Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

Sample Formal Assessment Task Notification – Part A

Geography – Year 12
Ecosystems at Risk

Sample for implementation for Year 12 from 2019

Rationale

This assessment task is catered to Doonside High stage 6 Geography class, this being the first term of year
12 it is a theory-based research task that is weighted at 20%. Students had just come off the senior
geography project therefore, the task does not have a major fieldwork component. Initially this task was
going to have a presentation aspect, however, this class does not excel at public speaking and prefer more
written/creative based tasks. The nature of this task will take the form of a take home research based
extended response that requires students to incorporate visual evidence in their response. Out of the Ten
(10) students Two (2) are life skills this means that the whole assessment has been scaffolded so all
students have access and are able to demonstrate their learning. This assessment requires students to
undertake geographical inquiry and research to investigate their case study and utilise geographical tools
and skills in order to acquire relevant geographical information. Students will be able to demonstrate their
knowledge and understanding of eco-systems at risk as their will be doing the second case study in class
during the same period. Therefore, they will be Learning the content skills required of them to successfully
communicate geographical information, ideas and issues appropriately in this assessment task. This
Geographical study of the functioning of ecosystems at risk, their management and protection is the first
unit the students undertake in alignment with year 12 Geography syllabus.

Task number: 1 Weighting: 20% Timing: Term 4, Week 8

Components Component Weighting %

Knowledge and understanding of course content 5%
Geographical tools and skills 5%
Geographical inquiry and research, including fieldwork 5%
Communication of geographical information, ideas and issues in appropriate forms 5%
Total 20%

Outcomes assessed
The student:
H1 explains the changing nature, spatial patterns and interaction of ecosystems
H2 explains the factors which place ecosystems at risk and the reasons for their protection
H5 evaluates environmental management strategies in terms of ecological sustainability
H8 plans geographical inquiries to analyse and synthesise information from a variety of sources
H10 applies maps, graphs and statistics, photographs and fieldwork to analyse and integrate data in
geographical contexts
H13 communicates complex geographical information, ideas and issues effectively, using appropriate written
and/or oral, cartographic and graphic forms.

Nature of the task

 Students are to investigate ONE at risk eco-system of their choice and write a (2000) word opinion piece
that will be hypothetically published. Your goal is to convince people to save your ecosystem.

1
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

The task:

‘Identify an at-risk Ecosystem and explain the factors which place this ecosystem at risk and reasons for its
protection. Evaluate the effectiveness of the environmental management strategies in terms of ecological
sustainability?’

Part A: Research and Extended Response Task

Your response must:

o Identify and describe the spatial patterns and dimensions of your ecosystem.
o Explain both the positive and negative impacts humans have on your eco-system.
o Evaluate previous and current management strategy’s in place. Are they successful or successful
in protecting your eco-system?
o Include visual stimuli e.g. maps, graphs, statistics, photographs and (Fieldwork if possible) and
integrate it into your response as evidence.

Marking criteria
Students will be assessed on their ability to:
Criteria for newspaper opinion article Mark
 Demonstrates deep knowledge and understanding of their ecosystem and reasons for
protection
 Clearly explains the factors which place the ecosystem at risk
 Makes well-reasoned judgements on management strategies in terms of ecological
sustainability. 17-20
 Applies relevant evidence, illustrative examples and integrate data in geographical
contexts where appropriate
 Presents a sustained, logical and cohesive answer using appropriate geographical
information, ideas and issues
 Demonstrates knowledge and understanding of their ecosystem and reasons for
protection
 Explains the factors which place the ecosystem at risk
 Makes judgements on management strategies in terms of ecological sustainability.
13-16
 Applies some evidence, illustrative examples and integrate data in geographical
contexts where appropriate
 Presents logical and cohesive answer using appropriate geographical information,
ideas and issues
 Demonstrates some understanding of their ecosystem and reasons for protection
 May provide reasons which place the ecosystem at risk
 Makes some judgements on management strategies in terms of ecological
sustainability. 9-12
 Refers to some evidence, illustrative examples and integrate data in geographical
contexts where appropriate
 Presents a structured answer using appropriate geographical information
 Identifies an ecosystem at risk and some of the factors that place the ecosystem at
risk
5-8
 Makes little or no Judgements on management strategies
 Uses some geographical information
 Demonstrates limited understanding of an ecosystem at risk
1-4
 Limited or no reference to geographical information


