Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
InternationalBaccalaureateIB AmericasIndividuals and Societies
Managing Assessment in the MYP Category 3
McAllen, TexasJune 2015English
Jennifer Dosher
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2012
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2012
Teacher Training Workshop
This workbook is intended for use by a participant at an IB-approved workshop. It contains several types of material: material that was created and published by the IB, material that was prepared by the workshop leader and third-party copyright material.
Following the workshop, participants who wish to provide information or non-commercial in-school training to teachers in their school may use the IB-copyright material (including student work) and material identified as the work of the workshop leader unless this is specifically prohibited.
The IB is committed to fostering academic honesty and respecting others’ intellectual property. To this end, the organization must comply with international copyright laws and therefore has obtained permission to reproduce and/or translate any materials used in this publication for which a third party owns the intellectual property. Acknowledgments are included where appropriate. Workshop participants may not use any of the material in this workbook that is identified as being the intellectual property of a third party for any purpose unless expressly stated. In all other cases permission must be sought from the copyright holder before making use of such material.
Permission must be sought from the IB by emailing [email protected] for any use of IB material which is different from that described above or those uses permitted under the rules and policy for use of IB intellectual property (http://www.ibo.org/copyright/intellectualproperty.cfm).
Permission granted to any supplier or publisher to exhibit at an IB-approved workshop does not imply endorsement by the IB.
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2012
The IB mission statement
The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.
To this end the organization works with schools, governments and international organizations to develop challenging programmes of international education and rigorous assessment.
These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right.
Presenter Contact Info 5
Mission and Standards 6
Appendix - Differentiation tasksheet 8
General report - Individuals and societies - 2014 9
Individuals and societies assessment tasks 13
Appendix - Jigsaw reading 14
Appendix - Applying best-fit to make a finaljudgement 18
GRASP chart 20
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2012
Workbook contents
Presenter Information
Jennifer Dosher Carrollwood Day School
Tampa, Florida
[email protected] [email protected]
website = jdosher.weebly.com
5/20
Mission and Standards
The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable, and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.
To this end, the organization works with schools, governments, and international organizations to develop challenging programs of international education and rigorous assessment.
These programs encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate, lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right.
6/20
Mission and Standards
C.4. • Assessment at the school aligns with the requirements of the program. • The school communicates its assessment philosophy, policy, and
procedures to the school community. • The school provides students with feedback to inform and improve their
learning. • The school has systems for recording student progress aligned with the
assessment philosophy of the program. • The school has systems for reporting student progress aligned with the
assessment philosophy of the program. • The school analyzes assessment data to inform teaching and learning. • The school provides opportunities for students to participate in, and
reflect on the assessment of their work. • The school has systems in place to ensure that all students can
demonstrate a consolidation of their learning through the completion the MYP personal project [or community project for programs that end in the MYP year 3 or4].
7/20
Learning engagement
Differentiation Page 1 of 1
Managing assessment in the MYP workshop resources © International Baccalaureate Organization 2015
Complete the chart to show what you know about differentiation. Use quotes, bullet points, statements and/or sketches.
Differentiation
Definition Associated vocabulary
Examples (What it looks like in the classroom)
What it does not look like
8/20
June 2014 General Report
Humanities General Comments It is important to note that the new version of the MYP Individuals and societies guide, published in May 2014, should be used next year. This guide will come into use from September 2014 (for northern hemisphere schools) or in January 2015 (for those in the southern hemisphere). The following report, however, is based on the previous version of the MYP humanities guide, published in 2012. This year, 169 schools from the three IB regions sent us 194 humanities samples from the MYP. In addition to samples for history, geography and humanities, seven samples were received for business studies, seven for economics and one for philosophy. The number of schools that submitted samples electronically, either through the Basecamp portal or through their own online system, has continued to increase compared to last year. The 2012 assessment criteria for humanities were used for the second time during this session. Generally, schools have implemented the adjustments that were proposed following the first year’s use of the new criteria. The tasks submitted are much clearer, and better correspond to all the specific objectives. Overall, the teachers are well acquainted with the assessment criteria, as this report will show. Most schools included the five student project covers required, in accordance with the required achievement levels (three pieces of work demonstrating average results, one piece of a comparatively high standard and one of a comparatively weak standard). Very few schools made use of the pre-2012 guide. All aspects of each criterion should be assessed at least once. This year, again, we did have to remind some schools to include sufficiently varied work to allow for this. It should also be noted that some schools do not clearly identify which criteria are assessed through the tasks. A relatively small number of cases of plagiarism were identified. Nevertheless, many schools still need to be reminded that teachers are required to authenticate each piece of work submitted for the purposes of moderation. It might be beneficial to establish clear school guidelines linked to the use of references, or at least for schools to submit, together with the sample, details of the approach favoured. The purpose of this is to give the moderation team a better understanding of the rules that apply in different school contexts regarding academic honesty policies. Practically all samples included a copy of the moderation report from the previous year. Several schools submitted evidence of the application of recommendations set out in that report. However, some schools had not addressed the points in the previous report that required further attention. These schools must be reminded that the achievement levels of their future students risk being lowered if they do not take these points into consideration.
Comments concerning the choice of tasks for assessment and background information Generally speaking the samples submitted were well organized. We were able to find the requested documents and background information, even though the information did not always correspond to the unit plans included in the sample. The curricula should be framed as a central feature of the appropriate MYP unit plans in order to allow the moderation team to visualize the background information and the topic studied at the time when the students carry out the task. Schools should ensure that the unit plans cover all
9/20
tasks included in the sampling exercise. All too often, the unit plans do not include the same aspects as those covered by the tasks. We applaud teachers who have successfully adapted and clarified the criteria in accordance with the specific context of each task. We have also noticed clear improvements in the communication with students, especially when it comes to the requirements that must be met to obtain the highest level of achievement for each piece of work. Some schools however showed only limited awareness of the new guide. This year, once again, some samples contained previous tasks that had been only minimally adapted for moderation. Accuracy of the moderation process depends in part on the amount of detail provided by schools concerning the conditions in which the work was completed. This information would include the amount of input provided by teachers, the number of in-class hours devoted to the task and/or hours spent working at home, and the range of documents used. Only a few schools failed to provide this information. The documents submitted often d0 not specify the amount of time allowed for a task or the duration of a class period (in minutes). In most cases, the assessed pieces of work included the following essential information: the mark schemes, examples of answers and the time allowed for the task. An overall improvement was noted when it came to the quality and variety of the material assessed. Most assessments made it possible for students to gain the highest achievement levels for the criteria selected. Criterion B strands including the research question and unit plan, do however seem to present difficulties. Some aspects of criterion C also require attention, especially concerning the assessment of a broad range of sources. The written report was generally limited to between 700 and 1,500 words, as appropriate. However, just like in previous years, a small number of schools used a higher word limit or did not set one. Others set word limits which were too restrictive to allow the students to develop their knowledge, understanding, and critical thinking. In both cases it is possible that students were penalized. Many varied and stimulating tasks were submitted. Most of them were appropriate and fully met the requirements and guidelines for moderation. Cases of having to lower the achievement levels due to tasks not being in-depth enough to allow students to reach the highest levels of achievement for the criteria selected were rarer. It is important to ensure that the tasks allow students to develop their answers well. This year, lowered levels were linked rather more to the fact that not all strands of the specific objectives had been addressed for the two or three sample folders submitted for moderation. Schools avoided the inclusion of group work in the samples submitted for moderation, as it is very difficult to determine the specific contribution of each student for moderation. Nevertheless, some schools did still submit group work, and the moderation team struggled to identify the individual contributions of each student, which often resulted in lowered levels for the students concerned.
Comments on the use of assessment criteria Most schools applied the criteria correctly during this second year of using the new guide for humanities. Criterion A (knowing and understanding) was adequately assessed. Short pieces of work are the main weak point because in some cases the word count for the task was too restrictive and did not afford students the possibility of developing their knowledge and understanding sufficiently. Finally, it is preferable to always assess the two specific objectives of criterion A in one task. Assessment of criterion B (investigating) presented a greater difficulty, although some schools applied the requirements of this criterion very effectively. In many cases, last year’s recommendations linked to the research question explored by the students and the implementation of the action plan were taken on board and we noted a clear improvement. However, in many cases the question and the research plans were rather more implied than explicitly stated.
