Module 5 Unit 2 Activity 2 - Thinking Like an Assessor

With backwards mapping we learned to start with the end in mind. We began by focusing on the standard and learning objectives, and then worked backwards to consider which assessments would be most appropriate to accurately measure the students’ understanding. The standard I chose, and the SMART learning objectives I created, are as follows:

Standard E1: Students understand common economic terms and concepts and economic reasoning. 
1. By the end of the unit students will be able to evaluate the relationship between scarcity and the need for choices and provide solutions to problems based on these concepts. 
2. By the end of the unit students will be able to make and justify economic decisions based on the concepts of marginal benefit and marginal cost.
3. By the end of the unit students will be able to identify the difference between monetary and non-monetary incentives and will be able to apply those concepts to realistic economic simulations. 

With the learning objectives in place we can focus on appropriate assessment methods. Assessments can be broken down into two broad categories: summative and formative. Summative assessments are generally given at the end of the unit to measure understanding and tend to be more high-stakes in nature, in that there is usually a grade attached. Formative assessments, on the other hand, are used during the unit to measure understanding and make necessary adjustments to teaching methods.

Summative Assessment
I want to be sure that my students have a very good grasp of all the learning objectives, and in particular I must make sure that they fully understand the concepts of scarcity/choices and marginal cost/benefit. The remainder of the economics course is built on these ideas, so it is vital that I can identify any students who are struggling. To this end I will be using a performance based summative assessment. Performance based assessments require more complex thinking and problem solving than a simple multiple choice test. Students have to use higher level thinking to demonstrate that they can apply classroom concepts to real world scenarios (SCOPE, 2014).

This unit will last for four weeks, so I will be asking my students to keep track of their spending for the entire month. At the end of the unit they will be asked to give a presentation to the class in which they analyze their spending over the course of that month. The students will have to justify the spending decisions they made by accurately using the concepts of scarcity/choices and marginal cost/benefit. The students will be asked to give an in-depth analysis of an expensive purchase that they made, or are thinking of making, in order to demonstrate their full understanding of the subject matter. They will also be asked to state how their views on spending money have changed based on what they learned in this unit. The assessment is given a raw score of fifty, and the rubric is as follows:

Category	Scoring Criteria	Total Points	Score
Organization    (10 points)	The presentation is on topic	5
	Information is presented in a logical sequence.	5
Content           (40 points)	Presentation accurately discusses scarcity and choices when reporting spending decisions	10
	Presentation accurately discusses marginal cost and marginal benefit when reporting spending decisions	10
	The purchase of at least one big ticket item is discussed in depth	10
	Presentation includes discussion of what students have learned from analysing their spending with the knowledge acquired in this unit.	10
Score	Total Points	50

This assessment aligns very well with the standard, and the first two SMART learning objectives that I developed to meet that standard. The first two objectives require students to evaluate the relationship between scarcity and choices, and make and justify economic decisions based on the principles of marginal cost/benefit. This assessment requires the students to do all those things, and will allow me to clearly see if they are meeting the objectives.

This assessment does not, however, address the third SMART objective, which requires students to identify monetary and non-monetary incentives and apply them to a simulation. It would be possible to cover all three objectives at once by simply giving the students a written test, but in order to push the students to use higher order thinking it is sometimes necessary to have different assessments for different learning objectives. I use a job-seeking simulation to assess the students on the third learning objective, but as we have been asked to only provide one assessment for this piece I won’t go into detail here. I will include more information in my unit plan.

Formative Assessment
It is important to monitor the students’ progress during the unit, and a formative assessment I have found to be effective is the 3-2-1 method. At the end of each week of the unit I distribute a piece of paper to each student. I ask them to write in detail three things that they learned that week, two things that they found particularly interesting, and most importantly, one question that they still have, or one concept that they are still unsure of. This can be assigned for homework, and it gives me a good read on how well the students are grasping the class material. The standard states that students should be able to understand common economic terms and concepts, and the first part of this formative assessment, where students outline three things they learned that week, helps me to see if they understand the concepts and are on target to meet the objectives. The second part, where students talk about areas of particular interest helps me think about possible differentiated assessment options, or possible enrichment assignments for gifted students. The third part helps me see where the students are struggling, and I can then plan review activities or adjust my teaching methods accordingly.

References:
SCOPE. (2014). What is performance based assessment? Retrieved January 13, 2018, from https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/library/publications