Feedback provided

2
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

 Written feedback will be provided on your papers

Assessment Checklist
Checklist
Stage Time Due Completed
Chosen a Case study By the End of Week 2
Describe the spatial patterns and By the End of Week 4
dimensions
Discussed the human impact on the By the End of Week 5
ecosystem
Identified management strategies By the end of Week 6
and began to evaluate their
effectiveness.

Scaffold:

Introduction

- Identify your ecosystem of Choice

- Key features
- Spatial Patterns
- Reasons for Protection

Paragraph 1: Natural impact

Paragraph 1: Natural impact 1
Topic Sentence
Explanation
Example/Evidence
Link to the question
Paragraph 2: Natural Impact 2
Topic Sentence
Explanation
Example/Evidence
Link to the question
Paragraph 3: Natural Impact 3
Topic Sentence
Explanation
Example/Evidence
Link to the question
Subheading 2: Human Impact
Paragraph 4: Human Impact 1
Topic Sentence
Explanation
Example/Evidence
Link to the question
Paragraph 5: Human Impact 2
Topic Sentence
Explanation
Example/Evidence
3
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

Link to the question

Paragraph 6: Human Impact 3
Topic Sentence
Explanation
Example/ Evidence
Link to the question
Subheading 3: Management strategies that address human Impacts
Paragraph 7: Management strategy 1
Describe the management strategy
Judgement statement
Refer to the management criteria
Provide evidence
Paragraph 8: Management strategy 2
Describe the management strategy
Judgement statement
Refer to the management criteria
Provide evidence
Paragraph 9: Management strategy 3
Describe the management strategy
Judgement statement
Refer to the management criteria
Provide evidence
Conclusion

- Refer to reasons of protection

- How successful have the manage strategies been overall?
- What’s needed to be done next?

4
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

Evaluate the importance of assessment and approaches to feedback and assessment design that
will inform your practice in your teaching area.

Assessment is an underlying component of our teaching profession, assessment data is critical as it

can determine future instruction, it acts as an indicator on the effectiveness of our teaching practice and is
a essential measurement tool in Australia’s standards-based education system. Competence in assessment
is key in order for a teacher to reach professional success in an education system as assessment has
become a complex issue that is under intense public scrutiny (Schneider & Bodensohn, 2017, p.127).
Assessment is a professional expectation of a graduate teacher as they must have the capacity ‘to assess,
provide feedback and report on student learning as evidenced in standard 5 of the Australian professional
teaching standards for teachers’(Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2011, p.16). This
paper will evaluate the importance of assessment and approaches to feedback and assessment design
which will inform my own practice. It will also discuss the changes to the HSC requirements and minimum
standards and the impact this has on student outcomes regarding high stakes testing.

Assessment for, assessment as and assessment of learning are “approaches that enable teachers to
gather evidence and make judgements about student achievement” (NESA, 2012). Assessment for Learning
(formative assessment) is a co-operative adventure that occurs throughout the teaching and learning
process with its first and foremost priority being to promote and enhance student understanding (Hooker,
2017, p. 441). Assessment for learning differs from accountability and ranking but provides the opportunity
for student self-assessment, data can be used to modify teaching and learning activities that would suit
students learning and assist with their needs (Hooker, 2017, p. 441). With advances in technology, utilising
google docs and classroom can be used as an engaging method to demonstrate and document student
learning (Hooker, 2017, p. 441). Feedback on student work is essential to student learning and effective
comments on student work are considered an aspect of quality teaching practice (Grainger, 2014, p. 89).
Effective feedback motivates the learner to improve is critical to formative assessment, computer-based
feedback maintains anonymity and does not expose ones need for help to their peers (Timmers, Braber-
van Den Broek, & Van Den Berg, 2013, p.26). Without Formative Assessment guiding classroom instruction,
learning will stagnant and students will not reach high levels of achievement. Assessment as Learning is
when students become their own assessors, where their take responsibility and monitor their own
learning, the activities involved can take the form of short collaborative performance tasks (Gupta, 2016).
In the context of a Geography classroom, this can occur during a mapping-based activity with class-wide
peer tutoring (CWPT) implementation. Class Wide Peer Tutoring (CWPT) involves forming tutoring pairs,
providing tutors with academic scripts e.g. topographical maps with questions and answers, tutors then

5
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

provide praise for correct answers and immediately correct errors, while the teacher monitors the pairs
(DuPaul & Weyandt, 2006). This encourages students to develop their own assessing abilities by providing
both formal and informal feedback, and undertaking both peer/self-assessment (NESA, 2012). If we treat
the curriculum as the bare minimum, we must teach we will never provide the students with real-life skills,
through that through assessment as learning we go above and beyond. There is a tremendous depth of
skills and knowledge like critical thinking, judgements, team-based work and assessing skills that a student
can gain while undertaking activities within this type of assessment, skills that are required of them in a
post-school workforce. Assessment of Learning (summative assessment) “assist teachers in using evidence
of learning to assess achievement against outcomes and standards, this occurs at the end of a unit of
work/term” (NESA, 2012). This is a requirement to demonstrates student learning to outside powers to
ensure all students across the state are achieving the bare minimum in NSW education.

The Australian governments continued push for high stakes testing is “driven by the desire to meet
public accountability, demonstrate transparency and maintain public confidence in schooling” (Klenowski
& Wyatt Smith, 2012). The issue with High-stakes testing is that it has a number of intended and
unintended consequences that is changing the landscape of education sector. To understand the
relationship between high-stakes testing and test scores we must look at it holistically. In some instances
areas that have high-stakes testing implemented have higher test scores compared to non-testing areas
(NYSED, 2003, p.5). These studies occurred early on when High-stakes testing was being implemented,
initially the pressures of the test motivated students to study and prepare improving their outcomes.
However, the nature of high -stakes testing has shifted and become something it was never intended to
be. The publicising of NAPLAN results on MySchool lead to issues of public accountability, it became an
issue of employment and numbers instead of learning. Cook (2018) argues that due to NAPLAN “parents'
trust in the state school system has taken a hit, with only 51.7 per cent reporting high levels of confidence
in the sector” (Cook, 2018). The growing public focus on the education system is forcing teachers alter
their practice to ‘teach for the test’. This has ignored the purpose of learning and placed educational
boundaries on the potential for student academic achievement as they are pushed to solely achieve well in
a single standardised test. This paper argues that there is too much importance placed on high-stakes
testing like NAPLAN, and should only be used as an external, private diagnostic test to decide the allocation
of resources. Students have become disengaged with learning they discuss how to get higher results in the
HSC by taking higher scaled subjects and not the ones that interest the student. High-stakes testing is in
fact holding back learners from reaching their maximum potential and perhaps limiting their creative and
critical thinking potential. There are well-recognised concerns about “under-utilising the professional

