Writing Score 2.0 Ravalli County Curriculum Consortium August 13, 2009 Marzano Research Laboratory - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


Title: Writing Score 2.0 Ravalli County Curriculum Consortium August 13, 2009 Marzano Research Laboratory


1
Writing Score 2.0Ravalli County Curriculum
ConsortiumAugust 13, 2009Marzano Research
Laboratory
  • We have defined what the student should be able
    to do.
  • What if they cant do it all?

2
Score 3.0
  • The rubric uses a 4 point scale
  • 3.0 represents what you want the student to know
    and be able to do
  • This means that a student can do all of the
    processes and knows all of the knowledge that was
    explicitly taught over the course of a unit

3
Score 2.0
  • 2.0 means the student gets and can do the simpler
    details and processes that were taught
  • But, the student is not able to do the more
    complex processes and does not know the more
    complex information
  • So, the student gets and can do the simpler
    stuff, but not the harder stuff

4
Applying the taxonomy to writing Score 2.0
  • Generally, Score 2.0 items will fall into the
    Retrieval level
  • However, it depends on the grade level and skills
    or knowledge being assessed
  • The rule is that the 2.0 is a simpler level or
    process than the 3.0

5
Writing Score 2.0
  • Score 2.0 is derived from score 3.0
  • They are simpler details and processes associated
    with the score 3.0 elements
  • Score 2.0s either identify necessary components
    of the score 3.0 (foundational knowledge) or
    simpler versions of the score 3.0
  • In most cases, you want a 2.0 element for each
    3.0 element

6
Writing Score 2.0
  • Score 2.0s use the following stem
  • There are no major errors or omissions regarding
    the simpler details and processes as the student
  • recognizes or recalls basic terminology such as

7
Terminology
  • At this step, define the basic vocabulary that
    the student needs to know
  • Complete the rubric by listing samples of the
    vocabulary appropriate to understand the Score
    3.0 content
  • Not every rubric has to have vocabulary

8
Score 2.0 Elements
  • 2 types of knowledge
  • Procedural
  • Knowing how to do something
  • Declarative
  • Knowing something
  • If the Score 3.0 is procedural, than the 2.0
    should be as well
  • If the Score 3.0 is declarative, then the Score
    2.0 is declarative

9
4 Techniques for Writing Procedural Score 2.0
  1. Use the hierarchy of procedural knowledge
  2. Behavioral Scale using prompts
  3. Performing the steps of a procedure
  4. Procedural Declarative

10
1. Using the Hierarchy
  • Procedural knowledge has a hierarchy
  • Processes
  • Macroprocedures
  • Skills
  • Tactics
  • Algorithms
  • Single Rules

11
The Hierarchy of Procedural Knowledge
  • Macroprocedures
  • Highly complex procedures, with many
    subcomponents
  • Tactics
  • Complex procedure, with fewer subcomponents
  • Algorithms
  • Procedures with very specific steps and very
    specific outcomes
  • Single rules
  • One step procedure, one IF-THEN rule

12
Using the Hierarchy
  • When you write procedural 2.0s, you may move
    down the hierarchy from the procedural 3.0
  • If the 3.0 involves a macroprocedure
  • For example Write a short constructed response
  • You may move to a lower complexity procedure,
    like an algorithm
  • For example complete a graphic organizer of a
    short constructed response

13
2. Behavioral Procedures
  • When the procedure is behavioral in nature, you
    may choose to use a slightly different form of
    the scale
  • Score 4.0 performs the procedure in a new
    context or assists others in performing the
    procedure
  • Score 3.0 - performs the procedure independently
    without prompting
  • Score 2.0 performs the procedure with a group
    or class prompt
  • Score 1.0 performs the procedure with an
    individual prompt

14
3. Performing the steps of a procedure
  • When the student is performing a skill that is
    the sum of a set of steps performed fluently
  • Score 3.0 could be that the student performs the
    skill fluently (e.g., long division, throwing a
    football)
  • Score 2.0 could be that the student performs the
    steps of the procedure in isolation (e.g.,
    performs the steps of long division or thorwing a
    football one at a time but cannot put it together
    and do it fluently )

