Lecturer:Rizky Gushendra, M. ED

Language AssessmentAssessing Writing

Name of members: Suhriadi Suciati Anandes Endra Heriyanto Jastri Permata Sari Mira Ayu Defitri Rifka Zahera Sispa Deni

State Islamic University Of Sultan Syarif Kasim RiauFaculty Of Education And Teachers TrainingEnglish Education Department2015

CHAPTER I

A. Introduction

The new assessment culture aims at assessing higher order thinking processes and competences instead of factual knowledge and lower level cognitive skills, which has led to a strong interest in various types of performance assessments. This is due to the belief that open-ended tasks are needed in order to elicit students higher order thinking. According to Black (1998: 87), performance assessment deals with activities which can be direct models of the reality, and some authors write about authentic assessment and tasks relating to the real world. The notion of reality is not a way of escaping the fact that all learning is a product of the context in which it occurs, but rather to try to better reflect the complexity of the real world and provide more valid data about student competence. As a consequence, performance assessments are designed to capture more elusive aspects of learning by letting the students solve realistic or authentic problems.Performance assessment consists of two parts: a task and a set of scoring criteria or a scoring rubric (Perlman, 2003). In here, the assessor use rubric in assessing writing. Rubrics are tools for evaluating and providing guidance for students writing. Andrade (2005) claimed that rubrics significantly enhance the learning process by providing both students and instructors with a clear understanding of the goals of the writing assignment and the scoring criteria.Rubrics used in many subject areas in higher education generally include two elements: (a) a statement of criteria to be evaluated, and (b) an appropriate and relevant scoring system (Peat, 2006). Rubrics can be classified as either holistic or analytic (Moskal, 2000). Holistic rubrics award a single score based on the students overall performance, whereas analytic rubrics give multiple scores along several dimensions. In analytic rubrics, the scores for each dimension can be summed for the final grade. Although an advantage of the holistic rubric is that papers can be scored quickly, the analytic rubric provides more detailed feedback for the student and increases consistency between graders (Zimmaro, 2004). Regarding to the explanation above, the holistic rubric will be used in this writing assessment.Regardless of holistic rubric format, when used as the basis of evaluating student performance, a rubric is a type of measurement instrument and, as such, it is important that the rubric exhibits reliability (i.e., consistency of scores across repeated measurements) and validity (i.e., the extent to which scores truly reflect the underlying variable of interest). Although reliability and validity have been noted as issues of concern in rubric development the reliability and validity of grading rubrics seldom have been assessed, most likely due to the effort and time commitment that is required to do so.

ReliabilityIn order for a holistic rubric scoring system to be of any value, it must be shown to be reliable; Reliability refers to the consistency of assessment scores. For example, on a reliable test, a student would expect to attain the same score regardless of when the student completed the assessment, when the response was scored, and who scored the response. On an unreliable examination, a student's score may vary based on factors that are not related to the purpose of the assessment.Many teachers are probably familiar with the terms "test/retest reliability," "equivalent-forms reliability," "split half reliability" and "rational equivalence reliability" (Gay, 1987). Each of these terms refers to statistical methods that are used to establish consistency of student performances within a given test or across more than one test. These types of reliability are of more concern on standardized or high stakes testing than they are in classroom assessment. In a classroom, students' knowledge is repeatedly assessed and this allows the teacher to adjust as new insights are acquired.The two forms of reliability that typically are considered in classroom assessment and in rubric development involve rater (or scorer) reliability. Rater reliability generally refers to the consistency of scores that are assigned by two independent raters and that are assigned by the same rater at different points in time. The former is referred to as "inter-rater reliability" while the latter is referred to as "intra-rater reliability."

Inter-rater ReliabilityInter-rater reliability refers to the concern that a student's score may vary from rater to rater. Students often criticize exams in which their score appears to be based on the subjective judgment of their instructor. For example, one manner in which to analyze an essay exam is to read through the students' responses and make judgments as to the quality of the students' written products. Without set criteria to guide the rating process, two independent raters may not assign the same score to a given response. Each rater has his or her own evaluation criteria. Scoring rubrics respond to this concern by formalizing the criteria at each score level. The descriptions of the score levels are used to guide the evaluation process. Although scoring rubrics do not completely eliminate variations between raters, a well-designed scoring rubric can reduce the occurrence of these discrepancies.

