As a continuation tothe blog post, on AI and assessments, here is a resource to think about how assessments/assignments can be framed in the age of AI written by Adam Pryor.
The blog begins overviews the ways education has viewed AI, viewing it has a threat to the assessment integrity.
The solution proposes the use of 'specifications grading' providing clear competency statements and a formative process through teacher/AI dialog for learners to experience and evidence true learning.
Therefore I am now working with teaching teams to review their assessments. In short to put lower weightings on the usual summative assessments (100%) and instead transfer the weighting to a series of formative (but graded) touchpoints, which collate students' learning. For example, if the usual summative assessments is an essay, report or design, this is marked and weighted at 20% of the final summative mark. 20% is assigned to an oral presentation plus oral examination to establish authenticity of the learners' work. 60% is allocated to the 'portfolio' of how the student worked through to end up with the essay/report/design. In the 'portfolio' would be the record of the various steps undertaken, including the use of AI where appropriate and justified. The rubric assigns marks for reflective learning, accuracy of recording the learning process, and justifications/rationalisations and decisions taken.
In doing, we shift the emphasis of assessments to the process of learning. Even if the final 'product' is not up to scratch, the portfolio of learning, recording the learning journey can still accrue sufficient marks for a good final grade. We can replicate more of what happens in the real world, that learning is a lifelong journey. We learn when we make mistakes as well as when things go well.
No comments:
Post a Comment