An assessment plan is required for all Stage 1 subjects. Schools should ensure that the assessment plan outlines are available for students. Assessment plans are submitted to the SACE coordinator for SSABSA approval.
Program Rationale (for teacher and school reference)
The rationale sets the scene for an assessment plan and is a statement of how the subject (as described in the curriculum statement) has been interpreted and developed in a teaching, learning and assessment program to suit a particular student cohort and school setting. The program rationale should:
- describe the setting (e.g. student background and needs, resources, timetabling);
- describe the intended teaching program (e.g. scope, themes, methods) and explain how it is designed to meet the needs of the particular student group;
- explain how the assessment outline is designed to provide an opportunity for the student group to succeed.
An assessment plan should be flexible and should cater for student diversity. It is a document of intention and may be subject to some change during the program.
Literacy Checklist (for teacher and student reference)
Types of communication
Teachers need to provide opportunities for students to use at least three types of communication. At least three boxes need to be ticked. One task may be used for more than one type of communication. For example a student giving a talk with the assistance of a PowerPoint would be using spoken communication, Visual communication, and Use of ICTs.
Working critically
One task must be identified that requires students to work critically. This task may be identified with an asterisk or there may be a few words describing how the students will work critically.
Assessment Outline (for teacher and student reference)
This outline, organised into the assessment components of the subject (as described in the curriculum statement), describes the assessment tasks and how they are to be assessed. This section of an assessment plan should be made available to students
Components
Curriculum statements specify between two and four assessment components (e.g. practical work, examination, research project). An assessment component may contain a number of summative assessment tasks.
Assessment Tasks
For 1-unit programs, four to six summative tasks are recommended. For 2-unit programs, eight to twelve summative tasks are recommended. Variations outside these ranges are possible but would need to be supported by the program rationale.
Assessment should be for measuring learning that has occurred. assessment should not be used as a motivation tool. Between 10% and 15% of the student’s total instruction time (including ‘homework’ time) is adequate to determine student achievement through summative assessment.
Assessment specifications may be provided to guide the form of the student responses in each assessment task. These specifications are not criteria for assessment. The word limit is a common specification in describing the parameters for assessment. As the word limit is not a criterion for assessment, assessment tasks with fewer words than the maximum limit can satisfy all criteria to the highest level. If the assessment task contains more than the specified maximum number of words it will be read only up to the word limit.
Weightings
The assessment plan should reflect advice on weightings of assessment components and tasks given in the curriculum statement.
Learning Outcomes and Criteria for Judging Performance
Criteria for judging performance should be those listed (or closely reflect those listed) for each component from the curriculum statement. These criteria should clearly relate to the learning outcomes being measured and be sufficiently detailed to deliver valid and reliable assessment (see below).
Assessment Plan Approval
The assessment plan will be approved provided that it:
- identifies the needs of the student group and explains how the assessment outline provides an opportunity for these students to succeed;
- clearly illustrates the close relationship between the focus of the learning outcomes, assessment component weightings, and criteria for judging performance;
- meets any specified assessment requirements of the curriculum statement;
- identifies three types of communication that students will use and identifies where students will be required to work critically;
- uses the prescribed assessment components and tasks, and identifies the relevant learning outcomes;
- indicates appropriate weightings of assessment components and tasks;
- describes criteria for judging performance that will enable valid and reliable assessment of the learning outcomes.
Assessment plans will be approved by the Assessment Field Officer allocated to the school.
Validity and Reliability of Assessment
Validity
Validity is essentially about ensuring that the teacher assesses achievement of the learning outcomes specified in the curriculum statement. If teachers assess learning outcomes that are not in the curriculum statement (or leave some out), they may still provide a fair assessment but not against the specified learning outcomes, and so the assessment will be invalid.
The learning outcomes are central to a teaching program and to a valid assessment. All summative assessment tasks must be designed to enable students to demonstrate achievement against one or more learning outcomes, as specified in the curriculum statement.
When taken in its entirety, the assessment outline on the assessment plan must assess all the learning outcomes of the curriculum statement to be valid.
Reliability
Reliability is essentially about consistency. Assessing involves making judgments against criteria for judging performance and then interpreting those criteria into a marks scheme. When marking an assessment task, a teacher makes a judgment about ‘how far’ a student has demonstrated achievement against one or more learning outcomes, according to the criteria for judging performance in the curriculum statement. Teachers’ interpretation of the extent of student achievement is their professional judgment. The important task is to apply this interpretation consistently in the student group.
