Assessment Policy

Statement of Intent

The aim of this Policy is to communicate the purpose of assessment at the FIS to all stakeholders. This Policy aligns assessment at the FIS with:

• the FIS Mission and Vision;
• the philosophy and principles of the IPC and the IB;
• research-informed best practice.

This Policy consists of a main part outlining general principles; and of several appendices that provide background and apply the general principles to educational contexts within curricular areas.

At the FIS, we want to develop “environments that bring out the best in people, take learning to the next level, allow for great discoveries, and propel both the individual and the group forward into a lifetime of learning. This is something all teachers want and students
deserve.” (Ritchhart, 2015:5-6). Assessment plays a crucial role in this process as it aims to provide students with essential feedback on their learning and thinking.

Application of Policy

The primary audience for this Policy will be teachers, who need to be familiar with its contents as they plan, implement and review the assessment of student work. This Policy will also be available to students and their parents. The Policy will be a reference point for resolving questions or conflicts related to assessment practices.

The Policy applies at all times and to all FIS students and teachers. There are no known restrictions, exclusions or special conditions to this Policy.

Policy Statement

1. The Purpose of Assessment

Assessment is a planned process that should provide students with the following opportunities:

• demonstrate what they have understood or skills which they have learned
• provide evidence of thinking
• understand their own progress toward learning objectives, as well as the progress made by the class as a community, and motivation to plan the next step/s in
  their learning (reflection and goal setting)
• understand learning goals and criteria for success
• self- and peer-reflect and share reflections with peers
• provide critical feedback on both learning and teaching
• self-assess and reflect on the learning process
• build confidence and self-esteem and to be recognized and affirmed in the many identities that they bring

Effective assessment enables teachers to:

• reflect, monitor, and modify curriculum, instruction and assessment practices
• determine degrees of prior knowledge before connecting new learning
• ascertain degrees of understanding at various stages of the learning process
• identify and support learning differences and learning styles
• informs decisions on the appropriate class placement (programme/course/level) for students
• plan the next steps in the learning process

Effective assessment provides parents with:

• opportunities to be involved in and better understand the learning process
• accurate information on students’ progress towards specific learning objectives
• accurate information on students’ strengths and development of learning

Effective summative assessment provides school leaders with:

• assessment information necessary for effective curriculum evaluation and revision
• information about student progress necessary for effective academic support

2. General Assessment Practices

At the FIS, a backwards design approach is used when planning. Learning objectives, and the way of assessing these, are at the forefront of learning experiences.

These are the general practices applicable to the whole school and all curricular areas. Practices which need to be specified by curricular areas will align with these, and must be detailed in the curricular area assessment protocol (see Appendix 0).

2.1 Level descriptors, levels, and marks/grades are decided by aligning evidence provided by students with published assessment criteria.

2.2 Students must be given at least two opportunities, each school year, to be assessed against published subject criteria.

2.3 Students must provide assessment when scheduled in order to receive timely feedback.

2.4 If the student provides work late, the teacher will still provide feedback, but it is understood that teachers organize their work schedules in such a way that other work must take priority, and feedback may be delayed as a result.

2.5 Student work provided within reasonable time before reporting deadlines must be considered as long as it can be assessed against published assessment criteria.

2.6 Students are entitled to repeat summative assessments. Any re-do should be more than just an opportunity to repeat the original assessment: It should be similar in scope and difficulty, but not identical. The outcome of the re-do will count, in that it will supersede the original.

2.7 Report grades are exclusively based on summative assessment, and principles of their composition are published to all students and parents at the beginning of the school year. If students have provided evidence of learning and thinking against published criteria, then they will achieve more than zero (0) marks/points.

2.8 In school sections and subjects where reports include written comments, these may be informed by both formative and summative assessments.

3. Monitoring Assessment Standards

3.1 Common Grade Level Assessments

3.1.1 A common assessment is one taken by more than one class or group of students. The purpose of a common assessment is to:

• Enable standardization across and between classes/groups;
• Develop consistency in the learning experience of students;
• Promote collaboration between teachers.

3.1.2 In subjects where classes are arranged into ability/readiness ‘sets’, the assessments may be tailored to meet the differing assessment needs, whilst still maintaining a common core to enable standardization. Formative assessments may additionally be delivered as common assessments.

3.1.3 Initial unit design includes creation of assessments, thereby ensuring that the teachers who will be overseeing assessments have been involved in the assessment design/redrafting. It is this understanding of how students will be assessed that helps drive learning experiences within a unit.

3.1.4 All assessors (and students) should be familiar with mark schemes or rubrics. These should make specific reference to assessment criteria. Before teacher designed assessments and rubrics are given to students, they should have been shared with all colleagues involved in the teaching of the class and the administration and supervision of the assessment. This design component is a key early step within the unit design focus.

3.1.5 Collaborative planning and meeting time is crucial for successful development of common assessments.

3.1.6 The term ‘common assessment’ also applies to formal IB internal and external assessment, including essays, projects and orals, where the students’ individual topics and titles will vary greatly, but are nonetheless assessed against common criteria.

3.2 Principles of Standardization

3.2.1 Standardization is a quality assurance process that ensures marks or grades are awarded, and/or feedback is provided, appropriately and consistently, and, where appropriate, to the standards defined by external examining bodies such as the IB. A student should receive the same grade or mark, and a similar style and quality of feedback, irrespective of who is marking the assessment, to increase the reliability of the assessment opportunity (PSP 0404-03-0121 & -0131)

3.2.2 In the case that one teacher teaches all classes who take a common assessment, a process of standardization should still take place, facilitated by the curricular leader, and choosing from the strategies set out below. Similarly, it is not permissible to avoid the standardization process by having one teacher mark/grade all of the work completed by students in all of the classes or groups.

3.2.3 Standardization should be distinguished from the process of ‘moderation’, which is conducted by external examining bodies such as the IB, involving review of a sample of already standardized assessment work submitted by the school.

3.2.4 The process of standardization includes checking and reviewing in order to reach a consensus and is best done as a collaborative exercise. This process of standardization provides feedback to assessors as well as providing valuable professional learning, in addition to fairness for students.

3.2.5 Student assessment samples and criteria should be submitted on Atlas/ManageBac to inform consistency across years.

3.2.6 Standardization may follow various approaches, selecting from one or more of the following strategies. The decision on the standardization protocol to be used will be made by the curricular leader. Collaborative planning and meeting time is crucial for successful implementation of most of these standardization strategies.

Peer Standardization with samples: Assessors meet early on in the marking process to compare an initial sampling of student work. This is usually with a variety of levels of responses. Discussions of student work against the criteria are the basis of these professional conversations. Once a shared understanding exists, teachers should complete the remaining marking independently using discussion to inform judgements. This is a very common approach though it needs to be scheduled to allow for individual teachers’ commitment.

Blind remarking: Student work is remarked by a peer/expert, without knowing the initial judgement. Hence no marks or comments can be included on student work (which can be challenging). Where there is considerable discrepancy a discussion is had to come to consensus. An additional person may be brought in to make a final judgement if consensus cannot be reached.

Confirmatory review: This is when an additional person reviews marks or grades awarded against criteria and agrees. If there is discrepancy, then discussion leading to consensus takes place.

In-situ standardization:  When assessments occur and are assessed at that time, such as orals, practicals, presentations or performances, then these can be recorded for standardization purposes. Alternatively, a second assessor can be present and consensus is sought.

3.2.7 A facilitator should generally direct the process. This is even more crucial when teams include three or more. The facilitator’s role is to:

• reference back to the criteria within discussions
• ensure all participants contribute to discussion
• keep to the set time frame for the process
• ensure perception of individual students does not influence evidence within student work samples
• reinforce/restate consensus point upon conclusion

3.2.8 Curricular leaders will oversee and guide standardization, resolving any disputes. They may facilitate the standardization process themselves, including making the choice of strategy, or they may delegate it to the teachers directly involved in administering the assessment, whilst still maintaining oversight.

3.2.9 Standardization must be completed before communication and feedback to students of assessment results.

3.2.10 Any section/program specific standardization requirements are included within the relevant appendix to this Policy.

4. Principles of Feedback

4.1 Feedback is understood as an invitation to thinking. It is the starting point of a critical, meaningful and robust conversation. it is intended to trigger thinking and reflection.

