Elizabeth Final Reflection

Focus on a specific assessment task in your school. Describe the assessment and discuss its effectiveness

In the Sec 2 Lit classes in PLMGS, an alternative mode of assessment required the students to engage in  project where they creatively engaged with the text of “Merchant of Venice”. There were several options the students could choose from. In one option, students could create a family tree, linking the characters together in an organized manner and giving  detailed character descriptions. In another option, students were given four scenarios from the text (one example: Shylock’s daughter running away with his money). Students would then design and create a newspaper with these four scenarios.

These projects allowed students to explore the text in greater depth, based on prior knowledge as well as in their own discoveries. The creation of the family tree, for instance, employed characterization skills, which had been partly covered in class, but also required them to read the text in further detail. By putting these information down into a family tree, it helps students to organize their thoughts and what they know about the characters in  a more systematic manner. The newspaper reports employed students creative juices and also developed  their writing styles. I was impressed that some students were able to write in the style very similar to that of a journalist, making the newspaper article very convincing and believable. While there were some groups of students who gave substandard work, most groups put in a lot of effort in drawing out information from the text and presenting it in their own creative methods.

The projects were graded according to the rubric that consisted of 5 categories: (i) Content (ii) Creativity and style (iii) Analysis of characters/events                     (iv) Presentation of project (v) Teamwork. While this rubric seems comprehensive and “covers all grounds”, I realized that it was not so when I was tasked to grade the projects.

Firstly, the “teamwork” component was  rather unclear, as it could not be seen overtly if everyone in the group had done their share of work. For this component, I would improve it by getting students to do a “Peer Evaluation” form, so that, as a teacher, I would be made more aware, should there be free loaders in a group.

Secondly, the different projects demanded different skills, the universal rubric was not as applicable to some projects. For instance, for the group doing the family tree (which only required them to link characters and do a character description), “content” was not part of their assignment. As such, when it came to the grading of the “content” section, it became rather ambiguous. The rubric, hence, was not universal, and could not be used accurately for each project that had been given to students as options they could choose from. For such a task, where there are options of the kinds of projects that students want to embark on, perhaps, a rubric for each option of project would give the project a more accurate assessment.