10/20
In the absence of a clear research question and a clear action plan, the achievement levels for this criterion were lowered considerably. Regarding the recording methods linked to the third strand, several schools submitted only one approach, which is not in accordance with what is set out in the guide. Moreover, in several cases some schools were moderated only on the specific objective strand ”addressing the research question” as the piece of work did not allow for a thorough assessment of the other strands linked to this criterion. Criterion C (thinking critically) had been correctly applied most of the time and the framework for it favoured critical analysis as well as a summary of arguments and evaluation of a high quality. Evaluating a broad range of sources sometimes presents difficulties, as occasionally we find only a basic grading of sources, without them having been evaluated according to their value and limitations. For criterion D (communication) a large number of samples were submitted of work structured in accordance with the target audience and the objective concerned. Once again we noted overall improvements in the source referencing system. Different recognized systems were used in a consistent manner and teachers correctly penalized errors in referencing of sources. However, tasks should include clearer instructions from teachers on the use of the chosen recognized convention for citing sources, with references in the text and the inclusion of a bibliography. Tests were generally assessed in accordance with criteria A and C, the most suitable criteria for this purpose. Nearly all schools published the two judgments required for each criterion, or eight achievement levels in total. They were distributed between two or three tasks. Few schools included any more than that. The most problematic point was the application of all strands of the criteria. A relatively significant number of schools did not meet the requirement to apply each strand at least once to the sample as a whole. Inversely, many schools attempted to apply all strands to each task. These two scenarios can lead the moderation team to lower the achievement levels. Like last year, schools are increasingly making use of electronic tools to verify cases of plagiarism, which was therefore a very rare occurrence among the samples. However, compulsory authentication by teachers was found to be missing for many pieces of work. This year, the criteria were correctly applied overall, and significant changes in the achievement levels of students were only observed in a limited number of the samples. This is the case particularly for schools that have been submitting samples for moderation for several years. Most of them included suitable and original tasks, appropriate for the criteria and with due consideration for recommendations provide in previous reports - for which we commend the teachers.
Organization of samples provided for moderation The quality of samples continues to be high overall during this second year of the 2012 criteria. The general organization, the inclusion of the cover-page forms, the assessment of a large number of the judgments and the background information supplied were, generally speaking, relevant and accurate. Some teachers made suitable use of the back of the cover pages to include specific information about certain students. Schools are encouraged to continue to do this in future. We also remind schools that more general information about the sample, the tasks and the students should be included in the background information folder. It is worth highlighting that some schools have not submitted unit planners together with the tasks or that some units did not contain the same information as the tasks linked to them. The samples submitted electronically were well organized overall and easily navigated. Scanned pieces of work sometimes left something to be desired, particularly when it came to the quality of the copies of documents.
11/20
Possible improvements This general report has identified the following possible improvements: • Continue efforts in all areas where strengths have been identified in this report, especially concerning the
organization of samples and application of criteria A and C.
• Ensure that the pieces of work assessed for criterion B (investigating) do contain a research question and a detailed, clear and precise action plan for carrying out the research; additionally, ensure that more than one method for recording information is submitted for assessment of this criterion.
• Ensure that all strands of each criterion are applied appropriately in at least one instance among all the samples.
• Bear in mind that applying each strand to each task is not advisable, as it risks penalizing students.
• Do everything to guarantee that the recommendations contained in individual reports to schools are applied when preparing the sample, with a view to moderation for the coming year.
• Contribute to the broader efforts to submit tasks electronically.
• Ensure that pieces of work and tests are developed in a way that allows students to achieve the highest levels for the criteria specified, that they contain stimulating questions that allow room for in-depth answers, that the work set is of an appropriate length and that enough time is allocated to complete it.
• Include clear instructions on referencing and citation of sources, linked to criterion D, in the information on the background information or on instruction sheets.
• Continue to provide varied and interesting tasks.
• Ensure that the subject-specific report and this general report are made available to all humanities teachers at the school.
Once again we congratulate schools and teachers for the ongoing general improvements which we have noted in this year’s samples, and for having adapted to the realities and requirements of the new criteria. We hope that this report and the individual school reports will help teachers to put together accurate and suitable samples of work bearing in mind the moderation process, and that the advice provided here will prove useful for all humanities subjects taught at the schools.
Schools are reminded to use the new Individuals and societies guide (For use from September 2014/January 2015). Any copies of the pre-published guide should be replaced by the final publications (May 2014 on the OCC).
Note: for moderation in 2015, only one judgment per criterion will be required. Please consult the eAssessment Development Report and the Handbook of Procedures for the Middle Years Programme: Moderation and monitoring of assessment (2015) in the MYP coordinators section on the OCC.
12/20
Individuals and societies Task As a student council member, you are involved with sending a team of five fellow students to represent your city at the International Festival. The team is to provide a "snapshot’ of your school and community. Several students suggested as possible candidates are native born to your country and tension has already started to rise as minority students and recent immigrants claim they are not being adequately represented. Your job is to develop an equitable, democratic solution to the problem of selecting students. Based on what you know, set up criteria that would be used to help select students. Your criteria should include a balance between individual rights and the common good and show equity. Other criteria should constitute ways to provide a true snapshot of your school. Make sure you consult with groups within your school for points of view. As you work on your plan, come to at least two conclusions about the benefits and challenges of a multicultural society, Make suggestions for helping the various groups in your building communicate and work together more efficiently. After you have developed a plan of action, consider what options students might have if they disagree with the selection process. Make suggestions about possible procedures to over-ride decisions. You will be assessed on your ability to make decisions that reflect the balance between individual and group rights, your ability to analyze perspectives and your ability to work collaboratively.