4.2 Feedback is expected to be part of a long-term conversation: It needs to link to previous parts of a conversation and should define mid- and long-term goals.

4.3 In order for feedback to be effective, it must be on-going and frequent.

4.4 In order for feedback to be effective, it must consider the current personal circumstances of the conversation partner, beyond the task and the subject in order to locate the importance of the conversation in the context of a variety of other (school and life) priorities.

5. Principles of Reporting

5.1 Reporting is an example of feedback, thus the principles of feedback stated above (4) generally apply.

5.2 Reporting may be thought of as an infrequent, formal and official form of feedback. Though read by students, typically the primary audience will be parents. Reports may also be later read by those responsible for admission to schools and universities. They form part of a students formal academic record, and data from them will be used in the student transcript (Grades 9-12).

5.3 Reports are published twice a year.

5.4 Specific guidance on reporting procedures within each section and program of the school are provided by respective Heads of Section and/or Program Coordinators.

Definitions

The following terms, which appear in the Policy or in the supporting Appendices, are defined as follows:

Assessment Task

An  assessment task  is a cognitive challenge within the  zone of proximal development . Such a task provides students opportunities to demonstrate learning and higher-order thinking objectives.

Zone of Proximal Development

“[The zone of proximal development is]  the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers … ” Vygotsky (1978:86)

Formative and Summative Assessment

Formative and summative assessment are two functions of assessment that work together.

Formative assessment can be conceptualized as consisting of five key strategies:

1. clarifying and sharing learning intentions and criteria for success
2. engineering effective classroom discussions and other learning tasks that elicit evidence of student understanding (through classroom questioning, for example)
3. providing feedback that moves learners forward (through comment-only marking, for example)
4. activating students as instructional resources for one another; and
5. activating students as the owners of their own learning (through peer- and self-assessment as examples of activities to promote 4. and 5. for example)

from Black and Wiliam (2009:5)

Furthemore, as Hattie has written (2012:162):

The terms  formative  and  summative  may refer both to the time at which a task is administered and, more importantly, to the nature of the interpretations from the tasks. If the interpretations from the tasks are used to modify instruction while it is ongoing, it is formative; if the interpretations from the task are used to sum up the learning at the end of the teaching, it is summative. 

The central role of formative assessment is clear from the above.

Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessment refers to the evaluation of “intellectual accomplishments that are worthwhile, significant, and meaningful” Wehlage, Newmann, & Secada. W. G. (1996: 21-48). In this respect, authentic assessment is promoted by tasks, projects, structures and learning environments that mirror those seen in the real-life problems that subjects and curriculum areas address, outside of the academic environment.

In the context of the FIS, authentic assessment provides a clear and visible route to align curriculum and pedagogy with Mission and Vision, and the Strategic Plan.

Report

A periodic formal summative statement of a student’s performance and progress.

Process

This Policy was first developed during the 2010/2011 school year by the Curriculum Director and volunteer teaching staff. Following this, the Policy has been further updated in 2016 and developed in response to the implementation of MYP in 2018.

This Assessment Policy followed the model provided by the International Baccalaureate (IB) on the Program Resource Center, Standard B1: Assessment policy (IBO, 2018). In addition to feedback and teacher involvement, the Diploma and Middle Years Programme Standards and Practices, as well as the guide: From Principles into Practice, and the IPC Assessment for Learning were taken into account in developing the Policy.

The policy updates were reviewed by the Curriculum Coordinators, volunteer teachers, and Heads of Departments (HoDs) and approved by the Senior Leadership Team in School Year 2017/18.

This current version (August 2020) is the result of a further review by the SLT in May/June 2020, responding to the feedback from curriculum leaders.

Publication Information

Policy approved: August 1, 2020

Effective: August 1, 2020

Supersedes: Assessment Policy 2018

Review date: March 31, 2021 (1 year review cycle)

References

Black, Paul and Wiliam, Dylan (2009), Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, p.5

Hattie, John ( 2012)  Visible learning for teachers . Routledge

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Ritchhart, R.(2015).  Creating cultures of thinking . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Wehlage, G. G., Newmann, F. M., & Secada, W. G. 1996. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality, (pp. 21-48). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Appendices

The following appendices form an integral part of the Assessment Policy. The purpose of each appendix is to further articulate (not repeat) and differentiate (not diverge) the whole school Assessment Policy within a specific section, program or curricular area context. The appendices and their protocols thus guide the practical implementation of the Policy.

Appendix 0: Components of Section and Curricular Area Appendices.

A checklist of the mandatory components of section and curricular area protocols (see Appendix 4). This appendix specifies the format of, and themes to be addressed within, each of the section and curricular area appendices.

• If a theme is not applicable to a particular appendix, this can be indicated ( n/a ).
• If a topic is already fully addressed in section appendix, there is no need to address it in a curricular area appendix.
• Where appropriate and beneficial, exemplars should be included to illustrate.
• Program/Subject Specific Guidelines
• Assessment Methods 

At the program level, an overview of assessment tools, strategies and methods which should be used, and any which should not.

• Feedback and reporting

Effective feedback and reporting if practices need to be explained over and above guidelines in the general Policy, e.g. procedures for early leavers or late arrivals; or modified reports.

Appendix 1: Assessment in the Primary School

1.1 Program/Subject Specific Guidelines

The Assessment Philosophy of the Primary School fully aligns with the principles laid out in the general part of the policy.

1.1.1 The Primary School curriculum comprises of the International Primary Curriculum and an English Language Arts and Mathematics curriculum written by the school. A scope and sequence integrates the IPC units of inquiry with the Mathematics and ELA curriculum ensuring interdisciplinary links. Each curriculum identifies the grade level learning goals. Student learning growth is assessed against these goals: achievement and learning gaps identified and next steps planned accordingly.

1.1.2 Subject Learning Goals identify the knowledge, skills and understandings deemed age appropriate at each grade level in English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, Art, History, Geography, ICT and Computing, Music, Technology, Physical Education and Society.

1.1.3 The International Learning Goals support students to move towards an increasingly sophisticated national, international, global and intercultural perspective. IPC Personal Learning Goals as the individual qualities and dispositions deemed essential to be well-rounded citizens, permeating all aspects of a Primary student’s school experience.

The assessment approaches in the Primary School are fully aligned with the school’s guiding statements and this will be made explicit as a task in the next review cycle.

1.2 Assessment Methods

1.2.1 Assessment Methods for Subject and International Learning Goals

Within the Primary School, assessment methods for Subject and International Learning Goals follow the following model:

1.2.2 Classroom Monitor

‘Classroom Monitor’ is an online assessment tool and student progress tracker, customized in school to fit the needs of Primary.

1.2.3 Roles in monitoring and tracking assessment

It is the role of the Primary Curriculum Cluster to track and analyse the taught and assessed curriculum, to analyse assessment data, and to facilitate Learning Progress Meetings.

It is the role of the Head of Department to track and analyse the taught and assessed subject curriculum, to use assessment data to facilitate Learning Progress Meetings.

It is the role of the teacher to assess student progress, to input the data at the end of every unit, to upload examples of student learning, to use Classroom Monitor to inform Learning Progress Meeting and Student Progress Meetings, and to use Classroom Monitor to inform reporting to parents.

1.3 Feedback and reporting

1.3.1 Feedback is provided by peers, learning assistants and teachers. Feedback includes written, verbal and non-verbal communication. To be effective, feedback must be timely in order to inform continued learning. This will mean in the majority of cases that feedback will be given immediately, but should never take longer than five working days.

1.3.2 Reporting

Teachers report on student learning, in the form of report cards, twice a year. Reporting provides clear information on a student’s strengths, areas for development and specifically what needs to be done to ensure continued progress and improved standards of achievement.

Reporting provides accurate, evidence-based information about students’ progress within curriculum areas with reference to the Standards and Learning Goals.

Within reports, teachers are expected to provide information on student growth; report the most recent assessment information in curriculum subjects; report the most recent assessment information for the Personal Learning Goals – narrative form for homeroom teachers, on a rating scale for specialist subject teachers; provide a description of learning that is a fair, clear, concise and recognisable picture of the individual student; use evaluative language when commenting on students’ progress (Beginning, Developing, Mastering and Exceeding); provide clear information about the grade level expectations a student is working on/has achieved; identify next steps in students’ learning.

Appendix 2: Assessment in the Secondary School

In general, 10 working days is considered timely feedback, but for some longer assessments, 15 working days is acceptable.

2.1 Assessment in the Secondary School, High School Diploma

2.1.1 Program/Subject Specific Guidelines

The FIS High School Diploma is a school-based award that recognises a student’s cumulative academic achievement over the final four years of secondary school i.e. Grades 9-12.

The FIS High School Diploma is aligned with and recognised as equivalent to the North American academic school leaving qualification awarded upon high school graduation. Recognition is provided by the school’s joint accreditation with the CIS and NEASC.

All students in Grades 9-12 are automatically enrolled by the school onto the FIS High School Diploma, which runs ‘in the background’, alongside the externally assessed MYP and DP programmes.

In order to be awarded a FIS High School Diploma, students must earn a minimum of 24 credits.

A full credit is awarded, at the end of each academic year, for each class successfully completed. The criterion for success is a FIS grade of 3 or higher. The mid-year report grade is thus only an indicative grade, with the award of a full credit being made at the end of the academic year, determined by the end of year report grade. Exceptionally, half-credits may be awarded in the case of a mid-year course change, or mid-year admission to the school, but where at least a full semester has been completed, to the above standard.

Credits must include:

4 – English
3 – Mathematics
3 – Humanities
3 – Science
2 – Design or Performing Arts or Visual Arts
2 – Physical and Health Education (PHE)
3 – ‘Language and Literature’ or ‘Language Acquisition’ (excluding English)
5 – Further credits from any disciplinary area (including Global Perspectives and Theory of Knowledge)

Additionally, students must demonstrate:

• continuous participation in the Service as Action (Grades 9 and 10) and CAS programs (Grades 11 and 12), meeting all stated learning objectives;
• continuous participation in Physical Education is required for graduation;
• continuous participation in Global Perspectives (Grades 9 and 10) is required for graduation;
• an overall minimum 85% attendance level (including excused and unexcused absences).

Further considerations (e.g. credit conversion and transfer) will apply to students joining the school after the beginning of Grade 9.

Special circumstance:

• At the exceptional discretion of the Head of School, students who have not completed the graduation requirements by the end of Grade 12 but have demonstrated valid academic achievement in other ways may be awarded a FIS High School Diploma. In such a case, the Diploma will be supported by an explanatory letter, issued to the student.

The FIS High School Diploma is recognised for entry into a number of American colleges through our accreditation with the Council of International Schools (CIS) and the New England Association of Schools & Colleges (NEASC).

Further clarification for how to earn credits will be provided by the beginning of school year 21/22 and then added to this appendix.

2.1.2 Assessment Methods

All courses offered in Grades 9-12 are designed to meet the assessment objectives of either the IB Middle Years Programme subject groups (Grades 9-10) or IB Diploma Programme subjects (grades 11-12). Other than a school-based PE and Advisory program, the FIS currently does not offer non-IB courses in grades 11-12.

As such, students have a choice between the following pathways when designing their programme for Grades 11-12:

• FIS High School Diploma + IB Diploma
• FIS High School Diploma + IB Course Certificates

In rare circumstances, a student may opt to pursue the FIS High School Diploma alone. Students need to understand that course offerings consist of IB Diploma courses, which can be chosen at the Standard or Higher level. Teachers can make some modifications to course expectations for students within a DP SL or HL course (see further guidance below).

Modifying IB Diploma SL Courses for HS Credit

To provide consistency of expectations and practices for students who opt not to pursue an external course certificate with the IB for their classes, the following parameters are intended to support teachers in modifying courses fairly and consistently. Modifications can be made to either or both of:

• Assessment components (e.g. criteria, tests, IAs)
• Assessment objectives & content

Modifying Assessment Components

Modification of assessment components are at the discretion of the teacher, pending approval from HoD.

Modifying assessment components is the most commonly employed approach to modifying DP SL courses for credit candidates. It can entail modifications to the defined assessment criteria, test expectations or the mark bands used.

For criterion-related assessments, it is recommended that descriptor bands are modified as follows: Descriptor sets are shifted ‘up’ by one band, requiring a newly defined lowest descriptor band and replacing the highest level descriptors by the descriptors that formerly described the next highest band of achievement.

For summative assessment, teachers may eliminate the most challenging questions or tasks, ensuring that the resulting assessment is approximately 80% in scope of the comparable DP SL assessment.

For Internal Assessment (IA) or External Assessment (EA) coursework components of DP SL courses, departments are encouraged to develop alternative assessments geared towards the individual students’ interests, in the context of the course, wherever possible.

Modifying Assessment Objectives & Content

A teacher has the discretion to choose whether this is an appropriate course modification to make, pending approval from the HoD. If this approach is pursued, students are expected to cover approximately 80% of the same assessment objectives and/or content as DP SL students.

2.1.3 Feedback and reporting

Feedback practices align fully with the programme-specific guidelines (please refer to MYP and DP appendices for further information). Students who take a modified DP SL course for HS credit are expected to complete an internal final exam each year. In grade 12, they will also sit a mid-year exam (timing aligned with DP mock exams).

When reporting on courses (report cards, transcripts), modified DP SL courses will be shown as follows: [subject] [grade level]. For example, instead of grade 11 DP English Language and Literature SL, the course designation English 11 is used; instead of grade 12 DP Theatre SL, Theatre 12 is used. Repetition of a specific [subject] [grade level] for which credit had been awarded, cannot result in a further credit.

In addition to the IB 1-7 grading scale, the following grade designations may be used in reports:

• N/A. (‘Not Awarded’) This is used when a student has not been in the class long enough for a grade to be awarded.
• M. (‘Medical reasons’) This is used when a student has been absent due to a certified medical condition for a prolonged period of time, and has not been assessed sufficiently within a semester to provide a report grade. This can only be awarded after confirmation by the Head of Secondary.

Further clarification for transcript-only codes will be added by the beginning of school year 21/22.

The general part of the Assessment Policy (2.7) finds its application here in that all summative work will be considered to determine a report grade. Where important assignments are not handed in at all, this is to be evaluated as if a student had turned up to an official exam, but handed in an empty exam sheet, thus providing no evidence of achievement against published assessment criteria. The result must be 0 points against published MYP and DP mark schemes, resulting in a grade 1 for the respective summative assessment. This grade forms part of the overall report grade according to the published composition of summative assessments in the semester or year.

Approach to Academic Tracking 

Current approaches to academic tracking will be reviewed in school year 21/22, in order to develop a system that enables the school:

• to track academic achievement of all student
• to provide all teaching staff with information on how students perform in subjects other than their own
• to provide consistent and traceable assessment data to design opportunities for further learning

In addition, routines and implementation of conversation about student monitoring will be refined in school year 21/22, in order:

• to address all students’ development in a holistic way
• to develop individualised strategies and interventions (aligned with Inclusion Policy)
  • in order to ensure that all students’ needs are met in a consistent and timely manner
  • in order to provide teachers with guidance on how to provide meaningful learning opportunities

Credit Recovery

Responsibility and oversight of the credit recovery system needs to be further refined. It is expected that this will happen in the course of school year 21/22, with the expectation that a consistent credit recovery system will be in place for the next cycle of the Assessment Policy.

Transfer Students

For students transferring into or out of the school, the Head of Secondary ensures that relevant academic information is acquired or passed on in order to ensure graduation requirements can be successfully met.

2.2 Assessment in the Secondary School, IB Middle Years Programme (MYP)

The information in this appendix builds on, and fully aligns with the core policy statement above.

2.2.1 Program/Subject Specific Guidelines

2.2.1.1  The MYP framework is concept driven, therefore assessments at the FIS must center around the student’s understanding of the identified Key Concept (overarching), Related

Concepts (subject-specific) and the Statement of Inquiry. As learning contexts must model authentic world settings, assessments must strive to be meaningful, allowing students to show their understanding of Global Contexts.

2.2.1.2 Student self reflection of Approaches to Learning skills and Learner Profile attributes is an integral part of MYP assessment practices. Teachers are encouraged to include comments using the language of these skills and attributes in their feedback on assessment.

2.2.1.3 Authentic assessment tasks in the MYP are generated by teachers and, where appropriate and possible, students. Objectives for each subject group are identified by the MYP subject group guides and are aligned with the assessment criteria. Assessment must support effective teaching and learning ensuring the student is offered an active role.

2.2.1.4 External Assessment – Subject Groups

MYP requirements are that candidates must be registered for assessment in at least six subject groups.

• language and literature
• language acquisition (or an additional language and literature subject)
• individuals and societies
• mathematics
• sciences
• one subject from arts, physical and health education, or design.

In MYP 4-5, In addition to completing the assessment requirements of six subjects, a candidate must also successfully meet the requirements of the core to be eligible for the award of the IB MYP certificate.

• Interdisciplinary on-screen examination
• Personal project
• FIS service as action

2.2.1.5 External Assessment – Personal Project, MYP ePortfolios & eAssessment

In the final year of the program each MYP student must complete a Personal Project. This summative review is proof of a student’s ability to complete independent work.

The ePortfolios of coursework are marked by classroom teachers. IB examiners assess sample ePortfolios for moderation. These external exams do not fall under the FIS retake policy (an exception from 2.6 of general past of Assessment Policy) and are meant as a final record of MYP success.

In MYP 4-5 digital tools such as AssessPrep may be used to familiarize students with the MYP On-screen assessment which they will be required to sit in May of MYP 5. FIS guidance on these assessments are in keeping with IB MYP Assessment Procedures documentation.

2.2.1.6 Appropriateness of tasks

The assessment task developed for each unit must address at least one MYP subject group objective. Student work that stems from these tasks can then be assessed using the appropriate criteria. It is essential that tasks be developed to address the objectives appropriately; it is not valid to assess summatively pieces of work that do not address at least one of the objectives.

Teachers will need to ensure that assessment tasks not only address an objective, but allow students access to all the achievement levels in the corresponding criterion. Similarly, some tasks may only allow very competent students access to any of the achievement levels; other students may not be able to achieve even the lowest levels simply because the task did not permit this. Many of the highest level descriptors require teachers to design open-ended tasks so that students can choose, for example, which techniques or skills to apply.

The school expects each curricular area to develop a common approach to task specific clarification for summative tasks. This to be provided at the time the assignment is given. (See example  MYP Task Cover Sheet  for guidance.)

2.2.1.7 Choosing a level of achievement by adopting a ‘best-fit’ model

The descriptors for each criterion are hierarchical. When assessing a student’s work, teachers must read the descriptors (starting with level 0) until they reach a descriptor that describes an achievement level that the work being assessed has not attained. The work is therefore best described by the preceding descriptor.

Where it is not clearly evident which level descriptor should apply, teachers must use their judgment to select the descriptor that best matches the student’s work overall. The ‘best-fit’ approach allows teachers to select the achievement level that best describes the piece of work being assessed.

If the work is a strong example of achievement in a band, the teacher should give it the higher achievement in the band. If the work is a weak example of achievement in that band, the teacher should give it the lower achievement level in the band.

2.2.1.8 School-based subjects

Currently, two subjects (Global Perspectives and Exploratories) are assessed outside the MYP assessment framework, using internal assessment criteria. Further information is available in the individual subject appendix.

2.2.1.9 The MYP Certificate

The maximum total score for the IB MYP certificate is 56, with a grade 1-7 assigned to each eAssessment. Students must achieve a total of at least 28 points, with a grade ‘3’ or higher in each eAssessment to be eligible for certification. For students who complete more than one eAssessment for each required or selected subject group, only the highest available grade for that requirement is applied. Further information regarding grade expectations for German recognition to obtain an equivalency for the ‘Mittlere Schulabschluss (MSA)’ are to be sought from the Assistant Head of Secondary/MYP.

2.2.2 MYP Assessment Criteria

2.2.2.1 Criterion-related rubrics

Students are assessed by criterion-related rubrics that are also found in the MYP subject group guides. The rubrics describe eight levels of competency against the unit objectives. (see Language & Literature example in Figure 1). Judgments are made by consulting the levels of achievement and assigning the level that best describes the quality of work submitted.The aim is to find the level descriptor that most accurately matches the achievement seen in the work using the best-fit approach across the strands.

To determine the final achievement level in each criteria for each student, teachers must gather evidence from a range of assessment tasks to enable them to make a professional and informed judgement. Subject groups must assess all strands of all four assessment criteria at least twice in each year of the MYP (see Figure 2).

2.2.2.2 MYP Grade Scale and Descriptors

To arrive at a criterion level total for each student, teachers add together the final achievement levels in all criteria of the subject group. After a series of judgments are made, the rubrics, along with formative assessment data and summative assessment data, are used to make a final judgment using the ‘best-fit’ approach.

As per IB guidelines , grades must not be determined by averaging summative performance levels over the year. In MYP1, teachers will use MYP1 criteria found in the subject guide. For MYP2 and 3, teachers will use MYP criteria for ‘year 3’ found in the subject guide. For MYP4 and 5, the teacher will use criteria for ‘year 5’ found in the subject guide.

The final grade is based on the total of the four criteria along the following grade boundaries:

2.2.2.3 EAL students in MYP classes will be assessed according to MYP assessment criteria, and tasks will be differentiated so that EAL students can achieve the highest levels of the assessment criteria.

In MYP1-3, where it is not yet possible for a student to achieve the highest levels of certain assessment criteria in certain subjects (because their English language level prevents them from accessing the highest levels even with accommodations, support and differentiation), no numerical rating level will be awarded for these criteria, rather narrative feedback provided based on the assessment criteria. This applies to feedback on both formative and summative tasks, and to semester reports. The criteria this applies to are decided collaboratively between the EAL department and subject teacher. In MYP4-5, all EAL students will be given numerical rating levels in all assessment criteria in all subjects, regardless of their English language level.

2.2.2.4 Students with identified exceptionality will participate in all assessments with inclusive arrangements pursuant to their Individualized Education Plan (IEP) or their Accommodations Certificate. These accommodations are based on specific needs as determined by external professional assessments and serve to allow access to the rigorous curriculum while not providing unfair advantages. For further information, please refer to the Inclusion and Special Educational Needs Policy.

2.2.3 Assessment Methods

2.2.3.1 Assessment in the MYP is not confined to the final part of a learning period, such as the end of a unit. Formative assessments are planned from the start of a unit. Internal summative and formative assessments are closely linked, and teachers must use their knowledge of IB assessment expectations and practices to help students improve performance

2.2.3.2 The following table (Figure 4) outlines, in general, types of assessments, their purpose and uses:

2.2.3.3 Differentiation

When planning for appropriate assessment, teachers must refer to expectations laid out in the Inclusion and Special Educational Needs and Special Educational Needs Policy. All students are given differentiated assessment opportunities.

For students with identified exceptionalities (students with an IEP), teachers collaborate with respective learning support specialists when drafting and possibly modifying assessments. EAL and Learning Support specialists are consulted when designing assessments to ensure access; accommodations or other supports are considered in order to provide the most inclusive learning environment.

2.2.3.4 Access Arrangements

For details pertaining to access arrangements, please refer to the Inclusion and Special Educational Needs Policy.

2.2.4 Feedback and Reporting

2.2.4.1 MYP assessment data relating to student achievement levels and grades, as well as written feedback, is recorded on ManageBac.

2.2.4.2 MYP assessment data and written feedback must, once standardization has been completed (for common assessments) be published to parents and students using the ‘notification’ option within the ManageBac gradebook. At their discretion, teachers may delay the publication of grades to parents to a day later than the publication of grades to students.

2.3 Assessment in the Secondary School, IB Diploma Programme (DP)

The information in this appendix builds on, and fully aligns with the core policy statement above.

More detailed guidance on DP assessment will be found within the IB Programme Resource Centre (PRC). The text below aligns with PRC documents but is, of necessity, briefer. In case of doubt, the definitive guidance will be provided within the relevant IBO documentation.

2.3.1 Program/Subject Specific Guidelines

Assessment in the Secondary Section through the IB Diploma Programme (DP) plays a significant role in the realisation of the school’s guiding statements. All aspects of learning as embodied in the IB Learner Profile and goals and objectives must be evaluated and monitored to provide students and teachers with information on the progress being made towards attaining the goals of the DP. Assessment at the FIS in the DP:

• supports setting personal learning targets and helps each student to reach their full academic potential.
• enables students, teachers, and parents to monitor and reflect on the learning and achievement of each student in terms of all-round personal development.
• facilitates the evaluation, adjustment, direction and redirection of curriculum planning and delivery.

This appendix represents a statement of intent and action describing the principles and practices for achieving educational goals relating to all aspects of assessment in the DP at the FIS. The FIS recognizes that “the goal of an IB education is far more than a series of academic grades” (Assessment principles and practices—Quality assessments in a digital age, IBO 2018).

2.3.1.1 Teachers look for evidence of what students know and understand through both formative and summative assessments. Assessment is:

• objective,
• criterion referenced
• against level descriptors.

Any mark scheme used should not be considered exhaustive. Teachers must reward alternative but equally valid answers that contain coherent ideas.

2.3.1.2 Individual DP subjects are assessed on a 1-7 scale. Letter grades A to E are awarded for Theory of Knowledge (TOK) and the Extended Essay (EE). The maximum points total is 42 plus Diploma points for Theory of Knowledge and the Extended Essay, totaling 45 points overall. The passing score for the DP is 24 points, although there are a number of failing conditions that need to be taken into account. For further details of these refer to Assessment Principles and Practices- Quality Assessments in a Digital Age (2019).

2.3.1.3 The weightings for assessment components in each DP subject are based on those set out in DP subject guides. The Grade Boundaries for Higher Level and Standard level subjects are based on those published by the IB in each of the subject reports.

2.3.1.4 In the event of the implementation of a new DP subject cycle, accompanied by the release of a new DP subject guide, then Heads of Department in consultation with the DP Coordinator will review historical data and any IB clarifications to determine grade boundaries for the assessment components of the new course until the first subject report with grade boundaries is published and made available.

2.3.1.5 Exemplar work will be available to current students for consideration and familiarisation with the application of the assessment criteria as they relate to each particular DP subject.

2.3.1.6 When a teacher has serious concerns about the academic performance of a student then the advisor must be notified in the first instance. The DP teacher must also inform the HOD and Assistant Head of Secondary/DP. Students of concern will then be monitored using the monitoring student progress sheet.

2.3.1.7 If a Curricular Area has established that a DP student is guilty of malpractice, the DP teacher must not award a level of achievement, and adhere to the school’s and IB’s Academic Integrity Policies. The Assistant Head of Secondary/DP will be informed and take action accordingly.

2.3.1.8 At the FIS there is annual and comprehensive analysis of the assessment data released by the IB to inform teaching and learning across the DP in the secondary school. This takes place at the beginning of each academic school year. All DP Core and subject teachers complete an analysis of the final results of their subject from the previous year with the assistance of the Head of Department and Assistant Head of Secondary/DP. ‘This analysis includes consideration of past results, averages and predictions in conjunction with an analysis of current comparisons to world averages, current predictions and relative performance in each subject assessment component. Core points through the extended essay and Theory of Knowledge performance are also included in this analysis.’ (BIS Assessment Policy) This process is coordinated by the Assistant Head of Secondary DP with oversight and input from the Head of Secondary and the Assistant Head of School Curriculum.

2.3.1.9 In the event that a DP student misses a scheduled summative assessment task for DP Core (TOK, EE & CAS) or DP academic subjects published on the school’s assessment calendar as a result of an unexcused absence that student shall provide a certificate (e.g., medical, dental etc) and seek to arrange a mutually agreed upon alternate summative assessment date and time. This will be coordinated by the relevant Head of Department and DP subject teacher and supported by the Assistant Head of Secondary/DP as required.

2.3.2. Assessment Methods

2.3.2.1 The IBDP assessment has two parts: formal IB assessment and school based assignments, tests and internal examinations which are designed to assist students prepare for final IB assessment requirements.

2.3.2.2 IB assessment consists of formal examinations and internal assessment during the two year course period. This is externally graded or moderated by an examiner, contributing to an individual student’s final DP qualification. The IB publication, ‘Assessment Principles and Practices- Quality Assessments in a Digital Age’ (2019), clearly stipulates the principles and practices by which the assessment is to be carried out. Specific subject guidelines are included in the Diploma Programme Assessment Procedures 2020 and in individual Subject Guides. It is expected that teachers will be familiar with all information relating to formal assessment in their subject areas.

2.3.2.3 School based assignments, tests and internal examinations use a combination of ATTs, ATLs and additional strategies to consolidate student learning in preparation for final DP grading.

2.3.2.4 Assessment tasks in the DP are criterion-related and must be scaffolded by teachers, or utilise examination (end-of-course external papers) criteria, so that at the end of the first year of the programme, DP1 students have had access to the full range of assessment grades commensurate with the course components covered and as specified in each subject guide.

2.3.2.5 For the DP, assessed work may vary in its purpose, and teachers are expected to use the full range of formative and summative assessment activities. Teachers must inform students in advance which criteria will be used to evaluate their work, both for internal assessment (IA) and external examination. Teachers must explain what is required for students to fulfil the criteria for any particular piece of assessed work.

2.3.2.6 Assessment of Internal Assessment (IA) work requirements must follow the stipulated requirements set out in each DP subject guide. Feedback must adhere to the stipulated requirements of these subject guides.

2.3.2.7 Teachers must keep a clear and accurate record of all assessment activities using the ManageBac grade book. Assessment activities must be evidenced, entered and uploaded through the ManageBac units and calendar. The FIS internal summative assessment calendar must be adhered to and once published any changes in the course of an academic year must be authorised by the Head of Secondary/DP. Summative tasks will be posted to the ManageBac calendar by a set date at the start of each academic semester. Teachers will be informed in advance of this set date to allow adequate planning and time to input summative assessment dates on the school’s internal assessment calendar and on ManageBac.

2.3.2.8 With summative assessment pieces the assessment process must be informed by the use of subject-specific assessment criteria. Teachers apply and use criterion-related assessment. As such, student answers are placed where the majority of descriptors correspond to the student’s work. i.e., A “best-fit” model is used. For example, if the level descriptors for an assessment criterion include many of the points for consideration set out in the level descriptors and student performance is at a high level on most of the strands/points for consideration but not all of them, then teachers adopt the “best-fit” model. If most of the performance for a criterion fulfilled the level descriptor requirements for a particular mark, and yet student work on a particular level descriptor was missing, a teacher might consider reducing the overall performance to a lower markband. If a piece of work seems to fall between two level descriptors, only partially fulfilling the requirements of the higher level descriptor, teachers will re-read both of the level descriptors in question and choose the level descriptor which is a ‘best fit’ description of the candidate’s work. Such a piece of work might be selected and considered through an internal school standardisation process (Refer to the standardisation section below).

2.3.2.9 A process of standardisation must be followed and adhered to for DP subjects. The standardisation process is set out in detail in the Standardisation Protocol section below.

2.3.2.10 Academic Honesty: in the event that a teacher suspects malpractice, they will refer to the school’s Academic Honesty Policy for guidance. Teachers must ensure that all submissions of formative and summative tasks are via ManageBac. When creating a summative task or deadline on ManageBac, teachers should select and activate the dropbox and TurnItIn function for that task. All DP student work submitted through ManageBac can then be checked for plagiarism via Turnitin. Heads of Departments and experienced staff can assist initiating this process on ManageBac if necessary.

2.3.2.11 FIS School Examinations

Guidelines for the administration and conduct of both school-based (‘mock’, ‘End of Year’) examinations, as well as formal IB external examinations, are provided separately, and at the appropriate time of year.

2.3.2.12 Mid-Year/End of Year Grades

In the DP each subject has specific criteria and these criteria are measured on numeric scales, which differ by subject/course. Marks and grades must align with expectations set out in IBDP subject guides. Further information can be found in subject specific appendices.

2.3.3 Feedback and reporting

2.3.3.1 Assessment data (‘grades’) and written feedback is recorded, once standardization has been completed (for common assessments), on Managebac. Written feedback must be provided for all summative assessments. The feedback must refer to the assessment criteria published in IBDP subject guides and contain individualised comments for each student.

2.3.3.2 Assessment data and feedback must be published to parents using the ‘notification’ option within the ManageBac gradebook. At their discretion, teachers may delay the publication of grades to parents to a day later than the publication of grades to students.