Intra-rater ReliabilityFactors that are external to the purpose of the assessment can impact the manner in which a given rater scores student responses. For example, a rater may become fatigued with the scoring process and devote less attention to the analysis over time. Certain responses may receive different scores than they would have had they been scored earlier in the evaluation. A rater's mood on the given day or knowing who a respondent is may also impact the scoring process. A correct response from a failing student may be more critically analyzed than an identical response from a student who is known to perform well. Intra-rater reliability refers to each of these situations in which the scoring process of a given rater changes over time. The inconsistencies in the scoring process result from influences that are internal to the rater rather than true differences in student performances. Well-designed scoring rubrics respond to the concern of intra-rater reliability by establishing a description of the scoring criteria in advance. Throughout the scoring process, the rater should revisit the established criteria in order to ensure that consistency is maintained.

ValidityValidation is the process of accumulating evidence that supports the appropriateness of the inferences that are made of student responses for specified assessment uses. Validity refers to the degree to which the evidence supports that these interpretations are correct and that the manner in which the interpretations are used is appropriate (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education, 1999). Three types of evidence are commonly examined to support the validity of an assessment instrument: content, construct, and criterion. This section begins by defining these types of evidence and is followed by a discussion of how evidence of validity should be considered in the development of scoring rubrics.

Content-Related EvidenceContent-related evidence refers to the extent to which a student's responses to a given assessment instrument reflects that student's knowledge of the content area that is of interest. For example, a history exam in which the questions use complex sentence structures may unintentionally measure students' reading comprehension skills rather than their historical knowledge. A teacher who is interpreting a student's incorrect response may conclude that the student does not have the appropriate historical knowledge when actually that student does not understand the questions. The teacher has misinterpreted the evidencerendering the interpretation invalid.

Construct-Related EvidenceConstructs are processes that are internal to an individual. An example of a construct is an individual's reasoning process. Although reasoning occurs inside a person, it may be partially displayed through results and explanations. An isolated correct answer, however, does not provide clear and convincing evidence of the nature of the individual's underlying reasoning process. Although an answer results from a student's reasoning process, a correct answer may be the outcome of incorrect reasoning. When the purpose of an assessment is to evaluate reasoning, both the product (i.e., the answer) and the process (i.e., the explanation) should be requested and examined.

Criterion-Related EvidenceThe final type of evidence that will be discussed here is criterion-related evidence. This type of evidence supports the extent to which the results of an assessment correlate with a current or future event. Another way to think of criterion-related evidence is to consider the extent to which the students' performance on the given task may be generalized to other, more relevant activities (Rafilson, 1991).

CHAPTER II

A. Report

Reliability Concerns in Rubric DevelopmentClarifying the scoring rubric is likely to improve both interrater and intrarater reliability. A scoring rubric with well-defined score categories should assist in maintaining consistent scoring regardless of who the rater is or when the rating is completed. The following questions may be used to evaluate the clarity of a given rubric: 1) Are the scoring categories well defined? 2) Are the differences between the score categories clear? And 3) Would two independent raters arrive at the same score for a given response based on the scoring rubric? If the answer to any of these questions is "no", then the unclear score categories should be revised. One method of further clarifying a scoring rubric is through the use of anchor papers. Anchor papers are a set of scored responses that illustrate the nuances of the scoring rubric. A given rater may refer to the anchor papers throughout the scoring process to illuminate the differences between the score levels. After every effort has been made to clarify the scoring categories, other teachers may be asked to use the rubric and the anchor papers to evaluate a sample set of responses. Any discrepancies between the scores that are assigned by the teachers will suggest which components of the scoring rubric require further explanation. Any differences in interpretation should be discussed and appropriate adjustments to the scoring rubric should be negotiated. Although this negotiation process can be time consuming, it can also greatly enhance reliability (Yancey, 1999). Another reliability concern is the appropriateness of the given scoring rubric to the population of responding students. A scoring rubric that consistently measures the performances of one set of students may not consistently measure the performances of a different set of students. For example, if a task is embedded within a context, one population of students may be familiar with that context and the other population may be unfamiliar with that context. The students who are unfamiliar with the given context may achieve a lower score based on their lack of knowledge of the context. If these same students had completed a different task that covered the same material that was embedded in a familiar context, their scores may have been higher. When the cause of variation in performance and the resulting scores is unrelated to the purpose of the assessment, the scores are unreliable. Sometimes during the scoring process, teachers realize that they hold implicit criteria that are not stated in the scoring rubric. Whenever possible, the scoring rubric should be shared with the students in advance in order to allow students the opportunity to construct the response with the intention of providing convincing evidence that they have met the criteria. If the scoring rubric is shared with the students prior to the evaluation, students should not be held accountable for the unstated criteria. Identifying implicit criteria can help the teacher refine the scoring rubric for future assessments.

Validity Concerns in Rubric DevelopmentConcerns about the valid interpretation of assessment results should begin before the selection or development of a task or an assessment instrument. A well-designed scoring rubric cannot correct for a poorly designed assessment instrument. Since establishing validity is dependent on the purpose of the assessment, teachers should clearly state what they hope to learn about the responding students (i.e., the purpose) and how the students will display these proficiencies (i.e., the objectives). The teacher should use the stated purpose and objectives to guide the development of the scoring rubric. In order to ensure that an assessment instrument elicits evidence that is appropriate to the desired purpose, Hanny (2000) recommended numbering the intended objectives of a given assessment and then writing the number of the appropriate objective next to the question that addresses that objective. In this manner, any objectives that have not been addressed through the assessment will become apparent. This method for examining an assessment instrument may be modified to evaluate the appropriateness of a scoring rubric. First, clearly state the purpose and objectives of the assessment. Next, develop scoring criteria that address each objective. If one of the objectives is not represented in the score categories, then the rubric is unlikely to provide the evidence necessary to examine the given objective. If some of the scoring criteria are not related to the objectives, then, once again, the appropriateness of the assessment and the rubric is in question. This process for developing a scoring rubric is illustrated in Figure 3. Figure 3. Evaluating the Appropriateness of Scoring Categories to a Stated Purpose Step 1 Step 2 Step 3State the assessment purpose and the objectives.Develop score criteria for each objectiveReflect on the following: Are all of the objectives measured through the scoring criteria? Is any scoring criteria unrelated to the objectives?

Reflecting on the purpose and the objectives of the assessment will also suggest which forms of evidence - content, construct, and/or criterion - should be given consideration. If the intention of an assessment instrument is to elicit evidence of an individual's knowledge within a given content area, such as historical facts, then the appropriateness of the content-related evidence should be considered. If the assessment instrument is designed to measure reasoning, problem solving or other processes that are internal to the individual and, therefore, require more indirect examination, then the appropriateness of the construct-related evidence should be examined. If the purpose of the assessment instrument is to elicit evidence of how a student will perform outside of school or in a different situation, criterion-related evidence should be considered.Being aware of the different types of evidence that support validity throughout the rubric development process is likely to improve the appropriateness of the interpretations when the scoring rubric is used. Validity evidence may also be examined after a preliminary rubric has been established. Table 1 displays a list of questions that may be useful in evaluating the appropriateness of a given scoring rubric with respect to the stated purpose. This table is divided according to the type of evidence being considered.

Table 1: Questions to Examine Each Type of Validity EvidenceContent

Construct

Criterion

1. Do the evaluation criteria address any extraneous content?2. Do the evaluation criteria of the scoring rubric address all aspects of the intended content?3. Is there any content addressed in the task that should be evaluated through the rubric, but is not?1. Are all of the important facets of the intended construct evaluated through the scoring criteria? 2. Is any of the evaluation criteria irrelevant to the construct of interest?1. How do the scoring criteria reflect competencies that would suggest success on future or related performances? 2. What are the important components of the future or related performance that may be evaluated through the use of the assessment instrument?3. How do the scoring criteria measure the important components of the future or related performance?4. Are there any facets of the future or related performance that are not reflected in the scoring criteria?

