G.U.S.S.E.T.

(Generic Universal Social Studies Evaluation Tool)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Generic Universal Social Studies Evaluation Tool Concept

In much the same way as a young graduate was once given the single word of advice "Plastics", a very experienced teacher once said to me that the single most USEFUL advice he could give me was to create recurring exercises so I wouldn't spend all of my time creating  new assignments. Having taken this, to heart, and being a Database developer in a previous life AND a historian who recognizes that in history,  the questions are frequently the same, only the data and the answers are different...  I conceived what will probably be my true lifesaver in my first year of teaching .  I believe it will not only fulfill the goal of accurately assessing student understanding, but it will provide them with valuable training IN AND OF ITSELF that will further their education. Furthermore, because the application of this tool can be extremely varied , the tool itself , with the exception of its data grid can remain entirely the same. and as the data grid can be generated by machine this will leave me with a flexible reliable standard tool for gauging student understanding that will free me from the drudgery of preparing "interesting exercises and projects" so that I can spend more time reading and evaluating the work of my students...

FORMAT

each GUSSET consists of a data grid, attached documents and a series of questions. 

The data grid is a matrix composed of five columns "Events, people, facts/concepts, places/artifacts, and documents. I will probably limit the grid to twenty rows just to keep it form frightening new students. the grid itself will be populated from database with items fitting specified parameters with regard to topic/time period, geography etc but otherwise randomly selected within those parameters and then "Seeded" with intelligently chosen items.... The documents column functions as an index of attached documents... all of these will change with each new assignment. generally there will be 60% items from the current unit 30% items from past units and 10% from future units

The questions section I hope to leave untouched for the entire course, and not just the unit, because the question pertaining to historical data , and the basic manipulations that show familiarity with the facts of a given era/subject are generally the same regardless of which period or subject.

The flexibility of the tool lies primarily in its application. budget permitting   I will be handing out one at the beginning of each period. on instructional day they will be encouraged to take notes on it in the margins, and then be asked to take it home and finish a segment of the questions as regular  homework.

As a project it can be assigned with instructions to link it to outside media sources (newspaper/books/internet) and the students asked to compose a SINGLE answer to the multiple questions (IE whatever you write will need to address these questions)

within the class it is admirably structured to serve as a framework for a jigsaw assignment., and of course it will function quite well as a conventional test.

lastly , instead of merely marking something as "wrong" the format of this tool allows a student to "challenge" a low grade, by writing more on the top... IE if a student marks that the united fruit company is somehow linked to moon exploration then i would be inclined to mark that off BUT if the students will be required to "defend" some portion of their answers in writing...or possibly to write "peer review" answers with regards to the answers of fellow students....

the questions are divided into "acquired knowledge" and "enduring understandings" and assignments  would include instructions like "do 2 of question 4 and 3 of question 2" or "pick one question from each question section"... 

At beginning of class after passing out the packet  I might say "be prepared to make an oral argument at the end of class for (pick a question) with each student knowing they would be picked once during the term..

GUSSET APPLICATIONS PROTOCOLS:

Daily Activity:

• DataGrid: Grid is populated with 50% material from that day, 10% previous day,10%previous week,10%next day and 10%current events
• Distribution: Distributed at the beginning of class. Collected at the beginning of the next class.
• Guidelines: during class student discussion and note taking are allowed but NO student is to write on another's GUSSET except in specifically marked  areas during peer review activities. Students should be instructed in and expected to understand the difference  between discussion and transcription.
• Activities 
  • During lecture and discussion students may take notes on their GUSSET to facilitate later answers
  • Students are invited to, and should be given time to complete their answers in class but should also be offered the opportunity to take GUSSET home to complete.
  • Students will be called upon, on a random order rotation basis to offer oral defense of their answers
  • students wishing to appeal a grade must submit their paper for peer review. If peer review concurs , annotates their reasons properly and signs, the  paper is passed back to the teacher for reconsideration.
  • students wishing to appeal a grade may request time to offer an oral defense of their position
  • students wishing to appeal a grade may submit a written defense/elaboration of their position

