grading criteria and marking schemes liz norman anzcvs 2015
Post on 15-Jul-2015
775 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Grading criteria
and marking schemes
Liz Norman
Massey University
Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists
Examiner Workshop, 14-15 February, 2015
Validity again…
• The questions must elicit the behaviour we want
to evaluate
• Different markers need to award similar/scores
for the same candidate response
• Markers need to reward features we want to
evaluate and not reward features we do not
want to evaluate
Purpose of marking schemes
• To help you during Q writing
– What content is important
– Whether the Q asks what you intended it to ask
– Whether it is do-able in the time available
• To help you during Q marking
– helps you decide whether an answer is good enough
to be awarded a mark
– facilitates reliable and fair marking
Types of marking scheme
1. Model answer – “ideal” answer
2. Point-based schemes
3. Criteria- & level-based schemes
4. Schemes with incorporated principle(s) for
discriminating levels
Model answers
• Not recommended as a sole component of a
marking scheme
– Usually more than would be expected to be given by
any candidate
– No guidance on how to assess alternative answers to
the model provided
– No guidance on how to award marks
• Can be a useful adjunct to a marking scheme
Point-based schemes
• Points for each objectively identifiable content
point
• Does not indicate the relative importance of the
points it awards
• Sum can be more or less than the whole
• Rewards quantity not quality
Prestructural
Unistructural Able to identify, list, name, enumerate but does not describe,
explain, relate or elaborate multiple aspects of a response
Multistructural
Relational
Extended
abstract
Quantitative change
Qualitative change
Criteria- & level-based schemes
• Criteria – different dimensions of performance
• Level – different quality/standards of
performance on a given criteria
Criteria- & level-based schemes
• Generic vs specific for the Q
• Explicit vs implicit weighting
Standards
Very poor Poor Fair Excellent C
rite
ria
Analysis and
interpretation
of results
Total 8 marks
0-2 marks
Interpretation not
provided or incorrect.
2-4 marks
Lacks one or more key
elements.
4-6 marks
Adequate interpretation
that addresses key
elements. Misses nuances
of interpretation or
uncommon differentials
6-8 marks
Thorough accurate
interpretation of results.
Well justified and
appropriately prioritised
list of differentials.
Quality of
planning
Total 8 marks
0-2 marks
No plans provided or
plans not appropriate
or dangerous
2-4 marks
Plans miss some key
aspects or overly
general
4-6 marks
Adequate plans that
address all key
differentials. Some
displaced in priority or not
pragmatic
6-8 marks
Thorough detailed and
well-prioritised and
pragmatic plan that
addresses all defined
differentials.
Knowledge of
current
literature
Total 5 marks
0-2 marks
Little or no literature referred to or incorrectly
referred to.
3-4 marks
Answer refers to some of
the key literature
4-5 marks
Answer refers to current
literature including
controversies and
comparative work from
other species.
Logical
presentation
Total 4 marks
1 mark
Answer is disorganised
and includes a large
amount of irrelevant
material
2 marks
Answer is somewhat
disorganized and
includes some
irrelevant material
3 marks
The answer is relatively
well organized and
contains little irrelevant
material.
4 marks
The answer shows a high
degree of logical thought
and well-constructed
argument.
Analytical vs holistic schemes
• Both are valid
• Analytical (criteria scored separately)– Better agreement between examiners
– Insufficient criteria
– Overlapping criteria
– Really just lots of smaller holistic decisions
• Holistic (scored as a whole)– Don’t straightjacket examiners
– Challenging, especially for longer answers
– Less agreement between examiners
Prestructural Question may be rephrased as the answer; almost completely
misses the point of the question.
Unistructural Able to identify, list, name, enumerate but does not describe,
explain, relate or elaborate multiple aspects of a response
Multistructural Able to list as well as describe distinct aspects of a response (such
as being able to describe aetiology, clinical features, management
of thrombotic stroke) but unable to explicitly explain causes for
observations; unable to present cause-effect relationships.
Relational Able to describe multiple aspects of a process and additionally
explain or elaborate observations into cause-effect relationships;
able to compare similarities and differences between apparently
distinct phenomena. This level is taken as suggesting that the
learner has understood.
Extended
abstract
Highly developed; able to explain mechanisms of phenomena and
apply this information to a novel context — able to develop novel
hypotheses, theories, and deduce principles; creative thinking.
SOLO levels in marking schemes
Prestructural The task may be engaged, but the student is distracted or
misled by irrelevant aspects
Unistructural The student focuses on the relevant domain and works with a
single aspect
Multistructural The student provides correct material with discrete, separate
pieces of information that may be combined to provide a
composite picture
Relational The student offers an integrated understanding of the
information. The whole has a coherent structure and meaning
Extended
abstract
Abstract general principles or hypotheses are provided
Scholten I, Keeves JP, Lawson MJ. High Educ 44:233–255, 2002.