6
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

abilities of teachers and focusing disproportionate resources on borderline students to raise their
achievement outcomes” (Klenowski & Wyatt Smith, 2012). Teachers have shifted their focus on low-
achieving learners due to external pressures, this alienates gifted learns having classroom activities being
unresponsive to the needs for gifted learners. (Jolly, 2015). This leads to an “overemphasis on basic skills
and a concurrent neglect of higher order and critical thinking in both testing and classroom practice”
(Klenowski & Wyatt Smith, 2012; Jolly, 2015). The format of these testing conditions, the limitations of
current print-dependent testing has excluded twenty-first-century skills, including working in teams and
online to use and create knowledge. (Klenowski & Wyatt Smith, 2012). The nature of high stakes and high
accountability nature of testing gives prominence to a narrow set of outcomes which end up shaping
teaching and learning within the classroom setting (Klenowski & Wyatt Smith, 2012). Teaching for high
stakes testing is occupying significant time in an already crowded curriculum, influencing teaching
strategies making learning less engaging and ‘fun’ (Polesel, Rice & Dulfur, 2013) These “hyper-narrowed
curriculums utilise often commercially produced collections of pre-packaged texts and resources targeted
solely at the skills and content to be covered on the various high stake’s tests” (Healy, 2008). Due to this
the nature of high-stakes testing must adapt to the context of todays world, technology has changed
everything however, education seems to be stalled whether this is due to willingness or funding. The fact is
students possess strong ICT skills that this should be utilised at every stage in order to engage them with
learning removing the narrowed curriculum that is installing educational barriers. The education system
must go further and not only adapt teaching and learning strategies but the nature of high stakes testing in
order for students to be successful. Therefore, High-stakes testing is necessary to improve equality in
education but due to lack of resources, time and energy there are currently and most likely for the near
future will always be more negatives than positives.

The changing of the HSC minimum standards appears to be an unpremeditated response to the
declining literacy and numeracy results. The continued stigma around setting a minimum standard of
literacy and numeracy skills is not only applying further pressure on our students, teachers and schools but
will not achieve its desired result. This is evident as the decision to link the year 9 NAPLAN results to the
HSC has been reverted. This change inadvertently transformed the year 9 NAPLAN test into a high-stakes
test, this would remove the value of the HSC. The decision to allow students to sit the literacy and
numeracy tests only at home at any time prior to the HSC is a successful strategy limiting student stress an
protecting the validity of the HSC (NESA, 2018). While at the same time monitoring student’s literacy and
numeracy skills. This paper argues that changing the testing system will not improve scores, however
providing adequate funding, resources and teachers will improve the teaching and learning cycle. By

7
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

Limiting an over-crowded curriculum and shifting it to be more focused on specific areas for each
individual while also removing the pressures of high-stakes testing will all contribute to a more engaging
and successful education system.

8
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

References

Board of Studies Teaching and Educational Standards, (2018). Stronger HSC Standards Blueprint. Retrieved
from http://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/wcm/connect/d210fd41-8c61-4754-aa45-
7476b9305b1d/stronger-hsc-standards-bostes-blueprint.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=

Dupaul, G., & Weyandt, L. (2006). School‐based Intervention for Children with Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder: Effects on academic, social, and behavioural functioning. International
Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 53(2), 161-176.

Gupta, K. (2016). Assessment As Learning. The Science Teacher, 83(1), 43-47.

Grainger, R, P., (2014). How do preservice teacher education students move from novice to expert
assessors?. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online), 39(7), 89-105.

Gredley, R. (2018). Initial NAPLAN results show no improvement. AAP General News Wire, p. AAP General
News Wire, Aug 27, 2018.

Hooker, T. (2017). Transforming teachers' formative assessment practices through ePortfolios. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 67(C), 440-453.

Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2012). The impact of high stakes testing: The Australian story.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 65-79.

NESA. (2018). Changes to the HSC minimum standard.https://education.nsw.gov.au/news/media-

releases/changes-to-the-hsc-minimum-standard

The Impact of High-Stakes Exams on Students and Teachers, New York State Education Department, (2004)
Retrieved from
http://www.oms.nysed.gov/faru/TheImpactofHighStakesExams_files/The_Impact_of_High-
Stakes_Exams.pdf

The cost of high stakes testing for high-ability students. (2015). Australasian Journal of Gifted Education,
24(1), 30-36.

Jolly, J., (2015). The cost of high stakes testing for high-ability students. Australasian Journal of Gifted
Education, Vol. 24, 30-36.

Timmers, Braber-van Den Broek, & Van Den Berg. (2013). Motivational beliefs, student effort, and
feedback behaviour in computer-based formative assessment. Computers & Education, 60(1), 25-
31.
NESA (2018) Changes to the HSC minimum standard.https://education.nsw.gov.au/news/media-
releases/changes-to-the-hsc-minimum-standard

9
Stuart McMahon – Geography 2B

10