2.3.3.3 In the case of DP Internal Assessment (IA) tasks, students are permitted to only receive one round of written feedback on a draft piece of work. For additional clarifications, teachers must consult their subject-specific guides and Head of Department in the first instance.

2.3.3.4 Through authentic and reliable feedback, based on grades that accurately reflect a student’s performance, as measured against DP objectives and subject-specific criteria, students are informed about their performance and are given suggestions as to what they need to do to progress. Emphasis is placed on students learning how to learn, with the aim to help them be better judges of their own performance, so they can develop strategies to improve (‘Guidelines for developing a school assessment policy in the Diploma Programme’, p.3).

2.3.3.5 A formal report is published, via ManageBac, to students and parents at the end of Semester 1 (‘Mid-Year Report’) and at the end of Semester 2 (‘End of Year Report’). Reports state a DP student’s level of attainment for each of the DP academic subjects and the DP Core requirements (Theory of Knowledge, Extended Essay, Creativity, Activity, Service).

Appendix 3: Assessment in Curricular Areas

3.1 Design

3.1.1 Context

Design, technology and innovation learning goals are formally assessed in certain IPC units.

MYP Design is taught in Grades 6-10, with Design in Grades 9 and 10 being an elective subject.

DP Computer Science is also taught as a second Science subject for DP students.

3.1.2 Subject-specific assessment practices

3.1.2.1 Mechanisms of repeating assessments

If students want to redo an assessment for an improved grade after a score has been given, they must completely redo the criterion selecting a new product. Because of the time involved in re-doing a Design assessment with a new product, a redo is only possible if the original assessment has been submitted on time.

3.1.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.1.3.1 Standardisation protocol

When assessing, teachers of the same grade level come together and share a selection of high, medium and low pieces for standardisation, and discuss what evidence they might need to look for in pieces of work to demonstrate that they reach certain bands.

For DP Computer Science a confirmatory review is conducted with the Computer Science teacher marking all IAs and the Director of Educational Technology reviewing scores and clarifying any questions on marking. If necessary, a blind remarking model will be used with input from an additional qualified DP Computer Science teacher being sought.

3.2 EAL

3.2.1 Context

In the Primary School (EY3 to Grade 5), EAL support is provided for the students to develop English language for social communication and academic purposes to access the Primary curriculum. EAL is taught during the English Language Arts (ELA) lessons and small group support is offered for different proficiency levels, as well as in-class support. Beginners and High-beginners receive EAL instruction that is planned to provide the students with Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills. For Low-intermediate to Advanced levels the ELA curriculum is differentiated for the English Language Learners (ELLs) to scaffold them in working on the same topics and tasks. All ELLs are supported in accessing the IPC Curriculum during in-class support as well as in EAL classes.

In the Secondary School, English Language Acquisition classes are offered for students whose English is not yet proficient. This is part of the MYP (Emergent Phases 1-2, Capable Phases 3-4 and Proficient Phase 5). In the DP, English B at Standard Level or Higher Level is on offer as a course choice for students. For more information about the different levels taught and placement procedures, please see the  FIS Language Policy.  For more information about assessment in MYP and DP Language Acquisition classes, please refer to the Language Acquisition Appendix to the Assessment Policy.

In addition to the English Language Acquisition classes, the EAL Program offers English subject support or Academic English Support (AES). In Grades 6 – 10 this is offered as an alternative to an Exploratory/elective choice for the students. Placement letters for English subject support or AES are sent out based on WIDA Model proficiency level testing results, summative assessment results from the Language Acquisition classes and teacher feedback and observations from the MYP lessons. The English subject support or AES lessons focus on developing the ELLs’ Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP), academic vocabulary, reading comprehension of mainstream texts and academic writing skills. Students are able to bring assignments from their subject classes to receive support and scaffolding for these, as well as to receive extra time where applicable. EAL teachers collaborate with their students’ subject teachers about the tasks and vocabulary. English subject support/AES is not graded by the EAL teachers. Moreover, EAL teachers provide in-class support during subject lessons, such as IndSoc, Science or sometimes also Math. Assessment is completed by the respective subject teachers with input from the EAL teachers as appropriate.

3.2.2 Subject specific assessment practices

3.2.2.1 Assessment practices with examples

The EAL Assessment Procedures (written in 2013/2014 and further updated in September 2017 and last in 2018/2019 with a review coming up in 21/22) detail information about EAL Assessment Philosophy and Principles, EAL Admissions and Programme Entrance, Upper Secondary School Admissions Language Proficiency Requirements and recommended Language Proficiency Level Assessment Test, EAL Student Files, Formative and Summative Assessment in EAL Classes, Collaborative Assessment and Reporting with the Mainstream for the different school sections, EAL Reporting Procedures for the different school sections, End of Year Summative English Language Proficiency Level Assessment (WIDA Model) and information about Moving Through the EAL Placement Continuum including EAL Exit Criteria. This document has been written by EAL teachers and its purpose is to inform and guide assessment of ELLs by the EAL Department as well as in collaboration with mainstream subject teachers in the different school sections.

The EAL support is aimed at differentiation and scaffolding tasks and assignments for students in their Primary subject classes and their MYP/DP subject classes. Tasks, assignments and assessments are not modified for the EAL students..

EAL / AES classes are not graded.

For information about how EAL students are graded in their MYP subjects, please see the MYP appendix.

As per the current IB Access and Inclusion Policy, some EAL students must be able receive accommodations for all learning and teaching. These accommodations are based on the individual students’ performance in recent proficiency level testing (WIDA Model tests) and may encompass extra time for written exams and/or oral exams, a reader or the use of a word processor with spell checker (if the extra time is not requested).

3.2.2.2 Mechanisms of repeating assessments 

For more information about English Language Acquisition, please refer to the Language Acquisition Appendix of the Assessment Policy.

3.2.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.2.3.1 Expectations for collaboration 

For more information about English Language Acquisition, please refer to the Language Acquisition Appendix of the Assessment Policy.

The FIS collaboration guidelines outline expectations for subject teachers and EAL teachers pertaining to expectations of both teachers working together on planning differentiation and scaffolding for ELLs in class, as well as for assessments. This document also outlines expectations for collaboration within co-teaching teams. Additional information for co-teachers is provided by the EAL Department.

3.2.3.2 Standardisation Protocol 

WIDA Model Assessment: EAL teachers meet to standardize pieces of writing within one grade level.

For more information about English Language Acquisition please refer to the Language Acquisition Appendix of the Assessment Policy.

3.2.4 Reporting

In the Primary School, EAL students receive a separate EAL semester report in addition to their mainstream semester report. In the Primary School, EAL students receive comments on their EAL semester reports that outline the EAL support provision and provide information about the students’ individual progress in the four skill areas Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing including recommendations on next steps as appropriate. In the Primary School, the EAL report replaces the ELA report for Beginner and High Beginner students since they receive EAL instruction during ELA time. WIDA MODEL proficiency level results are communicated annually to parents.

In the Secondary School, the WIDA MODEL results are communicated annually to parents of all students receiving EAL support, as well as a brief narrative comment for students who receive EAL support but who do not take MYP English Language Acquisition. Students who take MYP English Language Acquisition receive an MYP report in line with Secondary School report expectations.

3.3 Exploratory

3.3.1 Context

Each academic year, Students in Grades 6-8 (MYP1-3) are given the opportunity to learn a new skill outside of the regular MYP courses. This encourages student choice and provides an opportunity for the FIS community to share its diverse cultural differences and unique talents. Teachers are encouraged to share their passions with students, exemplifying life long learners. The exploratory program supports the school in its goal to ‘create educational opportunities for students that promote healthy relationships, individual and shared responsibility including personal competencies that support effective teamwork and collaboration.’

Furthermore, to support the MYP outcome for service learning and prepare students for their Personal Project in MYP5, exploratory classes provide students with the opportunity to become:

• More aware of their own strengths and areas for growth.
• Undertake Challenges and develop new skills.

The Course offerings available to students can be found  here .

In addition to these courses Learning Strategies is provided to support student learning. Students are enrolled in Learning Strategies courses after consultation between parents and students as appropriate, the AHoS MYP and the Learning Support department.

3.3.2 Subject specifications of General Assessment Practices

As much as possible, teachers are encouraged to make connections to MYP Key Concepts allowing for further interdisciplinary learning. ATL skill Categories should also be used when considering demonstration of learning in a meaningful context.