Another form of validity evidence that is often discussed is "consequential evidence". Consequential evidence refers to examining the consequences or uses of the assessment results. For example, a teacher may find that the application of the scoring rubric to the evaluation of male and female performances on a given task consistently results in lower evaluations for the male students. The interpretation of this result may be the male students are not as proficient within the area that is being investigated as the female students. It is possible that the identified difference is actually the result of a factor that is unrelated to the purpose of the assessment. In other words, the completion of the task may require knowledge of content or constructs that were not consistent with the original purposes. Consequential evidence refers to examining the outcomes of an assessment and using these outcomes to identify possible alternative interpretations of the assessment results (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education, 1999).

Lesson PlanSchool : Cendana Senior High SchoolSubject: EnglishGrade/Semester: X/1Skill: Reading Genre : RecountTest: English Composition Essay testTopic: HolidayTime allocation : 40 minutes (1 meeting)

I. Competence standardExpress the meaning in written text and short essay of recount in the context of daily life.

II. Basic CompetenceComprehend about the text and understand the meaning of the text.

III. IndicatorsIndividually, students can use the generic structure and language feature of recount text to tell their holiday.

IV. Teaching-Learning Methods Individual work Pair/Group work Online discussion

V. Teaching and Learning ActivitiesNo.ActivityStudents ActivityTeachers ActivityDuration (min)Material

1.Opening Students greet the teacher Students respond teacher questions about their holiday

Teacher greets the students. Teacher asks students about their holiday Teacher introduces the materials

15

2.Explanation about the generic structure and language feature of recount text Students learn about the generic structure and language feature of recount text Students tell their holiday each other Teacher and students analyze the example together. Teacher gives an example of the recount text that tells about holiday Teacher explains the function, generic structure and language feature of recount text Teacher asks work in group of 3-4 students and asks them to tell their holiday each other. Teacher and students analyse the example together.30LCD Projector, Laptop,

3.Explanation about Edmodo ; individual work and online discussion Students learn how to use Edmodo for learning Students write a recount text about their holiday individually Students post their writing in Edmodo and do online discussion there by giving comments Teacher explain what is Edmodo and how to use Edmodo for learning Teacher asks students to write a recount text about their holiday individually Teacher asks students to post their writing in Edmodo and give comments each other.35Set of computer and internet connection for each Student.

5.Closing Students review the materials that they have learned by asking question or giving opinion about the lesson. Students greet the teacher. Teacher does a reflection by summing up the days activity and evaluating the part the needs to be improved. Teacher re-explains about the topic that have not mastered and ask students to read the next chapter for the next meeting Teacher greets the students to end the meeting.10

VI. Learning Media

Power Point presentation Communicative facilitating e-tools: Edmodo.comVII. Evaluation

Scoring by using holistic rubric: The progress indicators in the scoring rubric have been developed to help teachers understand and evaluate their students progress and achievement in writing. Teachers are asked to make a best-fit judgement as to the level at which their students writing most predominantly sits for each of the seven content areas: Audience Awareness and Purpose, Content/Ideas, Structure/Organisation, Language Resources, Grammar, Spelling, and Punctuation.

Deep Features:Audience Awareness and Purpose: The writer aims to inform or entertain a reader or listener by reconstructing a view of the world that the reader can enter. Recounts centre on the sequenced retelling of experience, whether real or imagined.

There are three common types of recount that have variations in focus. Personal recounts involve the reconstruction of a personal experience that often includes reflections on the writers feelings. Factual recounts involve the recounting of events from an informational perspective (A visit to McDonalds) and often include statements of observation as asides to the recounting of events (The ice-cream machine behind the counter is big and shiny. I saw people polishing it. It takes a lot of work to keep it that shiny). Imaginative recounts may involve the writer in recounting events from an imagined perspective (A day in the life of a Viking raider) or recounting imagined events from a personal perspective (A field trip to Mars) that may include both imagined observation and comment.

