, feedback for short essay questions will be given based on individual answers. This is more time consuming than a stock answer but it will ensure that students know exactly how they are being assessed. In the formative quiz, students have some programmed feedback that gives them prompts about key understandings they need to have in order to answer the question correctly. However, in the summative test, some generalized feedback has been set up based on the total grade for the student but rather than giving qualitative (and unhelpful) feedback such as “good” or “poor”, generalized feedback such as the following has been programmed:
“50-60% – You have not demonstrated an understanding of some of the main ideas about ancient Rome. Next time, make sure you make use of the quiz provided as many of the test questions come from the quiz! The information presented on religion and government in ancient Rome will be important as we move on to the next modules. Please review the questions that you did not answer correctly and choose one of the short essay questions to re-answer and resubmit to me via email for additional marks”
While this is not a replacement for descriptive, individual feedback, it is proactive feedback that focuses on what a student needs to do next time and what they can do presently. It is my hope that feedback that focuses on “moving forward” will be helpful for students in determining what they need to do for next time.
Related to these quizzes is a formative assessment and study tool activity that I have set up in the form of a glossary (“Glossary Entry #1”). Students are tasked with the following activity:
- Add an entry to the Ancient Rome Glossary (at the top of the course page underneath the image) with a term, person or structure that pertains to Module 1, 2 or 3.
Criteria
- entry should be a minimum of 50 words.
- entry must not be a duplicate
- define your entry as it relates to ancient Rome (for example, if you choose to add “immortal” make sure you say who in Rome was immortal and what significance those immortals had on religion, society etc.)
Once finished, click “edit submission” on this page and type in the name of your entry then click “submit”.
- Additionally, you will need to add the emperor that you selected for your Facebook profile assignment to the Glossary. As others may have also chosen the same one, you are all responsible for contributing some information.
- You are required to make comments on at least 1 of the glossary entries of other students in order to improve their entry (see examples under Julius Caesar entry).
- You are also required to rate at least 1 of the glossary entries and explain the reasoning behind your rating in a respectful manner (ie. 5/5 – the important details of Julius Caesar’s life are clear and his important role in the end of the Republic is explained well. Ie. 1/5 – the dates that Caesar ruled are incorrect and so is the information about which triumverate Caesar was a part of. Also, Caesar is called an emperor but he wasn’t one.)
You will be authoring entries to this glossary as well as adding comments to existing entries. This glossary will serve as a study tool for quizzes and tests as well as a reference tool for assignments.
According to Gibbs and Simpson (2004), “students need to understand criteria in order to orient themselves appropriately to the assignment task” (p.20). While this seems like a given, many assignments do not come with clear criteria which can cause confusion and anxiety. The criteria given for this glossary comes with clear guideline about length, the type of term students should select, what “tasks within the task” they need to complete and examples about how to do something they would not have done before in Moodle (providing ratings/comments). Additionally, tasks are numbered to ensure that students are aware of exactly how many components they need to complete.
This activity has several purposes. First, it sets students up with a tool they can use to study and models efficient organization. Second, it allows for students to take information and present it in their own words and also apply it to other understandings from the unit. Third, it allows for students to improve upon their work and the work of others. By enabling tools that allow for students to add comments and rate entries, students are able to improve an entry by providing additional information and provide peers with formative feedback that lets them know how they can improve their entry. Students, conscious of the fact that their entries will be viewed by both their teacher and peers, may “supervise themselves and improve the quality of their own assignments prior to submitting them” (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004, p.20). This activity allows for the teacher check for understanding, insightful connections and correct information. The teacher will also make comments and add ratings to entries in order to guide students in their learning.
In keeping with the recommendation by Gibbs and Simpson (2004) that frequent assignments are more effective in distributing student effort than infrequent, intensive assignments, many assignments in my unit are provided that see students working individually and collaboratively, within the LMS and outside of the LMS, with audio, visual and text and in a timed and untimed environment. Hopefully this approach to assessment will have students recognizing the importance of all assessment tasks and not feeling the anxiety associated with an exam-only based learning environment.
References:
Gibbs, G. and Simpson, C. (2005). “Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning.” Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Accessed online June 24, 2009 http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf
