Equipped for the Future

Assessment Report

National Institute for Literacy

NIFL

By Sri Ananda

WestEd

EFF TECHNICAL REPORT

How Instructors Can Support Adult Learners

Through Performance-Based Assessment
Equipped for the Future

Assessment Report

National Institute for Literacy

NIFL

By Sri Ananda

WestEd

July 2000

EFF TECHNICAL REPORT

How Instructors Can Support Adult Learners

Through Performance-Based Assessment
Equipped for the Future publications are available from ED Pubs:

Publication No.

EX 0019P Equipped for the Future: Customer-Driven Vision for Adult Literacy 

and Lifelong Learning, July 1995

EX 0020P Equipped for the Future: Reform Agenda for Adult Literacy and 

Lifelong Learning, February 1997

EX 0094P EFF Voice: Equipped for the Future, Vol. 1, No. 1, Fall/Winter 1999 

(Newsletter)

EX 0099P Equipped for the Future Content Standards: What Adults Need to 

Know and Be Able to Do in the 21st Century, January 2000

EX 0106P Equipped for the Future Research Report: Building the Framework,

1993 – 1997, March 2000

Equipped for the Future Assessment Report: How Instructors Can 

Support Adult Learners Through Performance-Based Assessment,

July 2000

TO ORDER: 

1. Call toll free: 1-877-4ED-Pubs (1-877-433-7827)*

2. Use the Internet: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html

3. Send e-mail to: edpubs@inet.ed.gov

4. Ask for Publication No.: (see above)

*If 877 is not yet available in your area, call 1-800-USA-LEARN (1-800-872-5327); 

TTY/TDD call 1-800-437-0833.
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

SECTION 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

SECTION 2

Key Characteristics of Performance-Based Assessments for the Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Demonstrate Technical Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Linked Directly to Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Grounded in Theories of Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Serve as Instructional and Assessment Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Be Cognitively Demanding, Requiring Application and Integration of Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Require Shift in Roles of Instructor and Student . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Reflect and Accommodate Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

SECTION 3

Examples of Performance-Based Assessment Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Written Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Project Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Portfolio Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

SECTION 4

Scoring and Reporting Results on Student Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Developing Effective Scoring Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

The EFF Performance Data Collection Rubrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Reporting on Student Progress and Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24



Table of Contents

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT
SECTION 5

Developing Performance-Based Assessment Tasks and 

Preparing Students for Them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

How to Select or Develop Performance-Based Assessment Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

How to Prepare Students for Performance-Based Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

SECTION 6

The Role of Performance-Based Assessments in 

a Comprehensive Adult Learner Assessment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

References

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT
1

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

ARLIER THIS YEAR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE

for Literacy (NIFL) published Equipped

for the Future Content Standards:

What Adults Need to Know and be Able

to Do in the 21st Century. Based on six years of fieldbased research efforts, the Equipped for the Future

Content Standards provide a new definition of adult

literacy and lifelong learning, one that accurately

reflects the full range of skills and knowledge that

enable adults to carry out their responsibilities as

parents and family members, citizens and community members, and workers.

Work on an assessment framework for these

standards is underway and will be completed in

2002. In the meantime, however, programs using

the EFF Framework and Standards to guide curriculum and instruction have asked for assistance in

developing assessment tools that will enable them to

measure progress on these new standards. This

paper is a first step in providing such guidance.

Written by Dr. Sri Ananda, an assessment specialist who has been providing technical assistance

to the EFF development team, this paper describes

an important development in the educational

arena—the use of performance-based assessments

as part of a comprehensive system aimed at measuring student performance relative to challenging content and performance standards. The paper

provides an orientation to the key characteristics of

effective performance-based assessments, so that

instructors already using EFF Standards can understand how performance-based assessment tools can

be used to measure progress relative to these standards. Work has already begun on a handbook that

will assist instructors in applying the guidelines

presented here to the development of EFF assessment tasks geared to the standards and dimensions

of performance. Based on ongoing work in EFF field

development sites, the handbook should be available by January, 2001.

The author of this paper, Sri Ananda, is an educational researcher and assessment specialist with a

broad range of experience on assessment-related

issues and practices. Dr. Ananda is co-director of the

Assessment and Standards Development Services

program at WestEd, the educational research and

development organization that has been designated

by the U.S. Department of Education as the “Assessment Specialty Regional Laboratory.” In this capacity, Dr. Ananda directs several high-profile standards

and assessment projects at the national, state, and

local levels.

This paper is based on years of work on performance-based assessment by the author and her

colleagues at WestEd. The author also wishes to

acknowledge the helpful comments on earlier

drafts provided by Sondra Stein, Peggy McGuire,

and Joan Wills.



Preface

E
QUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE (EFF) IS A

standards-based system reform initiative aimed at improving the quality

and outcomes of the adult literacy

and lifelong learning delivery system. It is predicated

on the concept that the skills adult learners need for

success as parents, workers, and citizens go beyond

the basic academic skills traditionally targeted by

adult education programs. Over a six-year period,

EFF developed consensus among adult learners and

educators across the nation that in order to be effective, adult education programs must help adult

learners apply the basic academic skills to real life

situations, build problem solving and thinking

skills, and develop strong interpersonal skills. The

EFF Standards embody these important aspects of

adult literacy. The Standards provide a vehicle for

instructors and programs to align teaching and

assessment with preparing adults to carry out everyday activities that are important to adult roles as

parents, citizens, and workers.

At present, adult education systems are locked

into a more traditional approach to teaching and

assessment. Forced to rely for both assessment and

accountability on tests of adult learning that focus

on decontextualized skills and rely heavily on multiple-choice test items, instructors of adult education

find it difficult to fully integrate important higherorder cognitive and interpersonal skills into instruction and assessment—even though they know these

skills are critical to the success of their students in

the real world.

Performance-based assessment is an approach

to assessment that is congruent with EFF’s emphasis

on real world performance. Performance-based

assessments require the examinee to construct or

produce a response to an assessment item or task.1

This is different from multiple-choice testing in

which the examinee must select the correct response

on an assessment item. Performance-based assessment includes cognitively demanding, hands-on

activities. It aims to stimulate learners to think, react

to new situations, review, revise and evaluate their

work, and communicate in verbal and visual ways.

Examples of performance-based assessment methods include problem-solving scenarios, journals,

projects, performances, computer simulation tasks,

and portfolios.

Throughout the 1990s, performance-based

assessment has been gaining ground in K-12 education and in occupational testing and certification.

Increasingly, it is seen as an important component

of a comprehensive assessment system aimed at

measuring performance relative to challenging content and performance standards. Performancebased assessments are attractive to policymakers,

educators, and certification agencies because they

help provide a more comprehensive and valid picture of student achievement related to real world

outcomes than that produced solely by multiplechoice and short written-response tests.

Comprehensive approaches to assessment are

intended to address internal as well as external

assessment and accountability purposes, and, as a

3

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT



Introduction

E

1

Other terms commonly used to refer to the class of assessments that requires the examinee to

construct or produce a response include alternative assessment and authentic assessment.
result, include a range of assessment instruments,

including both multiple-choice tests and performance-based assessments. Nationally standardized

tests, such as the Adult Basic Learning Examination

(ABLE), the Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System (CASAS), the Tests of Adult Basic 

Education (TABE), and the GED high school equivalency examinations are examples of external measures of adult student learning. External assessments

are measures that are “imposed” from the outside

for accountability purposes. They are used to determine the extent to which adult programs are achieving certain goals or mandates. They are also used to

determine whether or not students have met some

external criterion for performance (e.g., learned

enough to qualify for a high school equivalency

diploma). In contrast, internal assessments typically

are measures that are developed and used within

programs or classrooms to gauge learning and provide important diagnostic information to students.

Clearly, both external and internal assessments contribute to a complete picture of student

achievement. There must be improvements in both

types of assessments in order to realize the goal of a

comprehensive, fully integrated assessment system

for adult learning. Therefore, it is important for

instructors of adult learners to be familiar with the

range of assessments that might comprise a comprehensive assessment system for adult learners.

This paper introduces instructors who are

using the EFF Standards to specific performancebased assessment methods that show promise for

measuring progress relative to the EFF Standards.

• Section II describes the key characteristics of effective performance-based assessments for the classroom.

• Section III provides specific examples of performance-based assessment methods.

• Section IV describes how to evaluate or score student performance on performance-based assessment tasks and how to explain results to adult

learners and others.

• Section V describes how to develop performancebased assessment tasks and prepare students for

them.

• Section VI discusses the role of performancebased assessment for purposes of instruction and

accountability.

4

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Performance-based assessment includes cognitively demanding, hands-on activities.

It aims to stimulate learners to think, react to new situations, review, revise and evaluate 

their work, and communicate in verbal and visual ways.
S DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE EMERGING CONsensus is that a comprehensive student

assessment system must include

multiple assessment techniques,

including performance-based assessments, in order

to assess the broadest possible range of skills and to

allow students to show their skills in different ways.

Performance-based assessments are particularly

useful in adult education classrooms because they

embody the kind of learning or work that has value

and meaning beyond the classroom. There is substantial agreement about characteristics that underlie effective use of performance-based assessments

in the classroom. These key characteristics are

described below.

Demonstrate Technical Quality

Like traditional standardized tests, performancebased assessments must meet accepted levels of technical quality. Among other attributes, technical

quality of assessments includes validity (the degree

to which an assessment measures what it is purported to measure) and reliability (the consistency and

stability of assessment scores). Although most educators understand that assessments used for highstakes purposes, such as program evaluation or

award of a high school diploma, must demonstrate

technical quality, some do not realize that equivalent

technical quality is essential in all contexts, including

classroom assessment. Stiggins (1997) describes five

aspects of general and technical quality that apply to

performance-based assessments for classroom use:

■ Clear targets. Instructors who select or develop

performance-based assessments must have a clear

sense of what they are assessing. Using EFF Standards as the basis for assessment helps to clarify

the targets. The EFF Content Standards and

dimensions of performance also serve to ground

the assessment tasks so that there is more consistency in the skills being assessed and in the criteria for gauging how well learners are performing.

■ Focused purpose. Performance-based assessment is not an end unto itself. Instructors must be

able to articulate why an assessment is being conducted and how the results will be used. For

example, the purpose of a portfolio assessment

might be to assess an adult learner’s work readiness skills (e.g., effective use of teamwork, communication, and technology), yielding meaningful

results for presentation to potential employers.

■ Proper method. A sound performance-based

assessment matches the method with the intended

target. If the purpose of an assessment is to determine how effectively an adult learner can plan,

then having the student actually develop and document a plan for some specified purpose (e.g.,

planning a community event) is appropriate.

■ Sound sampling. Given time and other limitations, performance-based assessments use only a

sample of tasks from the infinite number of tasks

that are possible to assess a student’s learning.

Good assessment yields a representative sample of

5

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT



Key Characteristics of

Performance-Based Assessments 

for the Classroom

A
student performance—that is, enough of the

right kind of information to draw solid conclusions about student achievement.

■ Accurate assessment, free of bias and distortion. To ensure accuracy and freedom from bias

and distortion, performance-based assessments

must be carefully designed and reviewed prior to

use. Because human judgment is often relied on in

evaluating performance on alternative assessment

tasks, evaluator bias or prejudice must be avoided.

Linked Directly to Standards 

The EFF Standards establish challenging expectations for learning. They set goals to guide curriculum

and instruction and also provide a common set of

criteria that can be used to evaluate student learning.

Performance-based assessment tools should be carefully designed to measure student progress towards

achieving EFF Standards. Specifically, assessments

must require students to demonstrate the particular

knowledge, skills, and modes of thinking described

by the Standards so that accurate inferences can be

drawn about student achievement relative to these

Standards. For example, if an assessment is supposed

to measure the Standard Speak so that Others Can

Understand, a multiple-choice test will not suffice

because it does not directly involve the targeted skill,

speaking. The assessment task that targets this Standard should require the student to demonstrate

effective speaking skills (e.g., engage in a dialogue;

give an extemporaneous answer to a question; make

a formal oral presentation) and evaluate his or her

ability to speak in a way that others can understand

according to the criteria specified in the Standard’s

components of performance.

In addition to linking to Standards, performance-based assessments should also link directly

to instruction—that is, to what students are actually

taught and have the opportunity to learn. Assessments should mirror instructional strategies that are

regularly used with students. For example, the experience of many large-scale student assessment programs is that students who have not had the

opportunity to write essays and internalize principles of good writing in class tend to perform poorly

on the essay components of statewide assessments.

Therefore, if students are expected to demonstrate

effective writing skills, then they should have sufficient opportunities in the classroom to develop and

use these skills before being assessed on them.

Grounded in Theories of Learning

Performance-based assessment is grounded in theories of learning that emphasize making meaning

through thinking and doing. For example, constructivism holds that knowledge is actively constructed

and that individuals create meaning by taking an

active role in their own learning. That is, they learn

by writing, discussing, creating products, and making decisions about learning. They do not learn as

well by passive participation, simply listening to the

instructor and restating what the instructor says

(Newmann, et. al., 1995).

The concept of contextual teaching and learning also underlies the application of performancebased assessment. Simply stated, students learn and

perform best in context. For example, students better understand and internalize statistical concepts by

actually conducting and analyzing a survey rather

than simply responding to statistical problems 

presented in a textbook, devoid of any meaningful

context. Performance-based assessment tasks, like

contextual learning tasks, use real-life applications

to reinforce academic knowledge and skills.

Performance-based assessment also acknowledges the important role of social interaction in

learning. Many theories of intellectual development

recognize that interaction facilitates intellectual

6

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Performance-based assessment is grounded 

in theories of learning that emphasize making meaning 

through thinking and doing.
development (Katz & Chard, 1989). Assessment

methods, such as portfolio and project-based assessments, encourage students to discuss their work

with their peers and instructors and get feedback as

they develop and refine their products.

Finally, recent research on motivation also

supports the use of performance-based assessment.

One research finding is that instructors encourage

motivation determinants, such as self-confidence

and self-efficacy (i.e., empowerment from being

actively involved in one’s own learning), by providing adult learners with meaningful feedback on

their work and helping them to regulate their own

learning. Moreover, as a contextual teaching and

learning tool, performance-based assessment is

intrinsically motivating because it emphasizes the

relevance of the learning content to the individual

(McMillan, 1997).

Serve as Instructional and 

Assessment Tools 

Performance-based assessment purposefully blurs

the lines between teaching, learning, and assessing.

At times, an assessment can serve simply as a gauge

of student progress. At other times, it can also serve

as a powerful instructional tool, providing meaningful learning experiences in itself (Stiggins,

1997). Assessment tasks should be engaging,

thought provoking, and motivating. To increase

student motivation, when possible, assessments

should provide adult learners with an opportunity

to integrate their own interests and particular

modes of learning into their assessment response.

In order for assessments to serve as a tool for

both teaching and gauging progress, adult learners

must be active partners in the assessment process. For

example, assessment tasks should be tailored to allow

for a range of responses or performances that might

demonstrate mastery of one or more Standards.

Moreover, students should participate in the analysis

and evaluation of their work in order to internalize

the critical elements of problem solving and better

understand how to improve their performance.

Be Cognitively Demanding, 

Requiring Application and Integration 

of Knowledge

As the EFF Standards attest, the solution to many

problems in daily adult life requires the integrated

application of content knowledge, complex thinking, reasoning, problem solving, and reflection

skills. Performance-based assessments that model

such real-world demands call for more than simple

recall of facts, concepts, or procedures. They require

students to actually apply their knowledge and skills

in ways that correspond to the use of knowledge and

skills in real life. For example, tasks may ask students

to analyze or explain cause-and-effect relationships,

develop defensible hypotheses or valid conclusions,

justify ideas or procedures, investigate and resolve

realistic problems, produce complex products or

events, or evaluate the work of self or others

(O’Neill & Stansbury et. al., 1999).

Some forms of performance-based assessment

are inherently more cognitively complex and integrated than others. For example, assessments that

are conducted over time, such as projects and portfolios, are almost always more cognitively demanding than assessments that require students to do or

write something “on the spot” (e.g., on-demand

assessments). Nevertheless, even on-demand assessments, such as a short, in-class essay, can require

cognitively complex thinking and integration.

Require Shift in Roles 

of Instructor and Student

Integrating some of the more challenging performance-based assessment methods, such as projects

7

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

As a contextual teaching and learning tool, performance-based 

assessment is intrinsically motivating because it emphasizes the relevance 

of the learning content to the individual.
and portfolios, into classroom practice requires

both instructors and students to redefine their traditional roles and how they interact with one another.

Instructors must give up some control, allowing students to take on substantial responsibility for their

learning and to work more independently. They

must also create an instructional environment that

promotes student responsibility. As students begin

to make more choices and decisions about their

learning, instructors must learn to work effectively

as coaches, balancing when to demand and when to

support. Although students take on more responsibility for learning, the role of the instructor remains

very active. Instructors must regularly monitor students’ work for information that can help shape

future learning goals and any necessary changes to

instruction. This is a significant shift in roles for

both instructors and students, requiring time for

both to become comfortable and effective in the

new environment.

