Assessment as Design
In AICI 501, assessment is treated as instructional architecture—not a compliance event. You will design outcomes, evidence maps, performance tasks, criteria, rubrics, and feedback systems that reveal learning as a visible, defensible body of work.
ADTL Fit: AICI 501 extends ADTL into the realm of evidence: assessment becomes an intentional design of cognition, culture, and aesthetic clarity—so learners can explain, revise, and transfer.
Shift assessment from measurement-only to designed evidence—grounded in ADTL’s ethics, cognition, culture, and aesthetic clarity.
- Define assessment as an architecture of thinking, not a terminal score.
- Identify how ADTL reframes evidence (cognitive, cultural, aesthetic, ethical).
- Assessment Archeology: examine an existing assessment and surface its hidden values.
- ADTL Lens Pass: map the assessment to ADTL domains to reveal gaps and redesign opportunities.
- Assessment reframe memo + design goals for a redesigned assessment.
ADTL Connection: Orientation begins by clarifying what “evidence” should show in a learner—and why.
Demonstrate mastery by diagnosing an assessment’s failure points and writing a defensible redesign intent statement.
- Identify 5 assessment issues (validity, alignment, bias risk, cognitive mismatch, readability).
- Write a redesign intent: what the new assessment will reveal, protect, and improve.
- Autopsy sheet + redesign intent statement (1 page).
Build outcomes that are observable and meaningful, then map them to evidence sources that make learning visible.
- Write outcomes that reflect cognition (thinking), not just recall.
- Create an evidence map: outcome → task evidence → criteria signal.
- Outcome Rewrite Lab: convert vague goals into observable evidence statements.
- Evidence Mapping: identify at least 3 evidence types per outcome (drafts, models, explanations, performance).
- Outcomes set + evidence map grid.
ADTL Connection: Exploration & Synthesis become trackable when evidence is designed—not assumed.
Exhibit mastery by critiquing and revising outcomes and evidence maps for alignment, validity, and learner clarity.
- Run a “misalignment scan” and identify 3 places evidence doesn’t match outcomes.
- Revise outcomes for precision and adjust evidence types for validity and accessibility.
- Revised outcomes + revised evidence map + short defense rationale.
Build performance tasks that elicit thinking, allow multiple valid approaches, and produce artifacts worth critiquing.
- Design tasks that produce evidence of reasoning, structure, and transfer.
- Embed scaffolds that protect rigor while supporting diverse learners.
- Task Architecture Build: prompt → constraints → success evidence → reflection.
- Student Pathways Check: test for “multiple routes to quality.”
- Performance task draft + student-facing directions + teacher notes.
ADTL Connection: Application is designed as a constructive act—students demonstrate understanding by making.
Demonstrate mastery by critiquing task usability and cognitive demand, then revising for clarity and fairness.
- Run a “student experience simulation” (readability + decision points + time risk).
- Identify 3 failure points and revise task language/scaffolds to eliminate them.
- Task critique notes + revised task excerpt(s) + revision rationale.
Create criteria that describe quality, then calibrate rubric scoring—optionally using AI as a consistency assistant (not a judge).
- Write criteria that match outcomes and task evidence.
- Design rubrics with clear descriptors and minimized ambiguity.
- Use AI for calibration prompts (consistency checks, descriptor clarity), keeping educator judgment central.
- Criteria Ladder: weak → better → best descriptors.
- Calibration Set: score 3 samples and reconcile differences through evidence talk.
- Rubric draft + calibration notes.
ADTL Connection: Aesthetic cognition is evaluated through justification, not preference—rubrics must describe reasoning and intent.
Exhibit mastery by stress-testing rubric descriptors for bias, cultural mismatch, and scoring inconsistency.
- Run a bias scan: language assumptions, culture-bound expectations, compliance grading, “hidden style rules.”
- Calibrate across 3 samples; rewrite 2 descriptors for clarity and fairness.
- Bias check memo + revised rubric section + calibration record.
Design feedback systems that help students revise with intent—and treat learners as partners in criteria and evidence.
- Create feedback prompts that generate revision moves (not vague encouragement).
- Design reflection that captures learner rationale and next iteration decisions.
- Feedback Rewrite: convert teacher comments into “revision directives.”
- Student Partnership Protocol: co-create criteria language and sample anchors.
- Feedback toolkit (stems + protocols) + reflection prompts aligned to rubric criteria.
ADTL Connection: Reflection is where meaning consolidates—students justify choices and plan revisions.
Demonstrate mastery by showing that your feedback and reflection system produces measurable revision and improved evidence quality.
- Design a mini “revision cycle” protocol and show how evidence improves across drafts.
- Define 2 evidence indicators that reflection must capture (intent + next move).
- Feedback/reflection protocol + sample prompts + evidence indicator checklist.
Assemble outcomes, evidence maps, tasks, rubrics, and feedback into a coherent assessment system that can run across a unit.
- Design an assessment ecosystem: when evidence is collected, where it lives, how it informs instruction.
- Ensure the system is usable (time, workflow, student clarity, feedback cadence).
- System Blueprint: timeline of evidence events + artifacts + reflection points.
- Workflow Stress Test: identify bottlenecks and revise for sustainability.
- Assessment system blueprint + implementation workflow notes.
ADTL Connection: Mastery is sustained through systems—evidence and revision loops are designed into the learning experience.
Exhibit mastery by packaging your assessment system as a portfolio artifact with a clear rationale and defensible evidence design.
- Present: outcomes → evidence map → tasks → rubric → feedback/reflection workflow.
- Defend your system against 3 critique prompts (validity, equity, usability).
- Assessment System Portfolio Piece (PDF/slide) + brief defense statement.