Table of Contents

CAESL Assessment Framework: Quality Tools and Quality Use (continued)

Step 5: Revise Expected Student Responses (ESRs)

Review the trends you wrote on sticky notes for each response set. Are there trends in the student work for each response set that would help you to identify modifications you might need to make to the current descriptors/characteristics for the high-, medium- or low-level responses? For example, in the medium-response set for science understanding, students’ conclusions only addressed three chemical reactions.

If so, you will want to modify the scoring guide for these student work trends. By modifying the scoring guide, you are taking note of trends in student skill levels so that you may monitor and adjust instruction to address student learning. 

What would you add to the teacher’s scoring guide based on your review of the student work? Write your ideas in the descriptors/characteristics categories.

Time to Reflect

Read the chart to see how the teacher revised the ESRs in the following scoring guide. The revisions are in bold italics.

High School Revised Scoring Guide for Formative Feedback
With Revised Expected Student Responses (ESRs)

Component
(Standard)

High

Medium

Low

Science Understanding

All chemical reactions are identified properly and chemical equations are balanced.

Some chemical reactions and identifications are missing or incorrect; some chemical equations are incorrectly balanced.

The chemical reaction is identified correctly, but the listed experimental observations are poorly written; the combustion reaction is usually balanced incorrectly.

Most chemical reactions identifications are missing or incorrect; most chemical equations are incorrectly balanced.

Text Type Criteria
(WHST.9-10.2)

The lab report contain: a) a well-defined hypothesis; b) a description of materials and experimental procedures; 3) a data table with relevant observation statements; 4) an analysis section that uses domain-specific vocabulary including appropriately balanced equations; 5) a conclusion statement and comparison with the hypothesis that follow from the evidence presented in the previous sections.

The lab report is missing one or two sections; the results and/or conclusion statement are not well elaborated.

The results section does not follow from the stated experimental observations.

The lab report is missing several sections; the results and/or conclusions are weak or incorrect.

Use of Academic Language (L.9-10.6)

Uses academic vocabulary (single-replacement; double replacement; decomposition, combustion; combination reaction) correctly.

Some academic vocabulary are used incorrectly

Appropriate vocabulary is used correctly only in certain sections of the report, but not everywhere.

Does not use correct academic vocabulary

Appropriate vocabulary is used correctly only infrequently throughout the lab report.

Communicating Information

Links concluding statements to experimental evidence.

Most of the evidence is present in the lab report sections but are not fully used in the conclusion statements.

The conclusion statement does not follow from the evidence presented in previous sections.

The conclusion statements are poorly written due to lack of evidence.



Step 6: Rescore student work

Now that you have modified the ESRs, and you have seen how the teacher modified the ESRs, rescore the student work. Place a sticky note on each piece of student work describing which set the response falls into: high-, medium-, low-level response.