Another challenge to performance-based

assessment is the support needed by instructors

who are interested in implementing such assessments in classroom practice. Performance-based

assessment is not business as usual. To successfully

incorporate such assessments into instruction and

classroom activities, instructors need help and

resources, including professional development

opportunities. They need to be trained or mentored by colleagues who have done this before.

Instructors also need additional classroom planning time to design assessment activities, as well as

to help manage and store student work. For example, as students work on projects and portfolios,

they collect and generate various materials and

products over time. The instructor needs to consider early on how to plan for performance-based

assessment tasks to help ensure that students have

sufficient access to necessary resources and have

space for organizing and storing materials and

work in progress.

Reflect and Accommodate Diversity

Differences in students’ culture, language, learning

styles, and preferred modes of expression can and

often do influence students’ participation in the

classroom and their performances on assessments

(O’Neill & Stansbury, et. al., 1999). For example,

many students have difficulty performing well on

assessments that conflict with their cultural norms

or require them to process information quickly in a

language other than their first. Similarly, students

who do not excel in verbal forms of expression are

usually disadvantaged by assessments that require

only verbal responses. Performance-based assessments should accommodate differences among students, giving all students sufficient opportunities to

effectively show their knowledge and skills.

While classroom assessments must have some

elements of standardization in order to be fair to all

students (e.g., the same basic requirements for completing the task), they should also provide a range of

task types and opportunities for choice and support

to accommodate student differences. Specifically,

performance-based assessments should provide students, whenever possible, with different avenues to

demonstrate learning (e.g., writing, creating “handson” projects, illustrating information or relationships through diagrams, graphs).

Also, instructions for performance-based

assessment tasks should be written using simple,

concise sentences in order to ensure that students

understand what the assessment requires of them.

Students who are still learning English and students

with learning disabilities should be accommodated

by any reasonable means, such as extending the

time limits for administration or by reading

instructions aloud.

8

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Performance-based assessments should accommodate differences 

among students, giving all students sufficient opportunities to effectively 

show their knowledge and skills.
GREAT VARIETY AND RANGE OF ASSESSment methods and tasks fall under

the umbrella of performance-based

assessment: projects, portfolios,

performance tasks, computer simulations, scientific

or mathematical inquiries, research reports, etc. To

allow for more in-depth discussion, we consider

three major types of performance-based assessment

methods in this section: written scenarios, projects,

and portfolios.

These three assessment methods were selected

as examples for several reasons. First, they have each

been used extensively and successfully in different

educational programs across the nation. Second,

because they differ in the scope of the task and the

skills that they target, these assessment methods

offer a glimpse of the range of possibilities associated with performance-based assessment. Finally,

these assessment methods were selected due to their

potential for reinforcing and measuring learning

relative to the EFF standards.

Written Scenarios

The written scenario is a type of on-demand writing

task. On-demand writing tasks require students to

respond in writing to an assessment prompt and

complete the task within a relatively short amount

of time (typically 15 minutes to one hour). This

assessment format is suited to measuring students’

depth more than breadth of knowledge, and their

ability to organize knowledge in relatively complex

ways. A written scenario is an on-demand writing

task that requires the student to apply previous

knowledge and pose written solutions to realistic

problems. Students must not only recall knowledge,

but must also be able to use the information to carry

out a range of complex cognitive behaviors, such as

organizing, summarizing, classifying, comparing,

relating, analyzing, synthesizing, evaluating, generalizing, inferring, predicting, concluding, applying,

solving, and/or creating.

Written-scenario tasks vary in length and

scope. Depending on the prompt, some responses

may take two to three paragraphs, while others may

take one or two pages. Figure 1 shows two examples

of written-scenario tasks that are targeted to specific

EFF standards and can be administered as ondemand classroom assessments. Note that each

written-scenario task has a title, a prompt, and

instructions. The title (e.g., The Talkative Reader,

Ben’s Job Dilemma) identifies the task with a word

or short descriptive phrase related to the prompt.

The scenario prompt provides background information on the item, succinctly describing a problem or

situation to be considered. This information sets the

stage for writing and is written to capture students’

interest in the topic. The instructions tell students

what to do. They clearly outline the specific “question(s)” to be answered and aspects of content to be

considered when responding. Written scenarios

should also include evaluation criteria, clearly articulating what students must demonstrate to receive a

good score or grade. In summary, the format of a

writing task is very important in helping to ensure

that students know what they are being asked to

write about, which skills they need to demonstrate,

and how their response will be evaluated.

The first scenario example in Figure 1, The

9

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT



Examples of Performance-Based

Assessment Methods

A
Talkative Reader, involves the role of family or parent. It calls for a parent to solve a problem with his

or her child’s teacher. The second scenario, Ben’s Job

Dilemma, deals with the role of worker. It calls for

the student to use his or her knowledge of career

development to evaluate someone else’s strategy for

finding work. Notice that both scenario tasks

require the learner to explain his or her thinking or

actions. Also, note that the evaluation criteria listed

are directly connected to EFF Standards, applications, or underlying knowledge linked to those

standards.

A major advantage of written scenarios is that

they are easy to develop and administer compared

to other performance-based assessment methods.

As previously mentioned, written scenarios can be

administered in a single class period. Compare this

to projects and portfolios, both of which entail

long-term support to students over the course of

several weeks or months.

Another desirable feature of scenarios is their

flexibility. For example, the scenarios presented in

Figure 1 could also be presented orally and require

oral rather than written responses by students.

Some instructors prefer to introduce the idea of scenarios to their students as oral problem-solving

tasks. They encourage students to discuss the scenarios and solve the problems orally as a group.

This variant on the written scenario is perfectly

acceptable, depending on the needs and abilities of

the group of learners being taught. Instead of assessing the EFF Standard Convey Ideas in Writing, oral

scenarios target the EFF Standard Speak So Others

Can Understand.

1 0

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

The format of a written scenario is very important in helping to ensure 

that students know what they are being asked to write about, which skills they need 

to demonstrate, and how their response will be evaluated.

Figure 1. EXAMPLES OF WRITTEN SCENARIOS REFERENCED TO THE EFF STANDARDS

Example 1: The Talkative Reader

Scenario: You are the parent of a first-grader named

Ivy. Ivy does good work and reads very well for her age.

You learn that there is a special program for strong firstgrade readers at Ivy’s school. Ivy was not invited to join

this program. You ask Ivy’s teacher, Ms. Lynn, why Ivy

was not placed in the program. She tells you that Ivy

talks too much in class and should not be “rewarded”

for her misbehavior.

Instructions: What would you say to Ivy’s teacher to

persuade her that Ivy should be allowed to join the

school’s program for strong readers? Describe what 

you would say in response to Ms. Lynn’s concern 

about Ivy’s talking in class. Besides speaking with Ivy’s

teacher, describe one other step you would take to

ensure that the school supports Ivy’s interest in reading

and explain why you think this step would be effective.

Your response will be evaluated on your ability to:

• Advocate and influence 

• Solve problems and make decisions

• Convey ideas in writing

Example 2: Ben’s Job Dilemma

Scenario: Ben’s goal is to find work as a sales associate

for a department store. He has never worked in a

department store before but he feels that he has good

interpersonal skills. Ben’s strategy for finding a job is to

look at the job ads in the paper every week and send

his resume in response to the ads. It has been two

months and Ben has not yet found a job or even been

asked for a job interview. Because Ben is your friend, 

he comes to you for your advice on seeking work as a

sales associate.

Instructions: What feedback would you give to Ben on

his strategy for finding a job as a sales associate?

Specifically, describe two strategies you think that Ben

should consider to be more effective in seeking work as

a sales associate. Explain how you would present these

strategies to Ben. 

Your response will be evaluated on your ability to:

• Plan (evaluate a plan’s effectiveness in achieving

goals)

• Solve problems and make decisions (generate 

strategies of options for effective action)

• Convey ideas in writing

• Guide others
Other ideas for written or oral scenarios include:

• Provide a graph of neighborhood crime statistics,

or some other neighborhood statistics. Ask student to analyze and interpret the graph and to

explain what he or she could do as a concerned

citizen to galvanize the neighborhood about the

problem. (Target EFF Standards: Use Mathematics

to Communicate and Solve Problems; Advocate and

Influence)

• Ask student to briefly describe a recent life decision and have him or her reflect on the process

used to reach that decision and the decision itself.

(Target EFF Standard: Reflect and Evaluate)

• Present a consumer problem. Ask student to analyze the problem, identify a potential solution, and

explain how he or she would negotiate that solution. (Target EFF Standards: Solve Problems and

Make Decisions; Advocate and Influence)

Project Assessments

A project is an in-depth, hands-on exploration of a

topic, theme, idea, or activity, resulting in a product,

performance, or event for assessment (Katz &

Chard, 1989). It takes place over a substantial period

of time (e.g., weeks, months) and is valued because

it represents the best of what a student can do given

constructive feedback and opportunities to revise

his or her work. Projects focus on depth of knowledge and result in substantial work products.

Although project assessment is considered an

innovative assessment method, most instructors have

used a form of project assessment at one time or

another. Indeed, project assessments are an extension

of project-based teaching and learning (Long & Crepeau, in progress). Project assessments can measure

students’ standards-based knowledge and skills as

applied in authentic situations. They can also assess

how well students are able to evaluate their own

work, solve problems, plan and carry out complex

activities, and communicate findings to an audience.

Perhaps the most important feature of project

assessments is that they involve hands-on applications. Consider the examples of project ideas presented in Figure 2. In each case, students must

explore a complex and realistic question, problem or

activity over time. During the process, they must do

1 1

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

A project is an in-depth, hands-on exploration 

of a topic, theme, idea, or activity, resulting in a product,

performance, or event for assessment.

Figure 2. EXAMPLES OF PROJECT IDEAS FOR ADULT LEARNERS

Survey Results: Student conducts

a class or neighborhood survey on

attitudes towards current events,

such as a new freeway construction

measure on an upcoming city election. Student analyzes results (e.g.,

calculates descriptive statistics for

different subgroups of respondents,

such as men and women) and then

orally presents the results (using

supporting graphics) and discusses

the implications of the results with

the class. (Target EFF Standards:

Use Mathematics to Solve Problems

and Communicate; Speak So Others

Can Understand)

Researching Child Care 

Programs: Student conducts a

comparative study of local child

care programs in order to select the

one that is within his or her budget

and best fits the personality and 

age of his or her child. The study

includes interviews with staff at the

different child care programs, observations of staff interacting with children, and examination of program

materials. The study culminates in a

paper summarizing the results of the

study, including the program ultimately selected and the reasons

why. (Target EFF Standards: Listen

Actively, Observe Critically, Convey

Ideas in Writing )

Seniors’ Home Health Care: 

A student interested in a career as a

home health aide researches current

health care options and services for

senior citizens. The student then

creates a brochure for senior citizens, providing current information

about health care options, costs,

insurance coverage, and services

for home health care. (Target EFF

Standards: Learn through

Research; Convey Ideas in Writing)
more than “learn about” a topic. They must actually

use their knowledge and skills to create products,

performances, or events that are related to that topic.

Another key feature of project assessments is

that they encourage students to integrate knowledge

and skills, often across several subject areas. Rarely

in life do individuals engage in activities that call for

only one type of skill or for skills relating to only

one discipline. Project assessments reflect this reality. When working on challenging projects, students

will invariably need to use content knowledge from

a variety of subject areas, as well as thinking, planning, and problem-solving skills.

One example of a project assessment is having

students actively plan and carry out a community

event (e.g., ethnic art and music festival) or endeavor (e.g., a food drive to feed the poor). Besides

requiring planning, researching, and thinking skills,

these types of “real-life” projects require application

of specific content knowledge, such as mathematics

(for budgeting) and civics (local government ordinances). Other examples of possible projects for

adult learners are presented in Figure 2.

Project assessments usually consist of four

basic parts, each of which can result in assessable

student work. These four parts are: (1) planning and

organizing the project; (2) researching and developing the project; (3) producing a final product, performance, or event; and (4) presenting the final

project. The Career-Technical Assessment Program

(C-TAP), an ongoing alternative assessment system

for secondary students and community college students in career-technical programs, has formalized

these four basic parts for their project assessment

component. These parts are summarized in greater

detail in Figure 3. Figure 3 also shows how the CTAP structure for projects relates to selected EFF

Standards. For example, Step 1: Planning and organizing the project addresses the EFF Standards Convey Ideas in Writing and Plan.

1 2

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

A key feature of project assessments is that they 

encourage students to integrate knowledge and skills,

often across several subject areas.

Figure 3. C-TAP PROJECT STRUCTURE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO SPECIFIC EFF STANDARDS

Step 1: Planning and

Organizing the Project

(EFF Standards: Convey

Ideas in Writing; Plan)

Project Plan: student 

prepares a document

describing the focus and

goals of a project, steps

for how the project will be

completed, resources and

materials, and a timeline

for completion.

Step 2: Researching

and Developing the

Project (EFF Standard:

Learn Through Research) 

Evidence of Progress:

student collects and 

produces materials that

may be considered 

evidence of progress,

such as journal entries,

research notes, interview

questions, letters, sketches, photographs, and

rough drafts.

Step 3: Producing a

Final Product (Note: 

Particular EFF standard

depends on nature of

product)

Final Product: student

produces and submits a

final product for assessment; it may be a physical

product, or documentation of a performance or

event that is the result of

project work.

Step 4: Presenting 

the Final Product

(EFF Standard: Speak So 

Others Can Understand)

Oral Presentation: student

makes a presentation

describing the project, the

knowledge and skills used

to complete it, and what

was learned during the

process.
As with any other performance-based assessment task, a project assessment needs structure in

order to help the student organize and demonstrate

his or her learning and to allow for teacher intervention or support along the way, as necessary. This is

particularly important for tasks that are complex

and time and resource intensive. Having students

begin a project by producing a project plan helps

them stay organized and focused. The project plan

can serve as a road map, helping guide students’

work throughout the assessment process.

Requiring students to produce evidence of

progress during the research and development phase

of the project can also serve many important purposes. It helps demonstrate to both the teacher and

student that the student is progressing at a satisfactory rate. It also gives the teacher an avenue for providing feedback to students regarding their work,

including positive support and making suggestions

for improvement, if needed. If the outcome of the

student’s project is not as anticipated, the collected

evidence of progress also may provide clues to help

both the teacher and learner identify what might

have been done differently for better results. The

requirement of an oral presentation in addition to

the final product provides students with an opportunity to receive public acknowledgement for their

hard work as well as to reflect upon their project

work and experiences. It also helps develop and reinforce students’ oral communication skills, skills that

teachers find lacking in many of their students.

Using a predetermined structure, projects can

be conducted by individual students or by groups of

students working in collaboration. There are advantages and disadvantages to both types of projects.

From an assessor’s perspective, individual projects

are easier to score because an individual student is

responsible for his or her own project work. In contrast, assigning a grade to an individual student for

his or her work on a group project is not as straightforward. Should everyone who worked on a group

project receive the same score? How do you ensure

that each student has a meaningful role in the group

project? One approach used to address these questions/issues is to carve out specific roles for team

members from the onset of a group project. This

helps ensure that all team members participate

meaningfully in the process and provides a basis for

scoring an individual’s performance.

Although complications like these must be

addressed with group projects, many potential

problems can be effectively side-stepped through

preplanning. Furthermore, there are benefits to

group projects that make them worthy of consideration. Specifically, group projects:

• mirror real-world activities, which often call for

collaboration;

• allow students to undertake significant efforts that

are beyond the scope of any one individual (e.g.,

specific community projects); and 

• reinforce important interpersonal skills as reflected in EFF Standards (e.g., cooperate with others,

advocate and influence, resolve conflict and negotiate, guide others).

In summary, project assessments can elicit rich

information about a student’s knowledge and skills.

However, projects require a significant time commitment from both instructors and adult learners.

This commitment may present a real challenge for

adult education programs that are either short in

duration or have an irregular class schedule. Nevertheless, many instructors who have formalized project assessment and incorporated it into the

curriculum attest to its positive impact on student

learning and its ability to motivate and sustain student interest.

1 3

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Many instructors who have formalized project assessment 

and incorporated it into the curriculum attest to its positive impact on student learning 

and its ability to motivate and sustain student interest.
Portfolio Assessments

A portfolio assessment involves the structured collection of student work that documents students’

application of knowledge and skill in a variety of

authentic contexts. In contrast to projects that typically require students to produce one product related to a few standards or themes, portfolios generally

require a variety of student work related to multiple

standards or themes (e.g., reports, work samples,

awards and certificates, career development documentation, self-reflection and evaluation pieces). As

such, portfolio assessments can usually provide a

more comprehensive view than projects of students’

standards-based knowledge and skills.

There are many examples of portfolios in place

today across the various levels of the education system. At the elementary and secondary education levels, portfolios have been found to be beneficial across

subject areas and purposes, ranging from the

statewide writing portfolio used by the Commonwealth of Kentucky as part of its statewide testing

and accountability system through several successful

classroom-focused applications. Portfolios are also

being used for purposes of professional certification.

For example, the National Board for Professional

Teaching Standards requires a teacher to successfully

complete a portfolio in order to be certified as an

accomplished teacher. While no state has endorsed

portfolios as part of their adult education accountability system, a number of adult education pro1 4

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

In contrast to projects that typically require students to produce one product 

related to a few standards or themes, portfolios generally require a variety of student work 

related to multiple standards or themes.

Figure 4. DESCRIPTION OF CPA PORTFOLIO ENTRIES

Personal Statement

Students outline their career goals

and evaluate their skills in relation to 

the Career Preparation Standards.

Resume

Students prepare a one-page

resume describing their experiences

and skills.

Application

Students complete an application

for employment or further 

education.

Letter of Recommendation 

Students obtain a letter of 

recommendation from someone

who knows them well, such as a

supervisor, community leader, or

teacher.

Work Samples (2)

Work samples are pieces of 

student work demonstrating 

students’ mastery of the Career

Preparation Standards. One work

sample must address Technology

Literacy. Examples include desktop

publishing, graphics, CAD, spread

sheets, databases, and use of

advanced equipment.

Writing Sample

The writing sample demonstrates

students’ ability to reach a 

conclusion based on their writing

ability and analytical reasoning.

Writing samples can range from 

a comparative analysis of short 

stories to a business proposal.

Interpersonal Skills Evaluation

(ISE)

An evaluation of students’ 

interpersonal skills (team work,

leadership, etc.), the ISE is 

completed by a supervisor or

teacher after a work experience, a

team project, or a class. Students

are strongly encouraged to obtain

an ISE from someone outside the

classroom (e.g., an employer, 

community project coordinator, 

or coach).

Optional Components

Students may create an additional

section in their portfolio and include

any of the following: 1) attendance

records; 2) transcript with GPA; 

3) extra-curricular activities, 

certificates, and awards; or 

4) cover letter (designed to 

accompany applications). Students

will not be evaluated on these

optional components.
grams are beginning to develop and incorporate

portfolios into classroom practice, including programs that are using the EFF standards.

Instructors who have been successful in implementing portfolio-based instruction and assessment

in their classrooms report that the methodology

motivates students to produce a body of standardsbased, theme-oriented work samples, rather than

disjointed products that are forgotten once the class

moves on to the next chapter of the textbook. As

suggested above, portfolios, because of their depth

and necessary time commitment, are excellent tools

to support integrated learning across a range of academic and interpersonal skills. The Career Preparation Assessment, or CPA, is one example of such a

portfolio (WestEd, 1995). High school students

work with a number of instructors across subject

areas to demonstrate mastery of both the Career

Preparation Standards—a series of important

generic workplace readiness skills including: Personal Skills, Interpersonal Skills, Thinking and Problem

Solving, Communication, Employment Literacy, and

Technology Literacy—and academic standards. The

CPA portfolio includes multiple entries designed to

triangulate student performance—that is, provide

students with a variety of ways to demonstrate the

full range of expected performance. Among the

required CPA portfolio entries are: a personal statement of goals; a resume; a completed application for

employment or continued education; a letter of recommendation; two work samples; a writing sample,

and; an evaluation of interpersonal skills. A description of each CPA portfolio entry is provided in Figure 4. Although the CPA portfolio model was

developed specifically for high school students, the

entries clearly have relevance for and could be tailored specifically to the needs of adult learners.

The complexity of portfolios—and the other

performance-based assessment approaches described

in this paper—demands careful attention to scoring.

The most common and recommended approach is

the development of a scoring rubric designed to assist

teachers in identifying work that meets the performance levels of the various standards measured by

the portfolio. Successful rubrics are consistent with

the expectations of the standards, guide the teacher

towards reliable application of these expectations,

and provide students with sufficient information to

understand how their work was judged. The CPA

Rating Guide (e.g., scoring rubric) is presented in

Figure 5 (see next page). Scoring rubrics will be

described in more detail in Section V.

1 5

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Portfolios, because of their depth and necessary time commitment,

are excellent tools to support integrated learning across a range 

of academic and interpersonal skills.
1 6

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 5. CAREER PREPARATION ASSESSMENT (CPA) RATING GUIDE

•Personal qualities

needed for employment

•Interpersonal skills

needed for employment

•Career planning and

employment literacy

•Analytic thinking

•Evaluation

•Presentation of work

using technology

•Application of 

technology other than

word processing

•Attention to audience 

•Using own ideas 

•Organization and clarity 

•Accuracy and 

completeness 

•Language mechanics,

sentence structure, and

vocabulary

•Does not identify own

personal qualities

needed to be 

successfully employed

•Shows little or no ability

to work productively

with others

•Shows little evidence of

planning for a career

•Reasoning is 

unclear, illogical, or

superficial; interprets or

calculates information

inaccurately; makes

statements with little

explanation

•Gives incomplete or

sketchy evaluation of

own work

•Does not use 

technology to present

work (Appearance

interferes with 

presentation of work)

•Application of 

technology other than

word processing is 

ineffective or lacking

•Shows little or no

awareness of the 

audience

•Writing is not original;

copies the ideas of 

others

•Ideas are presented in

a disorganized way

•Work lacks accuracy

and completeness

•Writing contains errors

in language use that

make ideas difficult to

understand

•Identifies own personal

qualities needed to be

successfully employed

•Shows ability to work

productively with others

•Shows evidence of

planning and 

developing a career

•Reasoning is clear and

logical; interprets or

calculates information

accurately; supports

statements with 

explanation

•Gives accurate 

evaluation of own work

•Uses technology to

present work

•Effectively applies 

technology other than

word processing

•Effectively presents self

and ideas to outside

reviewer

•Writing is original

•Writing is clear and

organized

•Work is accurate and

fully developed

•Writing contains minor

language errors; ideas

are understandable

•Consistently highlights

own personal qualities

needed to be 

successfully employed

•Shows leadership and

strong ability to work

productively with others

•Shows excellent 

understanding of career

planning; describes

realistic plan for 

achieving career

•Reasoning is clear, 

logical, and thorough;

interprets or calculates

information accurately

and creatively; supports

statements with 

evidence

•Shows understanding

and insight in 

evaluating own work

•Uses technology to

enhance presentation

of work

•Effectively applies 

technology other than

word processing that is

relevant to chosen field

•Self and ideas “come

alive” to outside

reviewer

•Writing is original and

may be creative

•Writing is clear and well

organized throughout

portfolio

•Work is accurate 

and complete with 

consistent and superior

development; shows

attention to detail

•Writing is almost free of

language errors and is

easy to understand

Career Preparation Analysis Technology Communication

BASIC

(Not ready

to show

employer 

or college)

PROFICIENT

(Ready

to show

employer 

or college)

ADVANCED

(Superior

quality, 

may exceed

expectations

of employer 

or college)
As previously mentioned, portfolios are beginning to be used in programs for adult learners. One

example of such a program is Vermont Adult Learning’s “Getting Ready to Work Class.” The entries for

their portfolio model are listed in Figure 6. As

shown, this portfolio includes six different sections

with academic as well as employment related parts.

Like the CPA portfolio model, the Vermont Adult

Learning portfolio model allows the student to

showcase his or her best work (six pieces). Specifically, the Vermont Adult Learning portfolio requires

students to provide a short explanation for each

piece describing why it was chosen, what was done

well, and what was learned.

The Canton Even Start portfolio, like the Vermont Adult Learning portfolio, is linked to the EFF

Standards. The Vermont and Canton portfolio

models are both in early stages of development (e.g.,

neither model has fully developed or formalized

scoring processes or rubrics). The Canton Even

Start portfolios are built around project-based

learning activities that are designed to help students

develop the 16 EFF Skills. Students identify specific

goals in relation to these 16 Skills. Dividing their

portfolio notebook into 16 sections, students keep

their goal sheets in the front of their notebooks, and

place evidence of skill development in the appropriate portfolio section for each EFF Standard. Each

student’s portfolio can then be used as the basis for

creating a Career Passport that contains formal documents that identify and describe the student’s marketable skills for potential employers. Because the

Canton Even Start portfolio effort is new, it is

reported that staff still need additional training in

using student-centered learning strategies and helping students to set goals and reflect on their work

1 7

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6. PORTFOLIO CHECKLIST FOR THE VERMONT ADULT LEARNING 

“GETTING READY TO WORK CLASS”

1. Cover Page: Name, Date, Photo

2. Table of Contents: All Items Listed in 

Order of Appearance

3. Vermont Adult Learning Section:

____ Assessment Analysis

____ Learning Styles Inventory

____ Academic Goals Timeline

____ Attendance Record

____ Transportation & Childcare Grant

____ GED Practice Test Scores; Scores Grades 

From Other Programs

____ Budget

____ 6 Best Pieces (Your Choice) With Your Notes 

for Each Piece

____ Mid Term and Final Evaluations

____ Instructor Evaluations

4. Department of Employment 

and Training Section:

____ Vocational Exploratory Checklists and II

____ Occupational Goal Sheet

____ Internship Description and Evaluation

____ Resume

____ Mock Job Interview Evaluation

____ Letters of Reference

____ Sample W-4

____ Copies: Birth Certificate, Social Security Card, 

Drivers License

5. Coordinator’s Section

____ List of Workshops With Certificates and 

Evaluations

____ List of Tours Attended

____ Letter from Mentor

6. Other: Any Special Accomplishments, etc.
(Meyer, 1999). Nevertheless, even in its early stages

of development, the articulation of program and

student goals facilitated by use of the portfolio and

other program components is a clearly recognized

benefit.

In summary, portfolios are the most comprehensive of the performance-based assessment methods available for classroom use. Because a portfolio

contains various types of entries and is developed by

a student over an extended period of time, it is a

valuable tool for gauging in-depth learning relative

to a wide range of standards. Besides its ability to

address challenging academic, problem-solving, and

self-reflection skills, portfolio assessment is popular

for its ability to measure interpersonal skills through

such entries as teamwork samples and formal evaluations of a learner’s interpersonal skills by a work

supervisor or an instructor. The complexity of portfolios, however, creates many challenges for instructors. The challenges range from logistical issues

(e.g., where and how to store portfolios) to systemic

issues (e.g., fundamental changes in curriculum and

instructional practice to support use of portfolios).

These challenges—and examples of solutions people have used to address them—will be the focus of

a subsequent paper.

1 8

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Because a portfolio contains various types of entries 

and is developed by a student over an extended period of time, it is a valuable tool 

for gauging in-depth learning relative to a wide range of standards.
CORING IS A MEANS FOR INTERPRETING THE

relationship between the EFF Standards

and student achievement. That is, the

scorer must judge a student’s assessment

response to determine its adequacy in relation to the

appropriate EFF Standard(s). Unlike a traditional

multiple-choice test, performance-based assessment

tasks do not have a set of correct answers built into

the assessment. There may be multiple “right”

answers to a performance-based assessment task.

Thus, scoring performance-based assessments can

be challenging and the process often receives insufficient attention.

This section describes the major steps in

developing and using effective scoring procedures. It

then presents different options for reporting scoring

results.

Developing Effective Scoring Procedures

1. Select an appropriate scoring method. Performance-based assessments may be scored using different methods or combinations of methods. The

two most common scoring methods are holistic

and analytic scoring. Using the holistic method,

the scorer rates the student’s response to an assessment as an integrated whole rather than the sum of

its individual parts. In contrast, a scorer using the

analytic method views a student’s response to an

assessment in parts, rating different parts of the

student response separately and then (usually)

combining these separate ratings into an overall

score. Holistic scoring is appropriate for complex

performances where the overall impact is of most

interest, particularly if extreme ratings on one or

more aspects can outweigh performance on other

aspects. It often takes less time than analytic scoring and can accommodate situations where two

very different performances can lead to the same

overall rating. Analytic scoring is appropriate when

the focus is on different aspects of performance as

well as the overall impact of performance. The

subscores can provide valuable diagnostic information about specific strengths and weaknesses of

individual students.

For example, suppose an assessment task calls

for students to write a persuasive essay about how

they would address an issue of concern to the community (e.g., lack of quality after school child care).

If the purpose of this assessment is to gauge a student’s overall progress on developing and organizing a cogent argument, the instructor may choose to

use holistic scoring, where the focus is on overall

performance. However, if the purpose of this particular assessment task is to assess and provide feedback on specific aspects of written communication

(e.g., language mechanics, content knowledge, and

use of persuasive writing techniques), the instructor

may choose to use analytic scoring.

2. Identify aspects and a scale for performance.

Once a decision is made about whether to use the

holistic or analytic scoring method, the next step is

to decide on a scale for performance. A scoring scale

is a system of classifying assessment performances

in a progressive series of points, grades, levels, or

degrees. Scoring scales can reflect graduated levels of

1 9

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT



Scoring and Reporting 

Results on Student Performance

S
achievements (e.g., Excellent, Good, Fair, Limited)

or they can assign a range of test scores or points to

different levels of performance (e.g., 100-91=A; 90-

81=B; 80-71=C; etc.).

In addition to identifying an appropriate scale

to reflect different levels of performance, different

aspects or elements of performance that contribute

to the overall evaluation of performance must also

be identified. Figures 7 and 8 show two examples of

scoring checklists that are being used by instructors

of adult learners. The scoring checklist shown in

Figure 7 focuses on an oral communication task,

identifying nine aspects of oral communication

(e.g., identifies purpose for speaking, uses correct

grammar, etc.) and three categories of performance

(excellent, good, developing). Notice that the aspects

of performance listed are behavioral indicators of

the EFF Standard, Speak so Others Can Understand.

As shown, the aspects listed in a scoring checklist

should focus on characteristics of performance that

are present in a student response, not those that are

absent. Also, they should focus on elements that are

being measured by the assessment, and omit reference to any element not being measured.

2 0

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

The aspects listed in a scoring checklist should focus 

on characteristics of performance that are present in a student response,

not those that are absent.

Standard

1. Identifies purpose for speaking.

2. Uses correct grammar.

3. Manages communication 

anxiety and apprehension.

4. Comments are clear.

5. Pronunciation is comprehensible.

6. Expresses views and opinions 

in English.

7. Uses new vocabulary.

8. Looks at the audience and 

makes eye contact.

9. Faces the audience.

Figure 7. SCORING CHECKLIST FOR EVALUATION OF STUDENT’S ORAL COMMUNICATION

(Speak So Others Can Understand)

Excellent Good Developing
2 1

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Strategies for Listening

Focuses attention on the 

speaker’s verbal and 

non-verbal messages and

can state how this helped

to interpret the message

Avoids distractions in

the environment

Avoids interrupting the 

speaker until he or she

is finished

Takes notes when

appropriate

Asks questions for 

clarification

Is able to rephrase the

speaker’s ideas

Compares the speaker’s

message with own

experiences

Can state the main ideas

and important details of

the message

Can follow verbal

instructions

Figure 8. SCORING CHECKLIST FOR EVALUATION OF STUDENT’S LISTENING SKILLS

(Listen Actively)

Strong Adequate

Needs

Improvement Developing

The scoring checklist in Figure 8 lists nine

strategies that comprise the EFF Standard, Listen

Actively. The scale for this checklist consists of

four performance levels: strong, adequate, needs

improvement, and developing. Presumably, for both

scoring checklists, an overall score is given to student work based on the individual ratings of the different aspects of performance.

It is important to emphasize that the performance scale used for scoring a performance-based

assessment task should closely align to the targeted

Standard(s) in order for the task to serve as a valid

measure of learning relative to those standards. For

example, EFF instructors can use the components

of each EFF Standard to guide development of a

scoring performance scale. Data collection currently underway to support the EFF Performance

Framework will help provide the groundwork for

more comprehensive and valid performance scales.

For example, the dimensions of performance specified by the Framework (types of tasks that can be

performed; range of contexts of performance;

knowledge base of learners; fluency and independence of performance) can be used to define and
distinguish among different levels of performance,

such as Excellent, Good, and Fair. (The EFF Performance Framework is described in more detail on

page 23.) 

3. Identify benchmarks and provide examples to

students. Labels for scoring categories are usually

not sufficient to communicate meaning. To help

communicate meaning, instructors should provide

students with examples that demonstrate different

levels of performance. These examples of student

responses, often called benchmarks, illustrate and

provide concrete examples of different levels of

performance.

Typically, instructors identify benchmarks by

sorting through a large number of student responses and selecting examples that represent solid examples of different levels of performance (e.g.,

Excellent, Good, Fair, and Limited) to a given task.

Solid examples are those that meet the descriptive

criteria for a given performance level and that different scorers agree reflect a certain performance

level. Solid examples are not “borderline” or

“jagged” responses that straddle the performance

boundaries between, for example, Excellent and

Good, or Good and Fair. These solid examples

(often from a previous class of student) are then

presented to and discussed with current students, so

that they get a better understanding of the scoring

criteria and how the criteria are applied to and

reflected in actual responses. Once students understand the scoring criteria and solid benchmarks of

performance, some instructors choose to share

“borderline” examples to further illustrate application of scoring criteria.