3.3.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

Teachers are to meet annually to determine the success of ATL skill development within the choices offered and through a community survey ensure new teachers are given the chance to suggest new courses for the following year. Student feedback should also be sought to determine possible new areas of study.

3.3.4 The organization of feedback

Timely feedback of formative assessments should consider the 5 Categories of ATL Skills: Thinking, Communication, Self Management, Research & Social.

3.3.5 Guidelines for reporting

Summative assessments are not required nor is a numerical grade based on MYP criteria required.

Written anecdotal records of ATL skills should be kept by teachers and summarized in written feedback entered into student report cards at the end of each semester. These comments should be based on the formative assessment of course relevant skills as well as specific ATL skills.

Over time teachers and students can identify ATL competence in any learning strategy using terms such as:

• Novice/Beginner
• Learner/developing
• Practitioner/using
• Expert/sharing.

Further details on the ATL skills framework can be found in Appendix 1 of  MYP: From principles into practice. 

3.4 English/German First Language

3.4.1 Context

This appendix covers ELA and German as a first language in Primary School, and MYP/DP Language and Literature / Literature classes in English and German.

In the DP, School Supported Self Taught Literature classes are also offered. Due to the self-taught nature of the course, the assessment practices in this appendix do not apply. The course is assessed externally and in line with IB regulations.

3.4.2 Subject specifications of General Assessment Practices

3.4.2.1 Primary School

3.4.2.1.1 Reading

Reading is assessed with standardized tests as well as within grade level expectations.

Fountas and Pinnell Literacy Benchmark Program, a summative assessment tool, is administered three times a year for students between EY5 and Grade 5. The assessment tracks progress and determines the independent and instructional reading level of the student. The instructional level refers to the level of the texts students will read during guided reading sessions/instruction. The independent reading level is the level of text students can access independently.

Teachers assess students’ reading in class according to the grade level reading learning goals.

The Reading Guidelines provide teachers with guidance on how to assess reading in class according to the grade level reading learning goals.

3.4.2.1.2 Word Work

Words Their Way, a spelling inventory, is administered twice a year for students between EY5 and Grade 5. This common baseline assessment is used to track progress and inform instructional groups. Students’ Spelling Inventories follow the student to the next teacher between grade levels.

3.4.2.1.3 Writing

ELA Progression Grid

The Primary FIS ELA writing curriculum is a broad overview articulating the continuum of learning growth for all students from EY 3 to Grade 5. The Progression Grids provide a detailed interpretation of the writing Learning Goals at each grade level. They are used by both students and teachers to guide and measure personal learning growth.

3.4.2.2 Secondary School

3.4.2.2.1 Mechanisms of repeating assessments

• Summative assessment tasks can only be repeated if the student approaches the teacher within three days after having received feedback. The re-do will generally take place outside normal teaching time, e.g. during lunch or after school. Teachers and students will agree a day and time. If the student does not take this opportunity and doesn’t show up, s/he forfeits the right to a re-do.
• In the PS and the MYP, longer assignments, e.g. projects, can be redone with a different thematic focus or on a different literary work. The due date will be determined by the teacher and will usually be shorter than the original timeline.
• DP externally assessed coursework (at the moment: HL Essay) can only be repeated on a different literary work and with a different focus after the feedback on the full draft or any time before that and in consultation with the teacher. The original deadline for submitting the final copy still applies.
• In the DP, the Individual Oral cannot be repeated.

3.4.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.4.3.1 Expectations for Collaboration and Standardisation Protocol

• PS: peer standardization with samples early on in the marking process within a year group is encouraged. If only one teacher teaches: Confirmatory review against criteria with a colleague or the HoD. This applies to summative work only.
• MYP: peer standardization with samples early on in the marking process within a year group. Where there is only one teacher, standardization buddies will be established across year groups. This applies to summative work but is encouraged on formative work where applicable.
• DP: For DP coursework and the IO: up to 5 students, a full moderation, with more students , sampling (top – middle – bottom); this is done with a teacher of the parallel course, the HoD or a volunteering colleague.
• DP: Once a semester, one summative assignment should undergo Confirmatory Standardization with a colleague or the HoD to check for consistency in the application of the assessment criteria.

3.5 Global Perspectives

3.5.1 Context

Global Perspectives is taught in Grades 6-10 as a compulsory FIS subject. Students study units based on the MYP Global Contexts and are assessed according to FIS-created assessment criteria based on the MYP ATLs.

3.5.2 Subject specifications of General Assessment Practices

3.5.2.1 Assessment practices with examples

Students complete three summative assessments per year. Students are assessed on three out of five criteria per unit. The assessment criteria for Global Perspectives are Investigating, Planning, Communication and Social Skills, Reflecting, and Critical Thinking.

3.5.2.2 Circumstances for and mechanisms of repeating assessments (2.6)

Teachers present the final assessment of a unit at the beginning of every new unit. Students complete a series of mini-tasks over the course of the unit so that pupils develop the skills to complete the final assessment. Hence, there is on-going feedback. The summative assessment takes place at the end of each unit.

• A student can repeat a final assessment if (s)he has actively participated in class discussions, done homework and completed all mini-tasks over the course of the unit.

• A student can repeat a final assessment if personal extraordinary circumstances had an effect on the student’s completion of the final task.

• A student can repeat a final assessment if extraordinary health circumstances had an effect on the student’s completion of the final task.

• A student can repeat a final assessment if (s)he feels his/her performance can be better. In this case, the student needs to complete a  Self-Reflection Form  form to justify why the retake is necessary.

 3.5.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.5.3.1 Expectations for collaboration

It is expected that teachers collaborate to plan the contents that they will teach. Teachers are expected to meet one or twice per month to monitor the progress of the students and to verify that the classes are advancing in a similar fashion.

3.5.3.2 Standardisation Protocol

Teachers of the same grade level meet to standardise assessments before the end of the unit..

3.5.4 The organization of feedback

Formative mini-tasks:

• General feedback is provided in class orally.
• Specific feedback is provided in writing. Teachers are encouraged to use MB to record their feedback.

Summative tasks:

• General feedback is provided in class orally.
• Specific feedback is provided in writing. Teachers are encouraged to use MB to record their feedback.

The comments and feedback on the students’ work should reflect what students are doing well and what they need to improve for future projects.

3.5.5 Guidelines for reporting

The grade for semester one depends on the students’ performance on the first summative assessment of the year. The end of the year grade considers the students’ performance in the first semester, and the students’ performance on the second and third summative assessment of the year.

3.6 Individuals and Societies/Humanities

3.6.1 Context

Humanities / Individuals & Societies are embedded within all FIS curriculum frameworks, from K – 12, inclusive of International Primary Curriculum (IPC), Middle Years Programme (MYP), and Diploma Programme (DP).

Within the IPC, Humanities is assessed discretely through units which are focused upon the Assessment for Learning process, where students are provided with feedback for improvement in relation to Learning Goals. These learning goals are academic, personal and global in nature.

Within the MYP all students study Integrated Humanities in grades 6 – 8, before choosing to specialise in discrete History or Geography. Business components of MYP are also written into the MYP Geography and MYP History courses. Completion of one of these e-Assessments in G10 is a requirement to obtain the MYP certificate. Within the DP and the High School Diploma, History, Geography and Business Management is offered. Diploma Programme students need to submit internal assessment (IA) and external assessments (EA).

3.6.2 Subject specifications of General Assessment Practices

3.6.2.1 IPC

• Assessment For Learning (AFL) – students will set goals based on a Learning Goal, receive formative feedback and then summative feedback, including one of the following descriptors: “Beginning”, “Developing”, or “Mastering”
• Assessments are usually spread over a variety of unit points. This allows students to have multiple opportunities to demonstrate their skills within the unit.

3.6.2.2 MYP

• Students will generally participate in two assessment tasks per unit, with a minimum of one of these being a ‘summative assessment’
• Unlike summative assessments, formative assessments do not always require feedback to be delivered via Managebac in a written format.

3.6.2.3 DP

• Students will generally participate in two assessment tasks per unit, with a minimum of one of these being a ‘summative assessment’.
• Students will complete a variety of IA and EA assignments across the department. In these circumstances deadlines must be met accordingly.