13/20
Rea
din
g s
ectio
ns f
or
jigsaw
to p
rin
t or
inclu
de
in
the
wo
rkb
ook:
Sourc
e:
Learn
ing d
ivers
ity in the I
nte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es: S
pecia
l e
ducation
al n
ee
ds w
ithin
the Inte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es, pag
e 5
-7
Pri
ncip
le
Rea
din
g c
ard
Aff
irm
ing id
entity
and b
uild
ing
self-
este
em
So
cia
l a
nd
em
otio
na
l con
ditio
ns f
or
learn
ing t
hat
va
lue a
ll la
ngu
ag
es a
nd
cultu
res a
nd a
ffir
m th
e ide
ntity
of
ea
ch
lea
rner
pro
mote
self-
este
em
. A
ffirm
ing
the
id
entity
of
a lea
rner
en
co
ura
ge
s t
he q
ualit
ies, a
ttitud
es a
nd
chara
cte
ristics ide
ntifie
d in
the I
B learn
er
pro
file
,
pro
motin
g r
esp
onsib
le c
itiz
enship
an
d inte
rna
tiona
l-m
inded
ne
ss. C
onditio
ns th
at
do n
ot aff
irm
id
entity
re
sult in le
arn
ers
with p
oor
se
lf-
este
em
. C
on
sequ
ently,
such le
arn
ers
will
be u
nab
le to
develo
p m
an
y o
f th
e q
ualit
ies,
att
itud
es a
nd
chara
cte
ristics o
f th
e le
arn
er
pro
file
.
Th
e identity
of
ea
ch
le
arn
er
mu
st,
there
fore
, b
e a
ffirm
ed.
Affir
min
g ide
ntity
ca
n b
e a
chie
ve
d b
y:
•
pro
motin
g a
cla
ss a
nd s
ch
ool e
nviron
men
t th
at w
elc
om
es a
nd e
mbra
ces t
he d
ivers
ity o
f le
arn
ers
•
by v
alu
ing a
nd
usin
g t
he d
ivers
ity
of
cultu
ral pers
pe
ctive
s to
en
ha
nce
le
arn
ing
•
by lia
isin
g w
ith
pa
rents
to e
sta
blis
h u
nders
tan
din
g o
f h
ow
be
st
to c
olla
bora
te t
o a
chie
ve s
hare
d g
oa
ls.
14/20
Rea
din
g s
ectio
ns f
or
jigsaw
to p
rin
t or
inclu
de
in
the
wo
rkb
ook:
Sourc
e:
Learn
ing d
ivers
ity in the I
nte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es: S
pecia
l e
ducation
al n
ee
ds w
ithin
the Inte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es, pag
e 5
-7
Va
luin
g p
rior
kno
wle
dg
e
Ne
w le
arn
ing
an
d u
nde
rsta
nd
ing is c
on
str
ucte
d o
n p
revio
us e
xperi
en
ce
s a
nd c
on
ce
ptu
al u
nders
tandin
gs in a
de
ve
lop
menta
l co
ntinuu
m.
Kra
shen
(20
02)
str
esse
s t
he im
port
ance o
f co
mpre
he
nsib
le in
put
for
learn
ing
to
ta
ke
pla
ce
. If n
ew
info
rmation
ca
nnot
be u
nd
ers
tood
, it
ca
nnot
be lin
ked t
o p
rior
know
ledge
an
d b
ecom
e p
art
of d
eepe
r le
arn
ing
. T
he p
sycho
logis
t V
ygo
tsky
(197
8)
descri
be
s a
zo
ne
of
pro
xim
al
develo
pm
en
t (Z
PD
) w
ithin
wh
ich n
ew
lea
rnin
g c
an t
ake p
lace if
the
re is s
up
port
. T
he
ZP
D lie
s b
eyo
nd
the z
one o
f pri
or
kno
win
g,
whic
h is
whe
re a
learn
er
ca
n w
ork
indep
en
dently
witho
ut
sup
port
. A
nyth
ing o
uts
ide th
e Z
PD
is n
ot
yet
ab
le t
o b
e lea
rned
.
