Taxonomic Levels

1
Taxonomic Levels And Rubrics
2
Desired Outcomes

• An awareness of taxonomic levels and its purpose
• An awareness of the relationship of HCPS III
  benchmarks and taxonomic levels
• An opportunity to match benchmarks and tasks to
  the taxonomic levels
• An awareness of various types of performance
  assessment rubrics

3

• Why do I need to know the taxonomic levels?
• Aligning our instruction and assessment to the
  targets.

4

• Alignment congruence or match between
  curriculum, instruction and assessment

What
How
How Well
5
Research on Aligning

• curriculum with standards and assessment shows a
  strong relationship to student achievement.
• (Prince-Baugh, 1997 Mitchell, 1998 Wishnick,
  1989)

6
Standards Implementation Process Model
Student involvement throughout the process.
Teacher collaboration throughout the process.
Identify relevant content standards
Determine acceptable evidence and criteria
Determine learning experiences that will enable
students to learn what they need to know and to do
Teach and collect evidence of student learning
Assess student work to inform instruction or use
data to provide feedback
Evaluate student work and make judgment on
learning results and communicate findings
Reteach, or repeat the process with the next set
of relevant standards
Adapted from WestEds Learning from Assessment
7
All targets, curriculum, instruction, activities
and assessments involve some level of thinking.
Taxonomy

• Definition the science or technique of
  classification

8
Cognition Type

• or cognitive demand - generally refers to a
  taxonomy and reflects a classification of
  thinking rather than a sequential hierarchy.
• (understanding prior to application and
  analysis)
• Cognitive demand is determined by analyzing the
  context of the lesson.
• (What support is provided and what are the
  students being asked to do?)

9
Adapt or adopt a systematic method for assigning
performance expectations. McREL

• Taxonomy of objectives a system for identifying
  distinct levels of difficulty.
• Blooms
• Guilfords
• Three-Story Intellect
• Marzanos

10
Marzanos Taxonomic Levels

• Level 1 Retrieval - recall, execution
• Level 2 Comprehension - integrating,
  representation, symbolizing
• Level 3 Analysis - matching, classifying, error
  analysis, generalizing, specifying
• Level 4 Utilization - decision making, problem
  solving,experimental inquiry, investigation

11
Not used with performance standards, but part of
taxonomy

• Level 5 Metacognitive System - goal setting,
  process monitoring, monitoring clarity,
  monitoring accuracy
• Level 6 Self System - examining importance,
  examining efficacy, examining emotional response,
  examining motivation.
• Adapted from Marzano (2001). Designing A New
  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.

12
The Three Systems and Knowledge
New Task

• Self-System
• Decides to engage

Continue current behavior

• Metacognitive System
• Sets goals and strategies

• Cognitive System
• Processes relevant information

Knowledge
13
Marzanos Taxonomic Levels (Cognitive System)
Level IV Level III Level II Level I
Knowledge Utilization Analysis Comprehension Knowledge Retrieval
Use ___ to determine ___ Judge the validity of ___ Use___ to solve Generate/Test hypotheses Analyze using evidence Investigate Compare/ contrast Differentiate Categorize Find what is common among Categorize Determine reasonableness of information Predict Determine what comes next/later Describe and explain Explain the concept Demonstrate and explain Diagram Illustrate/ describe how ___ is related to ___ Represent Recognize Select from a list Recall Give/Provide examples List Name Read Perform mathematical operation (by following a set algorithm)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Standards Implementation Process Model
Evaluate Student Work and Make Judgment on
Learning Results and Communicate Findings
Ï
Assess Student Work to Inform Instruction or
Use Data to Provide Feedback
Î
Teach and Collect Evidence of Student
learning
Í
Congruence of Content, Context Cognitive Demand
Determine Learning Experiences that will
Enable Students to Learn what they need to
Know Do