4. Check for reliability of scoring process. Clearly,

scoring of performance-based assessments requires

interpretation and professional judgment. In order

to be fair to all students, attention must be given to

the reliability of the scoring method used. As previously discussed, reliability refers to the consistency

of scoring, such that different scorers using the same

scoring method will assign the same score to a particular student response. For classroom assessments,

it is hard to monitor the reliability of scoring since

the classroom instructor typically scores assessment

tasks alone. As a result, there typically is not the

opportunity for two different scorers to rate a given

student response. However, the scoring of performance-based assessment tasks would clearly benefit

from collaboration among instructors. Instructors—especially those new to performance-based

assessment—should work together to check both

the appropriateness and reliability of the scoring

processes that they have developed. Also, each

instructor must take care to monitor his or her own

scoring, making sure to uniformly apply the same

criteria to score the responses of different students

to the same assessment task.

5. Check for appropriate level of difficulty. When

beginning to score a new assessment task, it is

important to gauge the level of difficulty of the task

and how well the scoring checklist or rubric accommodates the difficulty of the task: Is the task too difficult? Does the scoring checklist or guidelines (i.e.,

scoring rubrics) unfairly penalize students? Instructors should be aware that, when they first introduce

challenging performance-based assessment tasks to

their students, student scores could be fairly low.

Sometimes there are no performances that warrant

the highest rating on the scoring scale. The experience of many instructors is that over time both

instruction and student responses to performancebased assessments improve.

The EFF Rubrics for Collecting Data on

Learner Performance

As a system reform initiative, EFF is still in process.

Describing and measuring performance relative to

the EFF Standards is the focus of an ongoing phase

of work. A performance framework for EFF Standards is now being developed to help instructors

focus and collect data about learners’ progress. The

initial framework is presented in Figure 9. Devel2 2

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT
oped from a strong research base, the framework

identifies four key dimensions of performance:

types of tasks that can be performed; range of contexts of performance; knowledge base of learners;

and fluency and independence of performance.

These dimensions of performance will be used to

help frame the collection of data on adult learners.

The EFF Performance Framework is intended

to provide a conceptually sound structure for systematic data collection on adult learner achievement.

As previously alluded to, the data collected through

this process also will be used to guide assessment

development efforts, including the development of

assessment tasks, performance standards, and scoring rubrics. For example, data collected on the four

key dimensions of performance will help confirm

that these dimensions represent appropriate scoring

criteria for performance-based tasks. Validating the

performance dimensions in this way and then incorporating these dimensions into scoring rubrics will

contribute significantly to the reliability of EFFbased performance assessment tasks. At a more fundamental level, this comprehensive EFF data

collection effort will serve to validate the overall theoretical base for adult learning and performance on

which the EFF initiative is grounded.

2 3

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

What kinds of tasks

can learners carry out?

1. How complex is the

task?

2. How familiar is the task

to the learner?

In what contexts can

learners perform?

1. How familiar are 

learners with the 

context?

2. In how many different

situations can learners

perform?

3. How much risk is

involved in the 

situation? How high 

are the stakes?

What do learners

know?

1. What vocabulary do

learners have related to

the skill? Related to the

subject area?

2. What content 

knowledge do learners

have related to the

skill? Related to the

subject area?

3. What strategies do

learners have for 

organizing and applying

content knowledge?

How well can learners

perform?

1. How fluently can

learners perform?

• How much effort 

is required?

• How consistently do 

learners start and 

finish, getting to the 

desired outcome?

• How well are barriers

controlled or overcome?

2. How independently can

learners perform?

• How much help is 

needed from others?

• How much initiative 

is shown in getting 

started?

• How often do learners

generate their own 

strategies to complete

tasks?

Figure 9. PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK FOR EFF STANDARDS

n order to insure that adult learners can use the EFF skills to act flexibly, with a

range of options and choices, to meet the goals in their lives, teachers and learners

need to pay attention to the following aspects of learner performance:
2 4

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Reporting on Student Progress 

and Achievement

After scoring responses to student assessment tasks,

the next step is to communicate the results to the

appropriate audiences. Broadly speaking, there are

two types of information provided by student

assessment: formative and summative. Formative

assessment results are typically diagnostic, identifying student strengths and weaknesses. The instructor uses formative information for several purposes:

to identify possible gaps in students’ skills and

knowledge that call for redirection of instruction; to

identify specific aspects of a given student’s work

that need improvement; and to determine how to

support the student in achieving the next level of

performance.

Summative assessment results provide summary information of a student’s achievement at a

specific and meaningful point in time (e.g., end of

semester, end of program). Summative information

can also serve multiple purposes: as an indicator of

overall program quality; to compare student performances to established standards; and to assess a student’s performance in relation to his or her personal

or career goals.

Both formative and summative information

about student achievement can be reported to individual students and to the larger public (e.g., local

program administration or the federal government

for program accountability purposes). Students can

use the information to understand how well they

are progressing and where they may need extra

help. The larger public is likely to use summative

information to help inform policy and instructional program changes. For example, if the summative

assessment results for a particular community indicate that adult learners are performing below

expectations on readiness for work, interested parties in that community may push for more adult

education programs that focus on related aspects of

skill development.

In a comprehensive adult learning assessment

system, the instructor’s major responsibility in terms

of reporting assessment results is to the individual

student. Assessment results can be reported in several ways. Instructors can provide information on

classroom assessment results through individual

conversations with students, written comments,

grades, and/or scoring checklists or rubrics. Instructors can also help individual students interpret and

understand the results of assessment reports that

students receive from external agencies (e.g., certification agencies).

When instructors adopt new forms of assessment, it is an opportune time to establish a meaningful system for reporting assessment results.

However instructors choose to report assessment

results to individual students, there are five principles of effective reporting that should be employed:

1. Clearly identify and define aspects of student

achievement (standards) on which to report.

2. Inform students in advance of what standards

you expect them to meet.

3. Be clear about the reasons for reporting student

achievement, including how the information is to

be used, by whom, and for what purpose.

4. Use words, scores, graphic displays, or other symbols that are clearly understood by the student or

other important audience.

5. Provide opportunities to discuss the reports with

students and others in order to explain and clarify

their meaning.

In a comprehensive adult learning assessment system,

the instructor’s major responsibility in terms of reporting assessment results 

is to the individual student.
2 5

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

HIS SECTION PROVIDES SOME GENERAL GUIDELINES

for instructors about how to select or develop performance-based assessment tasks, as

well as how to prepare students for these

new types of assessment tasks. These “tips” were

generated from years of research on performancebased assessment methods by the assessment staff at

WestEd, a regional educational laboratory with

headquarters in San Francisco, California. First presented in an assessment guide by O’Neill and Stansbury (1999), these guidelines were informed by

hundreds of instructors who have used alternative

assessment tasks in their classrooms.

How to Select or Develop 

Performance-Based Assessment Tasks

Given the complex and ambitious nature of performance-based assessment tasks, instructors who are

interested in using them should carefully go about

selecting and developing them. The steps they

should follow are listed below.

1. Work collaboratively with other instructors of

adult learners. Performance-based assessment tasks

require students to demonstrate integrated, highly

intellectual learning. Working collaboratively with

other instructors, particularly at the onset, will help

ensure that the tasks you develop are clear, on target,

and appropriate for your students. Have your colleagues review what you develop and do the same

for them. Some performance-based assessments,

such as projects or portfolios, may be implemented

across several classrooms in a given program or

institution. Different classes may be responsible for

supporting different parts of a given student’s project or portfolio. In this situation, collaboration and

coordination among instructors is not only desirable, it is a requirement.

2. Adapt from existing assessment tasks. Performance-based assessment tasks are challenging to

develop. Particularly in the case of projects and

portfolios, don’t “reinvent the wheel” when it is easier to start with models. Adopt existing models as

is, if appropriate, or adapt them to your particular

lesson/learning objectives and the needs of your

students.

3. Use EFF Standards and related documents (e.g.,

curriculum frameworks) to guide task development and selection efforts. This will help ensure

that all assessment tasks are linked to targeted standards/learning objectives and measure the targeted

knowledge and skills.



Developing Performance-Based

Assessment Tasks and Preparing 

Students for Them

T
2 6

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

4. As tasks are developed or reviewed, ensure that

they meet the following criteria:

• focus on high-level thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving skills.

• use simple, concise language to clearly articulate

the task to be completed by the students.

• provide specific instructions, including only information that is relevant and necessary to answer

the question or complete the task.

• avoid unnecessary or excessive detail (when

including information in instructions or statement of task, ask yourself, “Is this essential information?” If the answer is “no,” eliminate it.)

• are within the appropriate range of difficulty for

your students.

• use familiar vocabulary and concise sentences.

• use graphics (when applicable) that are clear and

easy to understand.

• do not use language or content that could be offensive or inappropriate for subgroups of learners.

• do not include or implicitly support negative

stereotypes.