Content/Ideas: Recounts use a succinct orientating device early in the piece to introduce characters, settings and events to be recounted (i.e., who, what, why, where, when, how). A point of view, the perspective from which the recount is told, is often established here. Events are related in time order. Comment or observation and/or reflection is used to foreground events or details of significance to the writer. These may be interwoven with the retelling. Optional is a re-orientation that is an ending statement often used to reflect or comment on the events recounted or to predict future events (I had a great time at Camp Hunua. I wonder what will happen to us next year!).

Structure/Organisation: Recounts are organised around a sequenced account of events or happenings. They follow a time sequence in that they are organised through time (i.e., conjunctions and adverbials show linkages in setting events in time and ordering the events and the passage of time).

Language Resources: Specific people, places, and events are named (On Saturday, our class had a sleepover at Kelly Tarltons Underwater World in Auckland or Today, we raided Lindisfarne Abbey to gather more gold for our longboat). Detailed recounting makes extensive use of descriptive verbs, adverbs, adjectives, and idiomatic language to catch and maintain reader interest. There is frequent use of prepositional phrases, adverbials, and adjectivals to contextualise the events that unfold. Dialogue or direct speech is often used to give the recount a realistic feel, to assist in the reconstruction of the events, or to provide opportunities to comment on the happenings. Many action verbs tell of happenings and of the behaviours of those involved. Some relational verbs are used to tell how things are as the writer reflects, observes or comments. The choice and use of vocabulary often reflects the desire to create particular images or feelings for the reader. Verbs are commonly in the past tense, though tense can vary in the comments (On Tuesday, Mary and I went to the shop. We are best friends.).

VIII. AssessmentPerformance Assessment: Writing a recount text by seeing the holistic rubric below.

RecountELimitedAchievementDBasic AchievementCSoundAchievementBHighAchievementAOutstandingAchievement

Producing TextsProduces a wide range of well-structured and wel-presented literary and factual texts for a wide variety of purposes and audiences using increasingly challenging topics, ideas, issues and written language features.Poor or no structure. Poorly presented. Limited purposes. Unable to redraft for different audiences. Basic topics, ideas, issues and language used.Limited range of texts. Some structure. Basic presentation. Some drafting. Keeps to known topics and familiar issues and language. Little editing.A range of topics with acceptable presentation and structure.Written for some different audiences and purposes. Starting to accept challenges. Editing evident. A range of topics. Good presentation and structure. Accepts challenging topics, ideas, issues and language features.Edits well.Writes well on a wide range of topics with excellent structure and presentation for a variety of purposes and audiences. Can write on challenging topics, ideas, issues using sophisticated language. Edited well

Grammar and Punctuation Uses knowledge of sentence structure, grammar and punctuation to edit own writing.Many errors with grammar and punctuation. (Less than 50% of text correct.) Text difficult to read and understand. Unable to edit own work.Obvious errors with grammar and punctuation.(50% - 65% of text correct.) Effort needed to make sense of the text. Some editing of own work evident.Some errors with grammar and punctuation.65%-80% of text correct.) Text quite readable. Editing evident.Few or some errors with grammar or punctuation.(80%-90% of text correct.) Text easy to read. More complex sentence structure. Strong evidence of editing own work.Few or no errors with grammar or punctuation. (90%+ of text correct.) Text very easy to read. More complex sentence structure. Edited well.

SpellingSpells most common words accurately and uses a range of strategies to spell unfamiliar words.Many errors. (Less than 50% of text correct.) Meaning compromised. Few or no strategies used. Text difficult to read. Obvious errors. (50% -65% of text correct.) Guessing needed to gauge meaning. Few strategies used. Text a little difficult to read.Some errors.(65%-80% of text correct.) Meaning still conveyed with some guessing. Some strategies used. Text readable.Few or some errors. (80%-90% of text correct) Meaning not affected. Uses a variety of strategies. Text easy to read.Few or no errors.(90%+ of text correct.) Errors minor and do not affect meaning. Uses a variety of strategies. Text very easy to read.

