Assessment Plan

The assessments for the unit will be as described in the matrix below:

ASSESSMENT MATRIX
ASSESSMENT
ASSOCIATED LESSON
ASSESSMENT TYPE
ASSESSMENT OUTCOME
Guided Questions / Discussion Lesson 1 – Introduction to Validation Formative Assessment Students will be provided with feedback from the instructors. Feedback will allow the instructor and student to gauge the progression through the lesson/unit.
Plan a Validation Study Lesson 2 – Plan a Validation Formative Assessment Students will be provided with feedback from the instructors. Feedback will allow the instructor and student to gauge the progression through the lesson/unit.
Building a Validation Survey Lesson 3 – Design a Validation Survey Formative Assessment Students will be provided with feedback from the instructors. Feedback will allow the instructor and student to gauge the progression through the lesson/unit.
Interpret Survey Data Lesson 4 – Interpret Survey Data Formative Assessment Students will be provided with feedback from the instructors. Feedback will allow the instructor and student to gauge the progression through the lesson/unit.
Written Validation Report Lesson 5 – Report Recommendations and all prior lessons during the unit. Part A – Summative Assessment

(Final Assessment)

 Students will be required to take in the accumulated skills from the unit in order to present a set of logical recommendation. A grade will be provided which will be out of 20 possible points A scoring rubric will be used (attached below). This assignment must be passed in order to achieve the qualification.
Oral Validation Brief Lesson 5 – Report Recommendations and all prior lessons during the unit. Part B – Summative Assessment

(Final Assessment)

 Students will be required to present their recommendations as if required on the job. A grade will be provided which will be out of 16 possible points A scoring rubric will be used (attached below). This assignment must be passed in order to achieve the qualification.

Please review the summative assessment rubrics below:

WRITTEN REPORT RUBRIC
EXPERT (4)
PROFICIENT (3)
APPRENTICE (2)
NOVICE (1)
INTEGRATION OF KNOWLEDGE
The paper establishes that the student has an excellent understanding of the conduct of validation studies including the logical development of recommendations.
The paper establishes that the student has an above average understanding of the conduct of validation studies including semi-logical development of recommendations.
The paper establishes that the student has an average understanding of the conduct of validation studies struggled to develop logical recommendations.
The paper establishes that the student has a below average understanding of the conduct of validation studies. The Recommendations are not logical.
FOCUS OF THE DOCUMENT
The paper is focused on the validation study and includes the required detail and attention.
The paper is focused on the validation study but does not include all of the required details or elements.
The paper is focused on the validation study but is missing a significant amount of the required details or elements.
The paper is not focused on the validation study and is missing the required details.
DEPTH OF DISCUSSION
The paper includes an In-depth discussion and all sections of the paper provide the required level of detail.
The paper includes an In-depth discussion but details are missing in a few sections of the paper.
The paper does not include an In-depth discussion and details are missing in many sections of the paper.
The paper does not go into the required depth or detail. Many sections of the paper are missing.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations are strong and have been developed in a logical manner through the development of themes. The interpretation of the data connection to the recommendations.
Recommendations are strong and have been developed in a logical manner through the development of themes. Not all of the interpretations are connected to the data.
The recommendations are weak and have not been developed through themes nor do they draw from the interpretation of the data.
The recommendations are not included or are not connected to the data or interpretations.
PRESENTATION OF THE MATERIAL
No spelling or grammar mistakes. The report template was used.
Minimal spelling or grammar mistakes. The report template was used.
Obvious spelling and grammar mistakes. The report template was not used or missing elements.
Intolerable amount of spelling and grammar mistakes. The report template was not used.
ORAL PRESENTATION RUBRIC
EXPERT (4)
PROFICIENT (3)
APPRENTICE (2)
NOVICE (1)
CONTENT
The oral presentation provides an excellent understanding of the validation study and included logically developed recommendations.
The oral presentation provides an above average understanding of the validation study and included logically developed recommendations.
The oral presentation provides an average understanding of the validation study and included semi-logical developed recommendations.
The oral presentation provides a below average understanding of the validation study. Recommendations were not logical.
ORGANIZATION
The presentation was conducted in a logical manner. The presenter was direct and concise throughout the presentation.
The presentation was conducted in a logical manner. The presenter lacked in providing a completely direct presentation.
The presentation was not fully conducted in a logical manner. The presentation was not direct and was too drawn-out.
The order of the presentation was not logical and/or the presentation was too short or too drawn-out.
DELIVERY
The presenter was confident in their presentation of the material. The delivery was conducted in a professional manner.
The presenter was confident to semi-confident in their presentation of the material. The delivery was conducted professionally.
The presenter was lacking in confidence. The presenter did not fully understand the material that was being presented.
The presenter has little to no confidence. The presenter did not fully understand the material.
MECHANICS
The presentation was conducted with an excellent level of enthusiasm for the subject matter.
The presentation was conducted with an above average level of enthusiasm for the subject matter.
The presentation was conducted with an average level of enthusiasm for the subject matter.
The presentation was conducted with little or no enthusiasm for the subject matter.