How to Prepare Students for 

Performance-Based Assessments

Students who have not been exposed to performance-based assessment methods will need a lot of

preparation in order to be successful. The specific

strategies for helping students succeed on ondemand scenarios differ somewhat from those

needed for helping students succeed on projects and

portfolios. They are treated separately below.

Preparing Students for Scenarios

1. Plan classroom activities that will help students

learn to interpret, think through, and answer oral

and written-response tasks. For example, model

processes for “thinking through” and outlining

answers to written- or oral-response questions.

Share with students examples of responses that are

detailed, general, or vague.

2. Provide students with the opportunity to work

through questions as a group. After group discussion, have each student write out his or her own

response to the question.

3. Provide students, through classroom and homework assignments, with multiple opportunities to

practice writing or speaking about what they

know.

4. Have students evaluate their own answers to scenario questions, as well as the answers of their

peers, using a scoring guide or scoring criteria.

Encourage students to discuss strategies for improving their own and others’ work.

5. Allow students to revise and improve their

answers to scenarios based on your feedback or

the feedback of their peers.

6. Involve students in developing scenarios and

scoring guides related to content covered in your

curriculum.

7. Prior to administering a scenario task that

“counts,” show and explain to students the scoring

guide or criteria that will be used to evaluate their

work so that they better understand what is

expected of them.

8. Review effective test-taking strategies with students prior to administering scenarios in your

classroom. For example: encourage students to read

each part of the question carefully before responding; encourage students to briefly outline their

answers before writing their response; for written

scenarios, remind students to check their work

when finished to make sure they have responded to

all parts of the question.

Preparing Students for Project 

and Portfolio Assessment

All the above strategies for scenarios should also

help students prepare for designing projects and
2 7

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

portfolios since logical thinking and problem-solving is the common denominator for all these tasks.

However, the large scope of projects and portfolios

also call for other strategies to help students succeed

at these tasks.

1. Familiarize students with the EFF Standards

and the specific requirements of the assessment

they will be completing. Introduce the Standards at

the beginning of the course and continually reinforce Standards by referring to them frequently during instruction and as students make progress on

their projects or portfolios.

2. Encourage student independence by providing

them with choices and options (within the parameters of the overall task) for the focus of their projects or the entries to include in their portfolios.

3. Regularly ask students probing questions that

require them to reflect on or evaluate their own

work: How does this piece of work show mastery of

a Standard? What do you see as the strengths or

areas of improvement for this piece of work?

4. Have students work in pairs or small groups to

review and comment on each other’s work in

progress.

5. Provide students with access to support and reference materials that can give them ideas about

possible projects and entries for portfolios.

6. Nurture a culture of inquiry in the classroom,

where mistakes are viewed as vehicles for learning.
Y NOW THE READER SHOULD BE AWARE

that performance-based assessment is

a valuable approach to the measurement of adult learning and that it warrants inclusion in a comprehensive adult learner

assessment system. Its many advantages include

providing: a stronger link between instruction and

assessment, more meaningful connections between

classroom activities and the outside world, and

greater emphasis on deep content learning, problem-solving, self-reflection, and interpersonal skills.

Despite the great promise of performancebased assessments, there are challenges associated

with implementation beyond the individual classroom. For example, performance-based assessments are expensive to develop and score when

compared to multiple-choice testing. While multiple-choice tests can be machine-scored in a very

cost-effective way, scoring of performance-based

assessments involves human scorers who must be

trained and calibrated. Moreover, performancebased assessments sometimes demonstrate questionable technical adequacy (e.g., lower reliability

compared to traditional multiple-choice questions)

which limits their usefulness for large-scale testing

and accountability purposes.

Nevertheless, the question for educators

should not be whether to use performance-based

assessment methods, but rather how to take advantage of their benefits as part of an ideal overall

assessment system. The solution should be to 

phase use of performance-based assessment into a

comprehensive adult learning assessment system,

beginning with integration of performance-based

methods into classroom instruction and assessment.

As programs, instructors, and students become

more familiar with performance-based assessments,

and prerequisite development work is conducted to

ensure their technical quality and feasibility, performance-based assessments can be systematically

phased into high-stake, external assessment components. This phase-in approach will help ensure the

2 8

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT



The Role of Performance-Based

Assessment in a Comprehensive Adult

Learning Assessment System

B
long-term viability and sustainability of performance-based assessment in a comprehensive adult

learning assessment system.

Clearly, this new vision of a comprehensive

adult learning assessment system is not something

that local educators can make happen on their own.

Such systemic change requires that policymakers at

the national and state levels assume responsibility

for building a new infrastructure to promote and

support comprehensive adult learner assessment. In

turn, the responsibilities of local educators are to

become familiar with the full range of assessment

methods that support student learning and to

become informed consumers of these tools.

In summary, instructors of adult learners

should take to heart the connection demonstrated

by research between the expectations of instructors

and the behavior of students. If students are taught

and assessed using methods that require them to

think critically, analyze their work, and revise work

samples until they meet rigorous content and performance standards, they will rise to that challenge.

Classroom assessments that reinforce these expectations are a vital piece of the adult student learning

experience. Performance-based assessments, challenging though they may be for students and

instructors, are essential to realizing the promise of

adult education reform.

2 9

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

The responsibilities of the local educator are to become familiar 

with the full range of assessment methods that are available to support student learning 

and to become informed consumers of these tools.
3 1

EQUIPPED FOR THE FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Katz, L.G and Chard, S.C. (1989). Engaging Children’s

Minds: The Project Approach. Norwood: NJ, Ablex Publishing Co.

Long, C. & Crepeau, M. (in progress). Project-Based

Assessment. San Francisco: WestEd.

McMillan, J.H. (1997). Classroom Assessment, Principles

and Practice for Effective Instruction. Boston: Allyn and

Bacon.

Merrifield, J. (1999). Equipped for the Future Research

Report. A paper commissioned by the National Institute

for Literacy.

Meyer, J. ( September, 1999). Articulating Learning With

EFF Standards. Focus on Basics.

Newmann, F.M., Secada, W.G., and Wehlage, G.G.

(1995). A Guide to Authentic Instruction and Assessment:

Vision, Standards and Scoring. Madison, WI: the Board

of Regents of the University of Wisconsin.

O’Neill, K. & Stansbury, K. (1999). Developing a Standards-Based Assessment System. San Francisco: WestEd.

Stiggins, R.J. (1997). Student Centered Classroom Assessment. Upper Saddle River NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.



References
The National Institute for Literacy (NIFL) is an independent federal organization that is 

leading the national effort toward a fully literate America. By fostering communication, 

collaboration, and innovation, NIFL helps build and strengthen national, regional, 

and state literacy systems that can better serve adults in the 21st century. 

National Institute for Literacy Interagency Group

Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley

Secretary of Health and Human Services, Donna E. Shalala

Secretary of Labor, Alexis Herman

National Institute for Literacy Advisory Board

Jon Deveaux, Executive Director, Literacy Partners, Inc.

Mark Emblidge, Executive Director, Virginia Literacy Foundation

Toni Fay, Vice President, Corporate Community Relations, Time Warner

Mary Greene, KERA Public Television, TV Productions

Reynaldo Macias, Professor & Chair, César E. Chávez Instructional Center 

for Interdisciplinary Chicana/o Studies

Marciene Mattleman, Executive Director, Philadelphia Reads

Anthony Sarmiento, Director, Worker Centered Learning, Working for America Institute

Senator Paul Simon, Director, Public Policy Institute

Lynne Waihee, Chair, Read to Me International

National Institute for Literacy Staff

Executive Office

Andy Hartman, Director

Carolyn Y. Staley, Deputy Director

Shelly W. Coles, Executive Assistant

Program Office

Sandra Baxter, Program Director, National Reading Excellence Initiative

Jaleh Behroozi, Program Director, LINCS

Jennifer Cromley, Fellowships Officer

Christy Gullion, Policy Analyst

Susan Green, Program Officer

Wil Hawk, Program Analyst, LINCS

Sara Pendleton, Staff Assistant, Programs

Lynn Reddy, Communications Director

Sondra Stein, Senior Research Associate and Director, Equipped for the Future

Administrative Office

Sharyn Abbott, Executive Officer

Darlene McDonald, Contracts & Grants Assistant

Suzanne Randazzo, Management Operations Specialist

National Institute for Literacy

1775 I Street NW, Suite 730 Washington, DC 20006-2401

Tel 202-233-2025 

Fax 202-233-2050 

National Institute for Literacy

NIFL

Web www.nifl.gov
National Institute for Literacy

1775 I Street NW, Suite 730 

Washington, DC 20006-2401

Tel 202-233-2025 

Fax 202-233-2050 

Web www.nifl.gov

National Institute for Literacy

NIFL