Whe
n p
lan
nin
g t
he r
an
ge o
f ne
w le
arn
ing t
hat
ca
n take
pla
ce
in
an
y ind
ivid
ua
l, p
revio
us lea
rnin
g e
xperi
en
ce
s o
r prio
r kno
win
g m
ust
be
taken
into
co
nsid
era
tion.
It c
an
no
t be a
ssu
med
tha
t th
ose
le
arn
ers
who h
ave d
ive
rse learn
ing
ne
ed
s w
ill n
ece
ssari
ly a
ll sh
are
th
e s
am
e
pre
vio
us learn
ing a
nd b
ackgro
un
d k
now
ledge.
It m
ay
be t
hat th
ese learn
ers
ha
ve a
wea
lth o
f re
levant
ba
ckgro
un
d k
no
wle
dg
e t
hat
ca
n b
e a
ctivate
d a
s a
base
fo
r fu
rth
er
learn
ing.
Ho
wever,
the t
ea
che
r m
ay h
ave
to b
uild
up b
ackg
roun
d k
now
led
ge
in p
repara
tion
for
furt
her
lea
rnin
g.
Th
ere
fore
, te
ach
ers
sho
uld
:
•
exp
licitly
activa
te le
arn
ers
’ p
rior
un
ders
tandin
g
•
use
the
ir k
now
ledge
of
learn
ers
’ pri
or
un
ders
tan
din
g t
o d
iffe
rentiate
ta
sks a
nd a
ctivitie
s t
hat w
ill b
uild
up t
he f
urt
her
backg
roun
d
kn
ow
led
ge n
ece
ssary
for
ne
w learn
ing t
o o
ccur
•
record
in
form
atio
n in learn
ing p
rofile
s th
at
will
supp
ort
pla
nnin
g f
or
futu
re d
iffe
rentiatio
n a
nd
info
rm t
eacher
pra
ctice
•
co
nsid
er
the
tim
e a
nd th
e s
trate
gie
s n
ecessa
ry for
activatin
g a
nd b
uild
ing u
p b
ackg
rou
nd k
now
ledge
whe
n p
lann
ing a
unit o
f w
ork
or
lesson
15/20
Rea
din
g s
ectio
ns f
or
jigsaw
to p
rin
t or
inclu
de
in
the
wo
rkb
ook:
Sourc
e:
Learn
ing d
ivers
ity in the I
nte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es: S
pecia
l e
ducation
al n
ee
ds w
ithin
the Inte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es, pag
e 5
-7
Scaffo
ldin
g
Te
achin
g m
eth
odo
log
y ha
s ide
ntifie
d a
vari
ety
of sp
ecific
wa
ys in
whic
h te
ache
rs c
an
scaff
old
new
le
arn
ing
in t
he
ZP
D t
o h
elp
learn
ers
unde
rsta
nd
text an
d t
asks.
Scaffo
ldin
g is a
tem
pora
ry s
trate
gy t
ha
t en
ab
les le
arn
ers
to
accom
plis
h a
task th
at
wou
ld o
the
rwis
e b
e im
po
ssib
le o
r
much m
ore
difficult to a
cco
mplis
h.
Scaff
old
ing
sh
ou
ld f
oste
r le
arn
ers
’ in
cre
asin
g in
de
pe
nd
ence
in t
akin
g r
esp
onsib
ility
for
de
velo
pin
g s
trate
gie
s
for
the
ir o
wn learn
ing,
thu
s a
lwa
ys e
xte
nd
ing t
he
ZP
D.
Scaffo
ldin
g is a
dyn
am
ic p
ractice
in t
he learn
ing
pro
ce
ss.
The
use o
f gra
phic
org
an
izers
to d
eve
lop
a p
iece
of w
ritte
n r
esea
rch
is a
n e
xa
mp
le o
f sca
ffold
ing.
Oth
er
scaff
old
ing s
trate
gie
s m
ay p
rovid
e a
mo
re c
on
cre
te,
an
d less a
bstr
act,
con
text fo
r und
ers
tan
din
g.
Exam
ple
s o
f th
ese
are
:
•
vis
ual a
ids
•
dem
onstr
ation
s
•
dra
ma
tization
•
sm
all,
str
uctu
red c
olla
bora
tive
gro
up
s
•
tea
che
r la
ngua
ge
•
use
of
moth
er
tongu
e o
r b
est la
ngua
ge t
o d
eve
lop idea
s a
nd initia
l p
lan
s.
