The project required building a rubric which proved to be very interesting and challenging. It required a lot of detail and precision to make sure each category aligned with each other across the scoring columns. It forces you to evaluate your process and determine what level of performance is excellent and what level is unacceptable. It's value is that it provides a clear and detailed means of assessing something. It could be used to assess almost anything.
To rate your quiz-maker using the rubric you had to have a thorough understanding of the features of the quiz-maker.
Making the test was more detailed than I thought. I changed my direction on what type of test I wanted to make a couple of times based on the information I was making the test around and the types of questions I was able to form from it. I was happy with the final product. From making the test, I began to see how the test matches up with the experimental design concepts. That dictated the level of difficulty I tried to place in the questions and who I sent the test to in an attempt to influence the results.
I sent my test out to quite a few people to insure that I received enough responses to the test. I sent them to instructors at work, to SIU students, and to family members. I wanted a varied grouping to see which groups had the best scores = background with the material (or possibly good guessers).
I received positive feedback for the report generator of the testmaker. The certificate was a nice touch. The AF members that took the test could appreciate the automatic scoring feature. Many would have had to retake the test after seeing that they did not achieve the minimum score like our annual training CBTs.
My project partner will each create a summary of the project and will swap with our sister project partner to provide/receive the classmate peer review.
No comments:
Post a Comment