As a group, we examined items and readings previously marked by the larger group as needing revision. Many items required changes in wording. Some items needed distractor revisions as the best choice may not be clear. Three of the readings were considered too long, at over 150 lines, and will need to be shortened, using a preamble. Footnotes will be added to several readings to handle complex vocabulary not attainable through context clues.
Next, we examined the imbalances on the blueprint for both forms of the ENG0302 equivalency exams to determine what questions would need to be revised, dropped and added. For moves requiring changes in difficulty, from A to B to C, items could be revised. For moves requiring changes in outcome, from 1 to 2, items would likely to be dropped and new items added, with these new items preferably attached to the same reading. Questions will need to be added to provide outcome 3 questions for both forms.
Lastly, we examined item sets to see if we needed to replace any to achieve balance on the blueprint. We removed two readings and their accompanying items. The group established that readings were directly related to texts covered in the curriculum should not be used on equivalency exams to maintain fairness. Form B will require a functional writing reading.
In the end, the group came up with a revision plan, to be published at foundationalcurriculum.com in the coming week. Revision tasks will be shared with the larger group of English Language Arts faculty. More importantly, we came away as a new team. Thanks to Maureen Stewart for setting up the event and providing guidance for the group during review. Thanks to Patricia Pryce, Susan Lemmer, Tasha Nott, Meghan Clayton, Murray Ronaghan and Jennefer Rousseau for taking the time to review. Next time, I promise to bring patio chairs.
Well said, Carey! It was a very busy day with much accomplished. Thank you to all who participated. I look forward to the next stage in the project.
ReplyDelete