Q examples at different SOLO levels
Inviting a unistructural response:
• Identify descending motor pathways that primarily mediate upright posture and reflex postural adjustments.
• List four examples of long acting calcium channel blockers.
Inviting a multistructural or even a relational response:
• Describe the structure of the eukaryotic cell membrane.
• Describe the clinical features of ischemic stroke.
Inviting a relational response:
• Explain the mechanisms of each of the following in a patient with cirrhosis of the liver: ascites, splenomegaly, hematemesis, and neurologic deterioration.
Prakash et al. (2010) Adv Physiol Educ, 34(3):145-149
Incorporating principles/rules
• Ideal is a specific criteria- & level-based
schemes with incorporated principle(s) for
discriminating levels
AQA GCSE Science A Physics 1 Foundation Tier Physics 1F Specimen Mark Scheme
http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/science/gcse/physics-4403/past-papers-and-mark-schemes
Incorporating principles
Calais has a warmer winter and a cooler summer than Wroclaw. Explain why. (3 marks)
Marking scheme: Looking for answers related to distance from the sea therefore latitude is not credited.
– Land heats up quicker than sea (1 mark)
– A clear distinction between land and sea heating (2 marks)
Ahmed & Pollitt (2011) Improving marking quality through a taxonomy of mark schemes. Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice 2011;18:259-278.
Incorporating principles
Marking scheme excerpt:
Discussion should focus on strategies adopted to
ensure sustainability and an evaluation of these with
regard to whether or not or to what extent the Sahel can
be sustainably managed. The discussion will depend on
the content and whether the overall view is optimistic or
pessimistic.
AQA (2013) General Certificate of Education (A-level) Geography Unit 1: Physical and Human Geography
http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/geography/a-level/geography-2030/past-papers-and-mark-schemes
Quality vs quantity
• More complex and unstructured the Q the more
assessing quality not quantity
• In very constrained tasks only judging how
correct the answer is
• In very open tasks, “correctness” is less
important and its quality that's judged instead
Prestructural Question may be rephrased as the answer; almost completely
misses the point of the question.
Unistructural Able to identify, list, name, enumerate but does not describe,
explain, relate or elaborate multiple aspects of a response
Multistructural Able to list as well as describe distinct aspects of a response (such
as being able to describe aetiology, clinical features, management
of thrombotic stroke) but unable to explicitly explain causes for
observations; unable to present cause-effect relationships.
Relational Able to describe multiple aspects of a process and additionally
explain or elaborate observations into cause-effect relationships;
able to compare similarities and differences between apparently
distinct phenomena. This level is taken as suggesting that the
learner has understood.
Extended
abstract
Highly developed; able to explain mechanisms of phenomena and
apply this information to a novel context — able to develop novel
hypotheses, theories, and deduce principles; creative thinking.
Prakash et al. (2010) Adv Physiol Educ, 34(3):145-149
Content vs connections
Lucander et al. (2010). European Journal of Dental Education, 14(3), 145-150.
Writing marking schemes
• Select and organise the criteria/dimensions
• Develop clear descriptions for each
level/standard of each criteria
• Need to think about poor answers as well as
good ones
Revising mark schemes in use
• Hopefully all types of answer are anticipated
• Sometimes though it is not – can indicate unanticipated problems with the Q
• Marking schemes might need revising after first few candidates marked
• HSE should moderate marking and should encourage team members to report marking issues early in the piece.
Key points
Marking schemes
• Give an indication of the key criteria for
discriminating passing answers from failing ones
• Then add in what would be a better performance
and what would be a lesser performance
• Think about both quantitative and qualitative
aspects of an answer
Marking schemes
• Quantitative:
– Which parts of the answer are essential
– How many errors in these parts are tolerated
• Qualitative
– Thinking processes you want to examine
– What connections are essential/important
– How the structure of an answer will help you
differentiate a structured, related, connected thought
process from a multistructural list of unrelated facts
Marking schemes
• Think about how a candidate who includes
all/most of the right stuff but also includes wrong
stuff will be graded
• What it indicates about the knowledge structure
if there are contradictions/irrelevancies
in the answer
Marking schemes
• Keep them brief
• Think about them as specifying principles to
apply rather than exhaustive detail
• Concentrate on specifying the differentiating
characteristics and how much of this there
needs to be
• Don’t use them to educate examiners about the
topic
Next session’s task
Next session’s task:
• For each of your questions:
– Think about how you will discriminate a good from a
poor answer
– Form this into a marking scheme
• Aim is to have a full set of drafted Qs and
outlined marking schemes by 5:30 pm
top related