Handwriting and Computer Produces texts in a fluent and legible style and uses computer technology to present these effectively in a variety of ways.Handwriting very hard to read, lacking many elements (size, slope, formation, spacing) Very poor manipulation of a keyboard. Text very hard to read.Handwriting harder to read, lacking elements (size, slope, formation, spacing)Poor use of the keyboard. Text harder to read. Handwriting lacks some elements. Clear but less consistent. Adequate manipulation of the keyboard. Text readable.Handwriting lacks a few elements but still clear and neat. Good manipulation of the keyboard. Text easy to read.Clear, neat handwriting of consistent size and slope correctly formed. Can use a keyboard correctly to produce desired text. Text very clear and easy to read.

Context and TextCritically analyses own texts in terms of how well they have been written, how effectively they present the subject matter and how they influence the reader.Is unable to analyse texts regarding how well they are written, presented and how the texts influence the reader.Is able to do basic analysis of texts regarding how well they are written, presented and how the texts influence the reader.Is able to analyse texts regarding how well they are written, presented and how the texts influence the reader.Is well able to analyse texts regarding how they are written, presented and how the texts influence the reader.Is very well able to critically analyse how well the texts are written, presented, how effective they are and how they influence the reader.

Structure Critically evaluates how own texts have been structured to achieve their purpose and discusses ways of using related grammatical features and conventions of written language to shape readers and viewers understanding of texts.Lacks understanding of structure and purpose. Unable to discuss use of grammatical features and conventions of written language and how they are used to shape understanding.Has little understanding of structure and purpose. Less able to discuss use of grammatical features and conventions of written language and how they are used to shape understandingGrasps understanding of structure and purpose. Some ability to discuss use of grammatical features and conventions of written language and how they are used to shape understandingGood understanding of structure and purpose. Well able to discuss use of grammatical features and conventions of written language and how they are used to shape understandingExcellent understanding of structure and purpose. Adept at discussing use of grammatical features and conventions of written language and how they are used to shape understanding

Name: Muthia Andini

Visiting Bali There were so many places to see in Bali that my friend decided to join the tours to see as much as possible. My friend stayed in Kuta on arrival. He spent the first three days swimming and surfing on Kuta beach. He visited some tour agents and selected two tours. The first one was to Singaraja, the second was to Ubud. On the day of the tour, he was ready.

My friend and his group drove on through mountains. Singaraja is a city of about 90 thousand people. It is a busy but quiet town. The street are lined with trees and there are many old Dutch houses. Then they returned very late in the evening to Kuta.

The second tour to Ubud was a very different tour. It was not to see the scenery but to see the art and the craft of the island. The first stop was at Batubulan, a center of stone sculpture. There my friend watched young boys were carving away at big blocks of stone. The next stop was Celuk, a cente for silversmiths and goldensmiths. After that he stopped a little while for lunch at Sukawati and on to mass. Mass is a tourist center My friend ten-day-stay ended very quickly beside his two tour, all his day was spent on the beach. He went sailing or surfboarding every day. He was quiet satisfied.

Name : Ratna SetiawatiPangandaran Beach The tour to Pangandaran Beach started on holiday last semester. We decided to go to Pangandaran Beach by our motorbike. That was very interesting tour. Riding a motorbike from my hometown, Cirebon, to Pangandaran Beach with my best friends made me feel exited. The tour to Pangandaran Beach began at 09.00 a.m. in the morning and it took 5 hours riding to Pangandaran Beach. There were so many story that my friends and I got when we were in the tour such as there was my friend who got lost, ran out of fuel in the middle of jungle, and so forth. But it was interesting, because it was the first moment that I ever had in touring. We arrived at Pangandaran Beach at 02.00 p.m. and we stright to move to the beach. At beach we just lied down there to stretch our muscle because of 5 hours riding. We also had a lunch there by eating some foods that we brought from Cirebon. That was very nice moment when we shared our own food to others.

After we had enough rest, we began to explore Pangandaran Beach. Started by exploring the beach, and the sea using rented boat. Then we went to dive by renting some diving equipment. We could see many coral there. We just had 2 hours to enjoy Pangandaran Beach because we had to come back to Cirebon.