Weekly Evaluation

• DataGrid: Grid is populated with 50% material from that week, 10% previous week,10%previous unit,10%next week and 10%current events
• Distribution: Distributed at the beginning of class. Collected when completed (before the end of class).
• Guidelines: No discussion to take place during exam. Students who finish early may offer assistance in mechanics as papers come in. 
• Activities :Students  should complete quiz during the period 
  • Students will be called upon, on a random order rotation basis to offer oral defense of their answers
  • students wishing to appeal a grade must submit their paper for peer review. If peer review concurs , annotates their reasons properly and signs, the  paper is passed back to the teacher for reconsideration.
  • students wishing to appeal a grade may request time to offer an oral defense of their position
  • students wishing to appeal a grade may submit a written defense/elaboration of their position

Group Activity: Jigsaw

• DataGrid: Grid is populated with 50% material from Unit to date, 10% fresh material on same subject,10% material from next unit,10%"personal events" and 10%current events
• Distribution: Distributed at the beginning of class. Collected : as assigned. individual signed supporting papers will be collected as well as group project.
• Guidelines:  topic to be assigned with sufficient specificity to support commonality of specialists for jigsaw task groups. topics, papers and group assignments should be handed out before exiting the previous days class so that groups can get right down to work. Ideally should build on individual projects as task group areas.
• Activities :
  • Students should come in that morning and assemble in their task groups
  • Students should reassemble into their home groups at 1/3 of the way through the class 
  • students should begin writing at 2/3 of the way through class

Individual Project

• DataGrid: Grid is populated with 50% material from Unit to date, 10% fresh material on same subject,10% material from next unit,10%"personal events" and 10%current events
• Distribution: Distributed at the beginning of class. Collected : as assigned. 
• Guidelines: during class student discussion and note exchanges  are allowed but NO student is to write on another's GUSSET except in specifically marked  areas during peer review activities. Students should be instructed in and expected to understand the difference  between discussion/contribution and transcription. Should be encouraged towards areas that will form  jigsaw task group competancies.
• Activities 
  • Time should be allowed for students to discuss potential options and materials on the day the materials are handed out. Attribution of other students contributions is expected.
  • Students wishing to appeal a grade must submit their paper for peer review. If peer review group concurs , annotates their reasons properly and signs, the  paper is passed back to the teacher for reconsideration.
  • students wishing to appeal/raise a grade may request time to offer an oral defense of their position
  • students wishing to appeal/raise a grade may submit a written defense/elaboration of their position

Unit Evaluation

• DataGrid: Grid is populated with 50% material from Unit to date, 10% fresh material on same subject,10% material from next unit,10%"personal events" and 10%current events
• Distribution: Distributed at the beginning of class. Collected when completed (before the end of class).
• Guidelines: No discussion to take place during exam. Students who finish early may offer assistance in mechanics as papers come in. 
• Activities :Students  should complete quiz during the period 
  • Students will be called upon, on a random order rotation basis to offer oral defense of their answers
  • students wishing to appeal a grade must submit their paper for peer review. If peer review concurs , annotates their reasons properly and signs, the  paper is passed back to the teacher for reconsideration.
  • students wishing to appeal/raise a grade may request time to offer an oral defense of their position
  • students wishing to appeal/raise a grade may submit a written defense/elaboration of their position

Generic Universal Social Studies Evaluation Tool SAMPLE

Questions/Answers Section (page 1)

Questions/Answers Section (page 2)

Generic Universal Social Studies Evaluation Tool RUBRIC

NOTE: on the design of this rubric:

1)Language mechanics  is a non-subjective criteria... no mechanical errors= perfect mechanical score. It also gives challenged students one area in which, if they apply themselves, they should be able to consistently get a perfect grade  and though this will be diminished in importance by wieghting should still provide a useful boost.

2) I have not yet determined weighting... but it would probably be a simple 1,1,2,2,1 IE heavier weight to content and argument