15
4. Procedural Declarative
  • If the procedure is so simple that it cannot be
    broken down any further, the 2.0 could be that
    the student knows information about the procedure
  • Score 3.0 the student does long division
  • Score 2.0 the step lists the steps to long
    division
  • This could also be true when writing Score 4.0
    Declarative knowledge about the procedure could
    be used to go above and beyond

16
Declarative 2.0
  • Generally, declarative score 3.0 is written at
    the Comprehension, Analysis or Knowledge
    Utilization level
  • Then, the corresponding score 2.0 will be at the
    Retrieval level
  • Typically, Score 2.0 is written as
  • recognizing or recalling accurate statements
    about
  • recognizing or recalling examples of

17
Score 4.0 Elements
  • Score 4.0 elements involve anything that a
    student does that is above and beyond what is
    taught in class
  • This can include finding out new information,
    making new generalizations from learned
    knowledge, applying the information in a new way
    and demonstrating knowledge in a way that is more
    than what is expected from other students or
    ANYTHING above and beyond what was taught

18
  • Include score 4.0 in the rubric
  • Dont include score 4.0 in the rubric

Pros Cons
Puts emphasis on learning beyond what was taught by setting a target for the student Provides guidance for gifted student and teachers of gifted students Makes assessment clear for the teacher Tendency to limit student and teacher to what rubric says, easy to forget that element is only a suggestion Rubric is designed to limit and focus instruction at the score 3.0 and 2.0 level use of the rubric shouldnt change in the middle
Pros Cons
Allows student and teacher to use creativity to design task/assessment Doesnt limit student and teacher to only what is written on the rubric Allows for just about anything to be used to demonstrate knowledge Lack of guidance may cause teachers to forget gifted students May limit the use of the rubric to only score 3.0 and 2.0 Teachers may have difficulty assessing a demonstration of knowledge that is not clearly defined by the rubric
19
  • If the district decides to include score 4.0, it
    must be made very clear, in the rubric and in
    implementation training, that the included
    elements ARE ONLY SUGGESTIONS!
  • Students must have the guidance and opportunity
    to go above and beyond in any way that the
    teacher approves

20
  • Questions, comments, concerns?
View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Writing Score 2.0 Ravalli County Curriculum Consortium August 13, 2009 Marzano Research Laboratory

Description:

Title: Writing Score 2.0 Author: Lindsay Carleton Last modified by: David Yanoski Created Date: 11/11/2008 9:22:41 PM Document presentation format – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:32
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: LindsayC7
Learn more at: http://ravallicurriculum.pbworks.com
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Writing Score 2.0 Ravalli County Curriculum Consortium August 13, 2009 Marzano Research Laboratory


1
Writing Score 2.0Ravalli County Curriculum
ConsortiumAugust 13, 2009Marzano Research
Laboratory
  • We have defined what the student should be able
    to do.
  • What if they cant do it all?

2
Score 3.0
  • The rubric uses a 4 point scale
  • 3.0 represents what you want the student to know
    and be able to do
  • This means that a student can do all of the
    processes and knows all of the knowledge that was
    explicitly taught over the course of a unit

3
Score 2.0
  • 2.0 means the student gets and can do the simpler
    details and processes that were taught
  • But, the student is not able to do the more
    complex processes and does not know the more
    complex information
  • So, the student gets and can do the simpler
    stuff, but not the harder stuff

4
Applying the taxonomy to writing Score 2.0
  • Generally, Score 2.0 items will fall into the
    Retrieval level
  • However, it depends on the grade level and skills
    or knowledge being assessed
  • The rule is that the 2.0 is a simpler level or
    process than the 3.0

5
Writing Score 2.0
  • Score 2.0 is derived from score 3.0
  • They are simpler details and processes associated
    with the score 3.0 elements
  • Score 2.0s either identify necessary components
    of the score 3.0 (foundational knowledge) or
    simpler versions of the score 3.0
  • In most cases, you want a 2.0 element for each
    3.0 element

6
Writing Score 2.0
  • Score 2.0s use the following stem
  • There are no major errors or omissions regarding
    the simpler details and processes as the student
  • recognizes or recalls basic terminology such as

7
Terminology
  • At this step, define the basic vocabulary that
    the student needs to know
  • Complete the rubric by listing samples of the
    vocabulary appropriate to understand the Score
    3.0 content
  • Not every rubric has to have vocabulary