We came back to Cirebon at 04.00 p.m. It was imposible to ride in the night, so we just decided to stay over in our friend house in Ciamis and we started to come back in the morning. That was very nice experience that I and my friends ever had. We would never forget that moment.Name : Rena Kumala Cahya Ningrum

My Holiday in BaliWhen I was 2nd grade of senior high school, my friends and I went to Bali. We were there for three days. I had many impressive experiences during the vacation. First day, we visited Sanur Beach in the morning. We saw the beautiful sunrise together. It was a great scenery. Then, we checked in to the hotel. After prepared ourselves, we went to Tanah Lot. We met so many other tourists there. They were not only domestic but also foreign tourists. Second day, we enjoyed the day on Tanjung Benoa beach. We played so many water sports such as banana boat, jetsky, speedboat etc. We also went to Penyu island to see many unique animals. They were turtles, snakes, and sea birds. We were very happy. In the afternoon, we went to Kuta Beach to see the amazing sunset and enjoyed the beautiful wave. The last day, we spent our time in Sangeh. We could enjoy the green and shady forest. There were so many monkies. They were so tame but sometimes they could be naughty. We could make a close interaction with them. After that, we went to Sukowati market for shopping. That was my lovely time. I bought some Bali T-Shirt and souvenirs. In the evening, we had to check out from the hotel. We went back home bringing so many amazing memories of Bali.

Name : Zahara AtikaVisitting to the Zoo

Yesterday my family went to the zoo to see the elephant.When we got to the zoo, we went to the shop to buy some food to give to the animals.

After getting the food we went to the nocturnal house where we saw birds and reptiles which only come out at night.

Before lunch we went for a ride on the elephant. It was a thrill to ride it. Dad nearly fell off when he let go of the rope.During lunch we fed some birds in the park. In the afternoon we saw the animals being fed.

When we returned home we were tired but happy because we had so much fun.

Name : FitriahA Trip at the Beach

Last week my friend and I were bored after three weeks of holidays, so we rode our bikes to cerocok Beach, which is only five kilometres from where I live.

When we arrived at the beach, we were surprised to see there was hardly anyone there. After having a quick dip in the ocean, which was really cold, we realized one reason there were not many people there. It was also quite windy.

After we bought some hot chips at the takeaway store nearby, we rode our bikes down the beach for a while, on the hard, damp part of the sand. We had the wind behind us and, before we knew it, we were many miles down the beach. Before we made the long trip back, we decided to paddle our feet in the water for a while, and then sit down for a rest. While we were sitting on the beach, just chatting, it suddenly dawned on us that all the way back, we would be riding into the strong wind.

When we finally made it back home, we were both totally exhausted! But we learned some good lessons that day.

CHAPTER III

A. Conclusion

This paper aimed to review empirical research and illuminate the questions of how the use of rubrics can (1) enhance the reliability of scoring, (2) facilitate valid judgment of performance assessments, and (3) give positive educational consequences, such as promoting learning and/or improve instruction. A first conclusion is that the reliable scoring of performance assessments can be enhanced by the use of rubrics. In relation to reliability issues, rubrics should be analytic, topic-specific, and complemented with exemplars and/or rater training. Since performance assessments are more or less open ended per definition, it is not always possible to restrict the assessment format to achieve high levels of reliability without sacrificing the validity. Another conclusion is that rubrics do not facilitate valid judgment of performance assessments per se. Valid assessment could be facilitated by using a more comprehensive framework of validity when validating the rubric, instead of focusing on only one or two aspects of validity. In relation to learning and instruction, consequential validity is an aspect of validity that might need further attention. Furthermore, it has been concluded that rubrics seem to have the potential of promoting learning and/or improve instruction. The main reason for this potential lies in the fact that rubrics make expectations and criteria explicit, which also facilitates feedback and self-assessment. It is thus argued that assessment quality criteria should emphasize dimensions like transparency and fitness for self-assessment to a greater extent than is done through the traditional reliability and validity criteria. This could be achieved through a framework of quality criteria that acknowledges the importance of trustworthiness in assessment as well as supports a more comprehensive view on validity issues (including educational consequences).