Determine Acceptable Evidence and Criteria

Identify Relevant Standards
?
16
Lets Identify Taxonomic Levels

• Retrieve (Marzano)
• Recognize, Recall, Execute
• Comprehension
• Integrate, Symbolize
• Analysis
• Match, Classify, Analyze, Generalize, Specify
• Knowledge Utilization
• Decision Making, Problem Solving, Inquire
  Experimentally, Investigate

17
Topic Cells, Tissues, Organs, and Organ Systems
Benchmark BS.4.1 Describe different cell parts and their functions.
Level 1 - Knowledge Retrieval
Topic The Universe
Benchmark ES.8.10 Compare different theories concerning the formation of the universe.
Level 3 - Analysis
18
Drill and Practice

• Work with your table group
• Read each card
• Group by taxonomic level

19
Level of thinking helps determine the appropriate
assessment method
20
Analyze plot, setting, characterization, or
conflict to interpret theme in a literary text.

• Describe the setting of the story.
• Explain how the author uses his characters to
  convey a message.
• Compare the plot of this story to the plot of the
  previous story.
• Chooses a literary element (e.g., conflict).
  Describes how the author treats this element in
  the story. Assess how this element relates to the
  theme.

21
Knowing a taxonomy also helps in

• scaffolding instruction.

Create
Compare
Explain
Identify
22
Three Tiers of Skill and Assessment Work
Thanks to Heidi Hayes Jacobs

• Drill Practice
• Rehearsal Scrimmage
• Authentic Performance

23
The level of thinking in the benchmark is the
level of thinking required to meet
proficiency.
24
Balanced Assessment Model
25
Performance Assessment is

• an assessment (product or performance) based on
  observation and judgment about its quality.
• the activities, problems, projects, and
  assignments students are asked to perform.
• anything from a special task at the end of
  instruction as in a culminating event, or
  naturally occurring events during regular
  instruction.

26
The Importance of Criteria

• Teachers frequently ask the wrong question
  first What do we do? - putting the focus
  immediately on designing tasks - when they need
  to ask, What do we want kids to know and be able
  to do? How well? What does quality look like?
  We need to ask these questions very clearly
  first.
• Mike Hibbard, Education Update, 38(4). p.5, ASCD,
  June, 1996.

27
To Know Criteria Requires ...

• Being exposed to the criteria from the beginning
  of instruction.
• Having terms defined. (lots of details)
• Samples of strong and weak performances.
• Practice with feedback using the vocabulary of
  the criteria.
• Focused revision of work.
• Practice articulating the vocabulary for quality
  and applying it to many situations.
• Instruction consciously focused on subparts of
  the criteria.
• Judy Arter, ATI

28
What is a Rubric?

• A scoring guide designed to provide constructive
  feedback to students
• Designed to show how important elements of a task
  would look in a progression from less well
  developed to exceptional along a continuum
  (Tomlinson, 2003).
• A Latin word that means red.

29
A Rubric
Dimensions (essential qualities) Continuum
(Scale) Descriptors of points on the scale
Work samples illustrating those points.
30
Holistic Rubrics

• Holistic rubrics have one performance expectation
  description at each numerical level on the
  rubric.
• The product or performance is evaluated as a
  whole, and given a single score.
• Used to obtain the overall impression of the
  quality of a performance or product. (Wiggins
  and McTighe, 1999)

31
Holistic Rubrics

• Quicker to write and to use.
• Summative because they evaluate work at the end
  of the process.
• Fails to communicate to students, especially low
  performing students, what their shortcomings are

32
Holistic Rubric Example Fiction Writing Content
Rubric

• 5 The plot, setting, and characters are
  developed fully and organized well. The who,
  what, where, when, and why are explained using
  interesting language and sufficient detail.
• 4 Most parts of the story mentioned in a score
  of 5 above are developed and organized well. A
  couple of aspects may need to be more fully or
  more interestingly developed.
• 3 Some aspects of the story are developed and
  organized well, but not as much detail or
  organization is expressed as in a score of 4.
• 2 A few parts of the story are developed
  somewhat. Organization and language usage need
  improvement.
• 1 Parts of the story are addressed without
  attention to detail or organization.

