Calibrating Standards in the Assessment of Recitals

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Karl Donert, National Teaching Fellow HERODOT Project coordinator HERODOT: Benchmarking Geography.
Advertisements

Qualifications Update: National 5 Music Qualifications Update: National 5 Music.
Introducing Unit Specifications and Unit Assessment Support Packs Classical Studies National 3, 4 and 5.
Feedback sessions - Helping first year students get the most out of assessment and feedback Sue R Whittle & Linda B Bonnett Faculty of Biological Sciences.
Access to HE Diploma Grading. The Access to HE grading model unit grading all level 3 units (level 2 units will not be graded) no aggregate or single.
Developing consistency of teacher judgment Module 2.
Brunel University Briefing for External Examiners February 2013
Aim to provide key guidance on assessment practice and translate this into writing assignments.
Consistency of Assessment
Assessment practices: Quality and standards. Assessment and the assurance of academic standards The assurance of academic standards embraces a wide range.
Empowering Staff Through Institute Planning (ESTIP) Executive Workshop Institute Name: XXXXXX Presenter: XXXXXX Date: XXXXXX.
Teachers New to NCEA Workshop New Zealand education system receives international praise In 2011, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and.
Introducing Unit Specifications and Unit Assessment Support Packs National 5 and Higher.
1 Making sound teacher judgments and moderating them Moderation for Primary Teachers Owhata School Staff meeting 26 September 2011.
Programme Objectives Analyze the main components of a competency-based qualification system (e.g., Singapore Workforce Skills) Analyze the process and.
Introducing Unit Specifications and Unit Assessment Support Packs National 3, 4 and 5.
Rubrics Staff development workshop 19/9/2014 Dr Ruth Fazakerley.
National PE Cycle of Analysis. Fitness Assessment + Gathering Data Why do we need to asses our fitness levels?? * Strengths + Weeknesses -> Develop Performance.
Devising Assessment Tasks PGCE CS IT. Objectives To consider how to plan for assessment To consider progression To think about collaborative learning.
Qualifications Update: National 5 Art and Design Qualifications Update: National 5 Art and Design.
KTP Assessment Criteria May Assessment system changes New system in place for May 2016 KTP close Aligns with other Innovate UK assessment systems.
IDTA level 4 Diploma in Dance Teaching
Information for Parents Statutory Assessment Arrangements
Chawton CE Primary School Assessment Tuesday 4th October 2016
Understanding Standards: Nominee Training Event
Information for Parents Key Stage 3 Statutory Assessment Arrangements
Understanding Standards: Higher Course Event
Australian Professional Standards for Teachers Unpacking the Standards
Postgraduate Examination Board Briefing
UEL Guidelines for External Examiners
Information for Parents Statutory Assessment Arrangements
 Be prepared Be positive Be respectful Value the process
Class Rep Training.
MRCGP The Clinical Skills Assessment January 2013.
Assessment and Feedback – Module 1
Quality and Standards An introduction.
In-Service Teacher Training
The Extended Project Qualification
The use, benefits & pitfalls of self and peer assessment for formative feedback in a large generic nursing module: An example from practice Julia Petty,
J200/02 Music and News Annotated Sample Assessment Materials.
Transforming Grading Robert Marzano
Logo slide English/Arabic
Director of Quality and Educational Development
“CareerGuide for Schools”
Young Leader Training Module H Programme Plans Plus.
Construction Studies.
End of Year Performance Review Meetings and objective setting for 2018/19 This briefing pack is designed to be used by line managers to brief their teams.
Ongoing Reporting Guiding Principle 4
Inter-school Training and Agreement Trialing using the P Scales
Assessment, Standardisation and Moderation
Recognising and Rewarding Successful Teaching
Quality assurance and curriculum development
Skill Will Matrix A straight forward technique for analysing how members of a team need to be led and managed to secure their optimum performance within.
Understanding Standards: Nominee Training Event
National 5 assignment.
Calibrating Academic Standards in Geography
Calibrating Academic Standards in Geography
Welcome to the CSBM operational workshop:
Reminders National Moderator Reports
Calibrating Standards in the Assessment of Recitals
Assessment Who Should Assess?
Summary of Evidence/Reason for Referral
Biological Science Applications in Agriculture
In-Service Teacher Training
IDTA level 4 Diploma in Dance Teaching
KS5 Curriculum Overview Politics
Creating effective holistic assessment tasks
Brunel University Briefing for External Examiners March 2014
Sue Forsythe, Cathy Smith, Charlotte Webb Mathematics Education
Presentation transcript:

Calibrating Standards in the Assessment of Recitals

Introduction This event is based on a successful calibration event run by the HEA and Conservatoires UK in 2018. We are grateful to RNCM for hosting that event and providing the student examples. It will be a workshop of viewing and debating a range of recital performances. Chatham House rule applies. Present the text as on the slide. Boxes on right illustrate the various components of the HEA (now Advance UK) Degree Standards Project aimed at further professionalising external examiners. Chatham house rule : Take away any ideas and learning you gain from the event but do not share any information about individuals or institutions that you acquired in the process.

Intended outcomes Participants will develop: greater awareness of differences in academic standards across assessors greater capability and confidence in drawing on accepted academic standards in their assessing and external examiner roles a shared interpretation of agreed key criteria for the assessment of recitals, with reference to relevant national standards statements.  Briefly introduce these learning outcomes for the workshop

Why calibration? View the video explaining ‘Why Calibration?’ [link to video] This video was recorded at a calibration workshop organised by Conservatoires UK and the Higher Education Academy, hosted by the Royal Northern College of Music on 27 February 2018. Notes: The video records the presentation on ‘Why Calibration’ as presented to the Conservatoire UK Calibration event held in Feb 2018.

Social moderation to calibration Moderation is generally focused on agreeing marks, as in a panel discussion of a student performance. Calibration is about shared knowledge of standards, often achieved through social moderation processes in order to create ‘calibrated’ academics. Social moderation (also known as ‘consensus’ moderation) is a process for obtaining consistency in understanding and applying academic standards based on discussion of concrete examples and drawing on relevant reference points such as assessment criteria, learning outcomes or grade descriptors. A typical panel constituted to judge student recitals is an example of social moderation in practice. However, moderation activities are generally focused on agreeing marks for an assignment but external examiners need to bring their standards to the judgement of a whole range of new and varied student assignments, examinations and performances.  This is where the concept of calibration becomes important. This calibration event is aimed at improving the consistency of marking recitals and is an example of using a social moderation method to assist assessors and examiners in making similar judgements. The aim of Calibration is to create an assessor who can independently make similar judgements on new and different pieces of work. In the academic world, we are exploring the use of social moderation processes to develop the ‘calibrated academic’ (Sadler). ‘calibrated’ academics … are able to make grading judgements consistent with those which similarly calibrated colleagues would make, but without constant engagement in moderation. The overall aims are to achieve comparability of standards across institutions and stability of standards over time (Sadler, 2012)

The calibration process STAGE 1 – Individual (in advance of workshop) Watch each performance and mark it. Marks and comments are entered anonymously online. Comments focus on the aspects of the performance which most influenced the mark. STAGE 2 – Panel Share your marks and comments in your panel. Discuss your views and try to arrive at a consensus regarding the mark. Enter on the ‘panel’ sheet your agreed mark and the characteristics of the performance that most influenced your decision particularly at the borderlines – pass/fail, 2.2./2.1, 2.1/1. Notes: Present as text on slide. NB, Stage 1 may have been done independently by delegates before attending the workshop. STAGE 3 – Whole group We will share the panel judgements and try to achieve a consensus across the room – making the case for our viewpoints where they differ. We will try to assemble a list of the common characteristics of the performance which influenced our judgement – i.e. making explicit as possible our standards.

Recital 1: Piano Insert details of the results entered online. Range of marks Average mark Mode (middle mark) Notes: Insert data as requested on slide if available.

Recital 2: Popular music Insert details of the results entered online. Range of marks Average mark Mode (middle mark) Notes: Insert data as requested on slide if available.

Recital 3: Horn Insert details of the results entered online. Range of marks Average mark Mode (middle mark) Notes: Insert data as requested on slide if available.

Recital 4: Cello programme Insert details of the results entered online. Range of marks Average mark Mode (middle mark) Notes: Insert data as requested on slide if available.