Endnotes:

Purpose Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 63

Organization Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 15

Summary Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 72

Areas of Strength Understanding by Design Framework

Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 20; Wiggins and McTighe 1998
Triangulation of Evidence
Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 63
Reporting Key
Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 90-92

Areas of Improvement Clear Indication of Programming Needs

Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 72; Rockyview Schools, 2018, [online]
21st Century Learner Competencies
Alberta Education, 2016, p. 28-31
Core Subject Reporting Descriptors
Assessment in Alberta: Discussion Paper, (n.d.), p. 8-9

As Learning/For Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Basic

Learning/ Education, 2006, p. 15
Of Learning
Reconfigured
Assessment Pyramid

21st Century Learners Alberta Education, 2016, p. 15; Guskey, 2000, p. 14; Foothills School
Division, 2009, p. 66

Reporting Progress Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 49; Guskey, 2000, p. 10-17; O’Connor,
2007

Informational Impact Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 52- 53; Western and Northern Canadian
Protocol for Collaboration in Basic Education, 2006, p. 59

Example Reference Alberta Education, 2016; Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for
Collaboration in Basic Education, 2006, p. 17
To streamline the look of the poster, and due to limitation of the Canva software with regards
to superscript/subscript of numbers, we have opted to title our endnotes and included them on
a separate page. The endnotes progress from the top of the page, left to right, and repeat all
the way down in the same sequence. Each endnote corresponds to the title listed on the
infographic and we have been consistent in endnoting our work using an MLA style combined
with an APA format.
 References:
Alberta Education. (2016). Guiding framework for design and development of K-12 provincial
curriculum (Programs of study). Edmonton, AB: Author. Retrieved from:
https://education.alberta.ca/media/3575996/curriculum-development-guiding-
framework.pdf
Assessment in Alberta: Discussion Paper. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2018, from:
LearnAlberta.ca website:
http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/ssass/html/pdf/assessment_in_alberta.pdf
Foothills School Division. (2009). Supporting handbook for assessment, evaluation and reporting
of student learning: A toolbox for educators. Retrieved from
https://www.fsd38.ab.ca/documents/general/Assessment-Handbook-Updated-2016-
1.pdf
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Grading policies that work against standards … and how to fix them.
NASSP Bulletin, 84(620), 20–27. Retrieved from:
http://bul.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/content/84/620/20
O’Connor, K. (2007). A repair kit for grading: 15 fixes for broken grades. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Rockyview Schools. (2018). Report Cards — Rocky View Schools. [online] Available at:
http://www.rockyview.ab.ca/21stC/assessing/reports_cards
Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Basic Education. (2006). Three
purposes of assessment. In Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind:
Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Winnipeg, MB:
Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth. Retrieved from:
https://www.wncp.ca/media/40539/rethink.pdf
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Original Report Card (Foothills School Division, 2009, p. 120-124)
 Group Collaboration Chart
The role(s) of each As a collaborative group we discussed understandings and ideas from the readings, discussed
group member and analyzed different report cards, outlined the elements of our analysis and summary, and
determined we would create a poster “report card of a report card”. We opted to deconstruct
and analyze the Foothills School Division Report Card and Assessment, Evaluation, and
Reporting Handbook. Once we established our outline we discussed imagery of the poster and
decided the reconfigured assessment pyramid from our infographic would anchor our vision
and direction. Next, we divided the tasks with each member taking on one section and three
associated tasks: Malia contributed Value, Lana Analysis Strengths, Erica Analysis
Improvements, Kari Deconstruction, and Rachelle coordinated and organized of all documents,
and created/managed the poster design (google docs x 2, poster, endnotes, references, and
group summary). All members collaborated to polish and improve the first draft of the poster
and text, to ensure the language was concise, and all elements were purposeful. Edits and
refinement of each section were collaborated on as a group and left for final polish and
approval by the section leader. All members of the group contributed and referenced insights
and strategies, gained from the course readings, which informed, supported, and justified
deconstruction and value analysis of the report card. Each group member contributed content
independently, as part of mini-working groups, and as a collective group.

How goals and The goal of our deconstruction and analysis was to articulate how formative and summative
strategies were assessment support reporting and communication, adding value to students and stakeholders.
developed to We communicated through WhatsApp to set a date for an Adobe session. A google doc was
complete the task
initially started with an agenda for the meeting, including an outline of the tasks and rubric
outcomes, to establish structure for next steps and collaboration. During the group Adobe
session, we selected a report card and associated docs, broke down elements of our
understandings against the rubric criteria, and then deconstructed the sections of the report
card, recording our references and point form collective notes on each section. Workload was
then distributed, and a timeline for drafts and completion was agreed upon. A second google
doc was created including an outlined poster, text contributions table, endnotes, references,
and collaboration summary chart. Drafts were created and then reworked in mini-groups
asynchronously. Final edits were then loaded onto the poster and the group communicated
through the google doc and WhatsApp to ensure key ideas were represented and language
was appropriate and balanced on the page. Each group member was actively engaged in the
process of refining the information, based on our collective original vision, and members took
leadership for their sections. Our final asynchronous review ensured all elements of the
poster were articulate and purposeful against the assignment learning outcomes, and that all
references and endnotes were finalized accordingly.

How peer feedback Peer feedback occurred asynchronously and synchronously. We had working documents
was completed which each member had access to, where drafts and final edits were completed. In the
working document we commented on each other’s work, and the section leader
communicated final content and approval for their respective section.

Any other evidence to Our group used various forms of technology to enable our collaboration including an Adobe
show collaboration meeting, google docs, WhatsApp, text messages, emails, phone calls, and some members met
amongst the team face-to-face.