Design Protocol – Scoring Criteria

Purpose:
To draft descriptions of levels of proficiency for each performance indicator that:

  • Articulate a clear progression of learning.
  • Describe the quality of student work at each performance level.
  • Describe affirmatively what students can do at each level of performance.
  • Are task neutral and can be applied to a variety of learning experiences and products.


Time:
Two hours or more for the first graduation competency and associated performance indicators; approximately one to two hours for each of the remaining graduation competencies.


Roles:
Facilitator, timekeeper, notetaker


Materials

  • Scoring criteria design guide
  • Graduation competencies and performance indicators
  • Taxonomy guide (e.g., Bloom’s revised taxonomy or Webb’s Depth of Knowledge)
  • Chart paper and markers (or shared virtual workspace)

Reference Materials

PROCESS

1. Introduction (2-3 minutes)

The facilitator presents an overview of the protocol and reminds the group of norms for giving and receiving feedback.

2. Unpack the performance indicator (10 minutes)

  • Independently review the performance indicator and brainstorm what students need to be able to do (skills) and know (knowledge) in order to meet the expectations of the performance indicator.
  • As a group, create a table with two columns for each performance indicator. Label the columns “What a student needs to do (Skills)” and “What a student needs to know (Knowledge).” Share and record all of the individual reflections in the columns. Come to consensus on the essential skills and knowledge necessary to meet proficiency through the identified performance indicator.
  • This curated list of skills and knowledge will not be included in the scoring criteria, but serves as a draft set of learning targets for the performance indicator. As such, this list should be archived and remain accessible to draw from as teachers design units and lessons around the performance indicator.
  • The process of unpacking the performance indicator also ensures that all involved have a shared understanding of what achievement on the performance indicator, and the learning leading up to it, looks and sounds like.

3. Review the scoring criteria design guide (5-10 minutes)

4. Decide how many levels of proficiency you will define and how you will label each level (5 minutes)

Generally, scoring criteria are separated into four distinct levels with labels such as emerging, developing, proficient, and distinguished. For more detail on this, see our scoring criteria overview.

5. Describe proficiency (10-20 minutes)

Draft a statement that represents students’ knowledge and skills at the proficient level. Be sure to:

  • Identify the level of cognitive demand associated with the performance indicator and what verb will be used to describe active demonstration at that level;
  • Reference the chart created in step two to draft a statement that includes the necessary knowledge and skills of the performance indicator; and
  • Consider what the student is demonstrating through the work rather than what is absent.

6. Draft scoring criteria for remaining levels of progression. (20–40 min)

  • Review a taxonomy chart and identify the level of cognitive demand associated with each level of progression.
  • To exceed the standard, the scoring criteria should reflect a level of thinking that exceeds that of the proficient level.
  • To partially meet the standard, the scoring criteria should reflect a level of thinking that is one level lower on the taxonomy scale.
  • Continue to draft language that follows the traits of effective scoring criteria.

7. Check the draft scoring criteria against the Design Guide for Developing Scoring Criteria. (10–20 min)

  • Individually review the drafted scoring criteria, checking the language against each trait in the Design Guide for Developing Scoring Criteria.
  • If possible, select a sample of student work to score using the criteria in order to identity strengths and areas for improvement
  • Share observations and ideas for improvement.
  • Make necessary adjustments to the language of the criteria.

8. Repeat the process for additional performance indicators

9. Debrief the protocol. (5–10 min)

The facilitator helps the group assess how helpful the protocol was (or was not) in guiding the development of scoring criteria.

  • What went well?
  • Were everyone’s ideas heard?
  • How could the process be improved in the future?
  • What are the next steps we will take?

Interested In Learning More? Let's Talk.

Personalized, equitable, and student-centered education is too important to put aside. Together, we can improve learning for all your students.

Contact Us