Kn
ow
ing
th
e leve
l of
aptitu
de
of
a p
art
icu
lar
learn
er
allo
ws a
nu
mber
of
sm
all
ste
ps t
o b
e in
corp
ora
ted
into
th
e le
arn
ing
pro
ce
ss s
o th
ey
ca
n w
ork
tow
ard
s m
aste
ry w
hile
rece
ivin
g c
on
str
uctive f
ee
dba
ck o
n a
ll a
ttem
pts
. T
em
pla
tes m
ay
be
de
sig
ned
for
part
icula
r ta
sks,
with
qu
ite a
larg
e
am
ou
nt
of de
tail
pro
vid
ed
in th
e fir
st le
vel th
at
dim
inis
he
s o
ve
r tim
e a
s t
he
le
arn
er
begin
s to g
rasp
th
e r
eq
uir
em
en
ts o
f th
e t
ask. S
uch a
n e
xa
mp
le
ma
y be a
te
mp
late
for
wri
ting
up
a s
cie
nce e
xp
erim
ent,
wh
ere
ke
y te
rms a
nd p
hra
se
s a
re g
ive
n in a
gra
phic
org
aniz
er
that
ca
n b
e u
se
d u
ntil th
ey
are
in
tern
aliz
ed
by t
he
learn
er
an
d th
e f
orm
at
ca
n b
e c
om
ple
ted w
ith
out th
e s
caff
old
ing.
16/20
Rea
din
g s
ectio
ns f
or
jigsaw
to p
rin
t or
inclu
de
in
the
wo
rkb
ook:
Sourc
e:
Learn
ing d
ivers
ity in the I
nte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es: S
pecia
l e
ducation
al n
ee
ds w
ithin
the Inte
rnational B
accala
ure
ate
pro
gra
mm
es, pag
e 5
-7
Exte
nd
ing
learn
ing
As le
arn
ers
pro
gre
ss t
hro
ugh
th
e y
ears
, th
ey a
re r
equ
ired to
re
ad a
nd w
rite
in
cre
asin
gly
so
phis
ticate
d te
xts
in
the c
onte
nt a
rea
s o
f th
e
curr
icu
lum
. T
he
acade
mic
la
ngu
ag
e o
f su
ch t
exts
re
fle
cts
:
•
the c
om
ple
xity
and a
bstr
action
of
the
con
ce
pts
th
at le
arn
ers
are
re
qu
ire
d to u
nd
ers
tan
d
•
the in
cre
ased
de
nsity o
f lo
w-f
reque
ncy a
nd t
echn
ical vo
cab
ula
ry,
mu
ch o
f w
hic
h c
om
es fro
m L
atin a
nd
Gre
ek s
ou
rce
s (
for
exa
mp
le,
ph
oto
synth
esis
, re
vo
lutio
n)
•
the in
cre
asin
gly
so
phis
tica
ted g
ram
matica
l con
str
uctio
ns (
for
exam
ple
, th
e p
assiv
e v
oic
e).
Te
achers
ca
n h
elp
le
arn
ers
exte
nd
th
eir le
arn
ing b
y co
mb
inin
g h
igh e
xp
ecta
tion
s w
ith n
um
ero
us o
pp
ort
un
itie
s for
learn
er-
ce
ntr
ed
pra
ctice a
nd
inte
ractio
n w
ith c
og
nitiv
ely
ric
h m
ate
ria
ls a
nd e
xp
erie
nces.
Le
arn
ers
wh
o r
ead e
xte
nsiv
ely
, b
oth
in
sid
e a
nd
ou
tsid
e a
n I
B p
rog
ram
me,
ha
ve f
ar
gre
ate
r opp
ort
un
itie
s to
exte
nd t
he
ir a
cad
em
ic la
ng
ua
ge a
nd
con
ce
pts
th
an t
ho
se
wh
ose
read
ing
is lim
ite
d.
Th
e p
rovis
ion o
f o
pp
ort
un
itie
s t
o
exp
eri
ence
th
e e
njo
ym
ent
of re
ad
ing, a
nd t
o b
e a
ware
of
a w
ide r
an
ge o
f g
en
res f
or
wri
ting
, are
cru
cia
l to
de
velo
pin
g s
tud
ent
learn
ing
. T
he u
se
of
assis
tive t
ech
nolo
gy a
nd
soft
ware
ena
ble
s le
arn
ers
with la
ngu
age issue
s to
access m
ate
rial th
ey c
an
en
ga
ge
with m
eta
cog
nitiv
ely
.
17/20
Ach
iev
ing
a “
1 t
o 7
” g
rad
e u
sin
g s
ub
ject
cri
teri
a
Pag
es 9
1-9
2 o
f M
YP
- F
rom
Pri
ncip
les into
Pra
ctice (
201
4)
info
rm p
ractitio
ners
about
usin
g p
rofe
ssio
na
l ju
dgm
ent
to d
ete
rmin
e a
fin
al gra
de.