8
Score 2.0 Elements
  • 2 types of knowledge
  • Procedural
  • Knowing how to do something
  • Declarative
  • Knowing something
  • If the Score 3.0 is procedural, than the 2.0
    should be as well
  • If the Score 3.0 is declarative, then the Score
    2.0 is declarative

9
4 Techniques for Writing Procedural Score 2.0
  1. Use the hierarchy of procedural knowledge
  2. Behavioral Scale using prompts
  3. Performing the steps of a procedure
  4. Procedural Declarative

10
1. Using the Hierarchy
  • Procedural knowledge has a hierarchy
  • Processes
  • Macroprocedures
  • Skills
  • Tactics
  • Algorithms
  • Single Rules

11
The Hierarchy of Procedural Knowledge
  • Macroprocedures
  • Highly complex procedures, with many
    subcomponents
  • Tactics
  • Complex procedure, with fewer subcomponents
  • Algorithms
  • Procedures with very specific steps and very
    specific outcomes
  • Single rules
  • One step procedure, one IF-THEN rule

12
Using the Hierarchy
  • When you write procedural 2.0s, you may move
    down the hierarchy from the procedural 3.0
  • If the 3.0 involves a macroprocedure
  • For example Write a short constructed response
  • You may move to a lower complexity procedure,
    like an algorithm
  • For example complete a graphic organizer of a
    short constructed response

13
2. Behavioral Procedures
  • When the procedure is behavioral in nature, you
    may choose to use a slightly different form of
    the scale
  • Score 4.0 performs the procedure in a new
    context or assists others in performing the
    procedure
  • Score 3.0 - performs the procedure independently
    without prompting
  • Score 2.0 performs the procedure with a group
    or class prompt
  • Score 1.0 performs the procedure with an
    individual prompt

14
3. Performing the steps of a procedure
  • When the student is performing a skill that is
    the sum of a set of steps performed fluently
  • Score 3.0 could be that the student performs the
    skill fluently (e.g., long division, throwing a
    football)
  • Score 2.0 could be that the student performs the
    steps of the procedure in isolation (e.g.,
    performs the steps of long division or thorwing a
    football one at a time but cannot put it together
    and do it fluently )

15
4. Procedural Declarative
  • If the procedure is so simple that it cannot be
    broken down any further, the 2.0 could be that
    the student knows information about the procedure
  • Score 3.0 the student does long division
  • Score 2.0 the step lists the steps to long
    division
  • This could also be true when writing Score 4.0
    Declarative knowledge about the procedure could
    be used to go above and beyond

16
Declarative 2.0
  • Generally, declarative score 3.0 is written at
    the Comprehension, Analysis or Knowledge
    Utilization level
  • Then, the corresponding score 2.0 will be at the
    Retrieval level
  • Typically, Score 2.0 is written as
  • recognizing or recalling accurate statements
    about
  • recognizing or recalling examples of

17
Score 4.0 Elements
  • Score 4.0 elements involve anything that a
    student does that is above and beyond what is
    taught in class
  • This can include finding out new information,
    making new generalizations from learned
    knowledge, applying the information in a new way
    and demonstrating knowledge in a way that is more
    than what is expected from other students or
    ANYTHING above and beyond what was taught

18
  • Include score 4.0 in the rubric
  • Dont include score 4.0 in the rubric

Pros Cons
Puts emphasis on learning beyond what was taught by setting a target for the student Provides guidance for gifted student and teachers of gifted students Makes assessment clear for the teacher Tendency to limit student and teacher to what rubric says, easy to forget that element is only a suggestion Rubric is designed to limit and focus instruction at the score 3.0 and 2.0 level use of the rubric shouldnt change in the middle
Pros Cons
Allows student and teacher to use creativity to design task/assessment Doesnt limit student and teacher to only what is written on the rubric Allows for just about anything to be used to demonstrate knowledge Lack of guidance may cause teachers to forget gifted students May limit the use of the rubric to only score 3.0 and 2.0 Teachers may have difficulty assessing a demonstration of knowledge that is not clearly defined by the rubric
19
  • If the district decides to include score 4.0, it
    must be made very clear, in the rubric and in
    implementation training, that the included
    elements ARE ONLY SUGGESTIONS!
  • Students must have the guidance and opportunity
    to go above and beyond in any way that the
    teacher approves

20
  • Questions, comments, concerns?
About PowerShow.com