The assessment plan and instruments of the preteen drawing workshop I created for one of my classes, EDCI 572 (Introduction to Learning Systems Design), has been included as the artifact confirming my successful completion of the challenge, “Ensure that assessment is aligned with instructional goals, anticipated learning outcomes, and instructional strategies.” The final project design document is included; pp. 19-26 contain the assessment plan and instructional strategy alignment and Appendices B, C, and D (pp. 41-47) contain the assessment instruments, which are formative and summative rubrics.

Appropriately designed assessment is a cornerstone of ensuring overall effective instruction. In the book The Systematic Design of Instruction, Dick et al. (2022) describes learner-centered assessment as being “important for evaluating both learners’ progress and instructional quality” (p. 156). Without assessment, we are left wanting a way to accurately gauge these two components – learner progress and program quality.

I created criterion-referenced assessments to gauge the learners’ progress compared to their own starting work (which was essentially a pre-test). Two formative assessment rubrics and on summative rubric were created to capture individual progress in the two areas of instructional focus. Nearly all of the performance objectives were included as assessment items on the rubrics (excluding entry skills and selected subordinate skills). Pages 20 – 26 of the artifact document contains a chart showing learning objective alignment. Additionally, the formative rubrics were designed to build the learners’ self-efficacy and awareness of their skill growth. Dick et al.  support this idea, saying that “providing rubrics within the instruction and encouraging learners to use them for self-evaluation as they learn should increase their understanding and skill” (2022, p. 163). The formative assessments were completed by the learner, while the summative assessment was to be completed by the instructor. Considering the instructional goal was focused on a motor skill, the traits exhibited by the target audience, and the working definition of “mastery” (individual improvement in the areas identified on the rubrics), formative rubrics were used in place of graded items.

Designing the assessment plan and creating the assessment instruments for this workshop fundamentally altered the way I approach assessment in any instructional program. I have historically worked on professional development and leadership development materials. When assessment was included, it was typically limited to question types such as multiple choice, true/false, drag-and-drop interactions, etc. However, designing the workshop assessments introduced an entirely new way of assessing learner progress and the effectiveness of the instruction; one that is particularly suited to assessing instructional content focused on building or introducing new skills.

The artifact contains not only the entire assessment plan, but also a chart featuring how each objective would be measured and on which instrument. The assessment plan includes both formative and summative assessment instruments, along with rationales for why the instruments were designed the way they were. In further work, whether academic or professional, I plan to use the best assessment methods and instruments based on the needs of the instructional content and target audience. I will also advocate for more creative and targeted assessments beyond typical assessment designs and instruments (considering the nature of my professional focus on leadership and development skills).

Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O., (2022). The systematic design of instruction (9th ed.). Pearson.