This
do
cum
ent
is inte
nde
d t
o c
rea
te a
pra
ctical exam
ple
for
coord
inato
rs t
o u
se t
o info
rm t
heir
colle
ag
ue
s o
n h
ow
th
ey
are
to
arr
ive a
t a f
ina
l ju
dgm
en
t.
Ultim
ate
ly,
the f
ina
l
judg
me
nt com
es d
ow
n t
o a
te
ach
er’s p
rofe
ssio
na
l ju
dg
men
t th
roug
h e
mp
loym
en
t of
a b
es
t-fi
t ap
pro
ach.
The b
est-
fit
appro
ach
is w
here
teach
ers
ap
ply
a f
ina
l
judg
me
nt
from
th
e M
YP
cri
teri
a.
T
each
ers
should
consult d
ata
fr
om
form
ative
asse
ssm
ent
(oft
en kep
t se
para
te),
su
mm
ative a
sse
ssm
ent
gra
de bo
ok
(exam
ple
belo
w),
an
d a
lso
facto
r in
the
follo
win
g:
Ch
an
gin
g p
att
ern
s o
f p
erf
orm
ance (
such a
s i
ncre
asin
g s
uccess),
consis
tency
of
results a
nd
mitig
atin
g
facto
rs.
Belo
w is a
sam
ple
of
a t
eacher’s g
rade
boo
k f
or
her
sum
mative
assessm
en
t ta
sks (
form
ative
tasks s
uch a
s q
uiz
ze
s,
dis
cu
ssio
ns,
gro
up
work
, hom
ew
ork
, exit
ticke
ts e
tc. w
ould
be
record
ed e
lse
wh
ere
and k
ep
t as e
vid
ence o
f th
e learn
ing)
an
d tha
t te
ache
r’s r
ation
ale
for
their f
inal ju
dgm
ents
.
There
were
four
sum
mative
assessm
en
t ta
sks in
the t
erm
th
at
we
re u
se
d t
o a
sse
ss a
fin
al gra
de.
Th
ey
we
re:
an
exte
nded-r
esp
onse u
nit t
est
tha
t asse
ssed
Cri
teri
on A
, B
an
d D
; a
n e
ssa
y th
at
asse
sse
d c
rite
rio
n A
, B
an
d C
; a g
rou
p p
roje
ct
that
asse
ssed c
rite
rio
n A
and D
; a
nd a
pre
se
nta
tio
n t
hat
assessed c
rite
rio
n
A, C
and
D.
C
rite
ria
A
Cri
teri
a
B
Cri
teri
a C
C
rite
ria
D
(Unit Test Oct 18th)
(Essay Dec. 5th)
(Group Project Jan 20th )
(Presentation Feb 1st)
A(O
vera
ll
Ju
dg
men
t)
(Unit Test Oct 18th)
(Essay – Dec. 5th)
B (
Ov
era
ll
Ju
dg
me
nt)
(Essay Dec. 5th)
(Group Project Jan 20th )
(Presentation Feb 1st)
C (
Ov
era
ll
Ju
dg
me
nt)
(Unit Test Oct 18th)
(Group Project Jan 20th )
(Presentation Feb 1st)
D (
Ov
era
ll
Ju
dg
men
t)
Tota
l (G
rade
Bo
undari
es)
IB “
1 t
o 7
” G
rade
Ali
4
6
7
7
7
5
6
5
8
7
7
7
4
6
6
6
25
6
Jua
n
7
3*
8
7
7
6
4*
5
7
3*
7
7
8
7
8
8
27
6
Zo
ya
6
5
4
4
4
6
4
5
5
5
3
5
4
4
4
4
18
4
Yin
2
3
5
5
5
2
5
5
2
4
4
4
2
6
6
6
20
5
Ann
2
7
7
3
6
3
4
4
3
5
3
4
6
6
3
4
18
4
18/20
To m
ake
her
final
jud
gm
en
t, t
he
te
acher
looked
at
the I
B r
ubrics t
o a
pply
th
e b
est
fit
ap
pro
ach.
In a
dd
itio
n t
o t
he s
um
mative
gra
de
s a
bo
ve,
sh
e a
lso
consu
lte
d h
er
form
ative a
ssessm
ent
da
ta a
nd p
attern
s o
f achie
vem
ent
(im
pro
vem
ent
an
d c
onsis
tency)
an
d m
itig
atin
g f
acto
rs u
niq
ue t
o s
tude
nt
cir
cum
sta
nce.