33
Analytical Rubrics

• Use multiple descriptors for each criterion
  evaluated.
• Type of task analysis where teachers award
  points on a criterion-by-criterion basis.
• Described as teaching rubrics because their
  design helps students improve their own
  performance.

34
Analytic Rubric Example Fiction Writing Content
Rubric
Criteria 4 3 2 1
PLOT "What" and "Why" Both plot parts are fully developed. One of the plot parts is fully developed and the less developed part is at least addressed. Both plot parts are addressed but not fully developed. Neither plot parts are fully developed.
SETTING "When" and "Where" Both setting parts are fully developed. One of the setting parts is fully developed and the less developed part is at least addressed. Both setting parts of the story are addressed but not fully developed. Neither setting parts are developed.
CHARACTERS "Who" described by behavior, appearance, personality, and character traits The main characters are fully developed with much descriptive detail. The reader has a vivid image of the characters. The main characters are developed with some descriptive detail. The reader has a vague idea of the characters. The main characters are identified by name only None of the characters are developed or named.
35
Holistic or Analytical Trait

• Holistic
• Use
• Quick snapshot of overall status
• When speed of scoring is important
• Simple products or performances
• Disadvantages
• 2 students can get same score for different
  reasons
• Cant identify strengths weaknesses
• Not useful for students

• Analytical
• Use
• Planning instruction - show relative strengths
  weaknesses
• Details to teach student quality
• Detailed feedback
• Precision more important that speed
• Disadvantages
• Scoring is slower
• Takes longer to learn

36
Descriptive Terms for Differences in Degree

• Degrees of Understanding
• Degrees of Frequency
• Degrees of Effectiveness
• Degrees of Independence
• Degrees of Accuracy
• Degrees of Clarity

37
Descriptive Terms for Differences in Degrees
Understanding Frequency Accuracy Clarity
thorough/ complete consistently completely accurate exceptionally clear
substantial generally generally accurate generally clear
partial/ incomplete sometimes inaccurate lacks clarity
misunder-standing rarely major inaccuracies unclear
38
Options for Selecting Rubrics

• Create your own - build from scratch
• Adopt - use an existing rubric
• Adapt - Modify or combine existing rubrics
• Reword parts
• Drop or change one or more scales
• Omit irrelevant criteria
• Mix and Match rubrics
• Change a holistic rubric into an analytic rubric
• Modify for different grade levels

39
Guidelines for Rubrics

• Rubrics are effective when teachers utilize the
  following criteria
• Use specific numbers like 2 or 3 or more
  rather than vague words like some, many, or
  few.
• Use specific descriptors, rather than general
  descriptors like good or excellent.
• Use the vocabulary of the standards and
  benchmarks.
• State clear expectations for work so that all
  teachers, students, and parents know the criteria
  for quality and the requirements for earning a
  grade.
• Burke, 2006

40
Resources

• Anderson, L.,Krathwohl, D. et al. (2001). A
  Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing.
  New York Longman.
• Curriculum AssociatesAssessing Levels of
  Comprehension.
• Lewin, L. Shoemaker, B.J. (1998). Great
  Performances. Virginia ASCD.
• Marzano, R.J. (2001). Designing a New Taxonomy
  of Educational Objectives. Thousand Oaks Corwin
  Press.
• Popham, W. J. (2002). Classroom Assessment.
  Boston Allyn Bacon.
• Stiggins, R.J. et al. (2004). Classroom
  Assessment for Student Learning. Portland ATI.
• Wahlstrom, D. (2002). Designing Using High-
  Quality Paper-and-Pencil Tests. Virginia
  Successline.
• www.k12.wa.us/CurriculumInstruct/
  pubdocs/WERA/WERA2005_Webversion.pp
• http//www.stedwards.edu/cte/content/view/1536/49/