He
re a
re h
er
jud
gm
ents
*:
o
Ali
is a
stu
de
nt
wh
o c
onsis
tently perf
orm
ed w
ell
in a
ll cri
teria.
S
he s
ho
wed
sig
nific
an
t im
pro
vem
ent
in C
rite
rio
n A
thro
ug
ho
ut
the t
erm
. A
fte
r consu
ltin
g t
he r
ub
ric,
the
te
acher
wa
s s
atisfied t
hat L
eve
l 7 w
as the
be
st fit fo
r de
scrib
ing A
nn’s
abili
ty in t
hat
dom
ain
.
o
Ju
an
had
a f
am
ily em
erg
ency at
the tim
e of
his
Essa
y.
A
co
nscie
ntio
us s
tuden
t, he
subm
itte
d a
p
ap
er
that
wa
s b
elo
w h
is no
rmal
sta
nd
ard
.
Form
ative a
sse
ssm
ents
(w
ork
do
ne i
n c
lass)
lead
ing u
p t
o a
nd
as p
art
of
the e
ssa
y sh
ow
th
at
he h
as e
xcelle
nt
know
led
ge a
nd u
nders
tand
ing.
The
te
acher
was s
atisfied t
hat
Juan
’s e
merg
en
cy
wa
s a
mitig
atin
g f
acto
r and
the r
ubri
c d
escribed
his
overa
ll a
bili
ty in t
hose
dom
ain
s.
Th
e t
eacher
co
uld
ea
sily
justify
th
at
Ju
an w
as a
le
ve
l 7
stu
de
nt
ove
rall.
o
Zo
ya s
tart
ed
the t
erm
we
ll but
he
r in
tere
st
in s
cho
ol a
nd
th
e q
ualit
y of
wo
rk h
as b
een d
eclin
ing.
By
ap
ply
ing t
he
be
st-
fit
appro
ach
, th
e t
eacher
co
uld
no
t con
fid
ently ju
stify
th
e d
escri
ptio
ns in
the
hig
her
levels
, a
nd s
o lo
we
r le
ve
ls w
ere
aw
ard
ed in m
ost case
s.
o
Yin
was a
ne
w s
tud
ent
to t
he M
YP
. H
er
earl
ier
wo
rk w
as w
eak b
ut
she h
as s
ho
wn
sig
nific
ant
impro
vem
en
t in
all
are
as.
The
teacher
was c
onfident
that
Yin
has le
arn
ed
the m
ate
ria
l an
d t
here
fore
cho
se t
o f
ocus o
n d
escri
pto
rs that
refle
cte
d Y
in’s
mo
re r
ecent
perf
orm
an
ce.
o
An
n h
ad a
mix
of
good g
rades a
nd w
eak o
ne
s.
Her
gro
up p
roje
ct1
and e
ssa
y w
ere
of
hig
h q
ua
lity
but
the
test
and p
resenta
tion w
ere
of
poor
qua
lity.
A
nn w
as a
sked s
om
e q
uestions a
bo
ut
her
essa
y w
hic
h s
he
str
ug
gle
d t
o a
nsw
er.
T
he b
est-
fit
appro
ach
le
d t
he t
each
er
to t
he
con
clu
sio
n t
hat
the
score
s o
n t
he t
est a
nd p
resenta
tio
n w
ere
more
accura
te d
escri
pto
rs o
f A
nn
’s a
bili
tie
s.
Wha
t w
ould
yo
u c
ho
ose?
*Ple
as
e n
ote
th
at
it i
s n
ot
an
exp
ecta
tio
n t
hat
teach
ers
do
cu
men
t ju
sti
fic
ati
on
s f
or
their
ju
dg
men
ts.
1 A
ccord
ing t
o t
he g
uid
e M
YP
: F
rom
Pri
ncip
les into
Pra
ctice (
20
14):
“te
achers
need to d
ocu
ment
care
fully
th
e in
put of in
div
iduals
work
ing in a
gro
up s
itu
ation s
o th
at th
e
achie
vem
ent le
vels
for
indiv
idu
al stu
dents
can b
e d
ete
rmin
ed”
(p. 84).
19/20
Goal – choose one Merge with your SoI
Your task is to __________________________ The goal is to ________________________ The problem or challenge is ________________ The obstacles to overcome are ___________________
Role– choose one
You are _________________ You have been asked to_____________________ Your job is__________________
Audience– choose one
Your clients are __________________ Your target audience is _______________ You need to convince ________________
Situation– choose one
The context you find yourself in is _____________________ The challenge involves dealing with __________________________
Product– choose one
You will create a _____________ in order to _______________ You need to develop ___________________ so that __________________
20/20