3.6.2.4   Repeating assessments

• If a student has genuine grounds to resit a summative assessment, they may choose to repeat it. This should take place outside of class time. Students need to seek approval from the subject teacher and arrange the retake according to school procedures.
• In the case of a written assessment, the teacher should provide a similar task which will measure the student’s understanding/knowledge of the criterion. Unless it is not possible, due to other responsibilities, timely feedback for a repeated assessment should follow 2.3 above.
• Internal/external assessments can only be repeated within the procedures and policies of the MYP and DP programmes.

3.6.3 Monitoring assessments and expectations for collaboration

3.6.3.1 Standardisation Protocol

• For all summative assessments, there is an expectation within the Humanities / Individuals and Societies department that a process of standardisation occurs, specifically within the MYP and DP programmes. If the assessing teacher has a strong understanding for the interpretation of the criteria/rubrics against the student’s work, examples with comments could be shared amongst colleagues. Standardisation is required in grade levels that are shared amongst teachers. Standardisation amongst teachers within the same subject and grade levels should take place within two weeks of a summative assessment.

• Internal assessments in Humanities / Individuals and Societies must be standardised, with either each student standardised individually, or through examples, provided to other teachers or the Head of Department.

• DP Internal Assessments follow a Confirmatory Review model of standardisation, whereby the aim is to review the accuracy of the marking by a non-subject expert and make sure there is relevant and clear rationale for the grades awarded.

3.6.3.2 Expectations for collaboration

• Attending collaborative planning meetings for all shared grade levels as well as at department level are a professional requirement for the development of planning, units, moderation and assessments.
• Attending departmental retreats as needed is a requirement for the review and revision of units, approaches to teaching and learning and assessments.

3.6.4 The Organisation of feedback

• In IPC, feedback is to be provided on the AFL documents and provided to the students/parents. Primary students will also receive reporting feedback which will summarise student performance and provide “next steps” for personal development.
• In the MYP and DP, students will receive feedback on each individual summative task assessment through Managebac “comments”. If applicable, the teacher could make comments by annotating the assessment as well.
• Formative assessment should be ongoing throughout the unit, if written feedback on formative assessments is to be given, it must come prior to the engagement of a summative assessment.

3.7 Language Acquisition (German, Spanish and English)

3.7.1 Context

In the Primary School (EY3 to Grade 5), German is taught as a language acquisition subject with links being made to the IPC framework. English as an Additional Language (EAL) is taught alongside the English Language Art (ELA) curriculum. For more information about EAL in the Primary School, please see the EAL subject-specific appendix.

In the Secondary School, language acquisition is taught as an MYP and DP (ab initio (German only), Language B SL/HL) subject (English, German and Spanish).

For more information about the different levels taught and placement procedures, please see the  FIS Language Policy.

3.7.2 Subject specifications of General Assessment Practices

3.7.2.1 Mechanisms of repeating assessments

Students will be reminded that a retake in language acquisition will not typically lead to a higher level being awarded, due to the fact that development of language skills needs time. Any retake of a summative assessment should take place within 2 – 3 weeks.

In order to retake a summative assessment, students should first initiate a conversation with the teacher articulating reasons for wanting to re-take. The teacher will then give the student a self-reflection form pertaining to the three Bs and the AtLs, which the student then needs to complete within two school days of receiving feedback on the original task. The purpose of this is for students to engage in deep thinking and self-reflection about their own learning and learning behaviour. The self-reflection form will contain a statement that displays that the grading from the second assessment will count towards the report card grade replacing the original grade on the first assessment.

3.7.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.7.3.1 Expectations for collaboration

Teachers of the same language acquisition phase or level across different year groups are encouraged to collaborate on assessment practices. In case teachers are teaching the same units to the same phases in different grade levels, they are encouraged to collaborate on the unit assessments as appropriate.

3.7.3.2. Standardisation Protocol

MYP Language Acquisition and and DP Language B and DP ab initio use a ‘Blind Remarking’ model for standardisation of the Individual Oral Assessments. The colleagues involved are the teachers of the courses and the Head of Department where there is only one teacher involved in teaching the course.

The Individual Oral Assessment grades are communicated via ManageBac to the students once the teachers and/or HoD have agreed on the mark that will be sent to the IB.

The following assessments will be used to calculate the predicted grade:

• Summative assessments in MYP 5 / DP 2, which are in the style of the exams or the individual oral assessment (MYP Speaking Criterion C)
• The mock exam, which is in the style of the exams
• The individual oral assessment

The components are weighted to mirror the weighting in the real exam (25% reading, writing, speaking, listening).

The grade based on the above will be calculated to form a ‘base’ grade. Once this has been done, the class teacher will take into account the following points, in consultation with the HoD and/or other language acquisition teachers if necessary:

1. a) Progress the student has made throughout the course. This will help predict how much more progress we expect them to make by the time of the exams.
2. b) The student’s performance in the most recent assessments (i.e. approx. one month before the final exams)
3. c) Any assessment data that may be unreliable (e.g. student was sick so performed worse than expected)
4. d) How close the student is to the next grade up/down
5. e) Historical data showing how much better students in the subject performed in the final exams compared to in the mock exams
6. f) For DP: DP grade descriptors (“Predicted grades should be based on the grade descriptors that are available in DP Grade descriptors” – DP Assessment Procedures 2021)

Then the class teacher, in consultation with the HoD and/or other language acquisition teachers if necessary, will use their professional judgment to agree on a predicted grade. The students are not made aware of the predicted grade.

3.8 Mathematics

3.8.1 Context

In Primary School, students are assessed using the Learning Goals for Mathematics..

In MYP 1-3, students take MYP Mathematics and are assessed according to the specific course standards. In MYP 4 and 5, two courses are offered to students, Mathematics and Extended Mathematics, each course being assessed against specific course standards in all criteria.

In the DP, students choose either Mathematics A&A or A&I at the SL or HL Level, depending upon availability.

3.8.2 Subject specific assessment practices

3.8.2.1 Primary School

The learning goals for Mathematics are a broad overview of the continuum of learning growth for all students from EY 3 to Grade 5. The Rubrics, developed using the levels Beginning, Developing and Mastering, provide a more detailed description of each learning goal so as to assist the growth within these skills.

Jam, Gloss and IKAN are summative assessment tools utilised by Primary teachers of mathematics.They identify the strategic stage a student is working at across a variety of domains. They are administered for students between EY5 and Grade 5 at the appropriate assessment for their stage.

• JAM is administered to EY5 and Grade 1 students achieving at a stage below 4
• GloSS is administered for those students achieving above stage 4
• IKAN is administered to all students from Grade 2 and above.

In Grade 1 to 5, JAM, GLoSS and/or IKAN are administered once a year in Semester 2 and on arrival for new students. In EY5, JAM is administered twice a year (typically around October and May). All results are recorded on the appropriate google spreadsheet.

3.8.2.2 Mechanisms of repeating assessments

In the Secondary School, students are allowed to complete retakes of MYP and DP summative assessments in all criteria. Students wishing a retake are required to contact their teacher in writing expressing the desire to complete a retake of an assessment, and are to negotiate an appropriate time of completion.

IBDP students wishing to complete a retake of the Mathematics IA are to express this desire in writing to their teacher. This process includes the identification of a new topic, production of a new proposal and draft, and submission of a new, good copy meeting all academic honesty requirements. Written feedback on the draft will be given, with the option of a personal interview left to the discretion of the teacher.

3.8.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.8.3.1 Standardisation Protocol

In the MYP, a sample of three pieces of student work in each group is chosen for standardization.

In the DP, for each of the Math Courses (A&A and A&I SL/HL), a peer standardization model is used for moderation. Each teacher of the course chooses their top, middle and bottom scored IA for moderation. Moderation of the resulting sample is completed during CP time involving all teachers of the course. In the event that only one teacher teaches the course, an external moderator (Ex. HoD, colleague from another IB school) will serve as a second moderator and a sample size of 5 (for classes under 20 students) and 8 (for classes of 20 or more) will be standardized. After adjusting the final grades of IA work in accordance with the standardization process, teachers are to share the grades with their students and keep a marked copy of their candidate’s IA.

3.8.4 The organization of feedback

For the IA in the DP, teachers and students will discuss the exploration. Students are encouraged to initiate discussions with their teacher to obtain advice and information, and students will not be penalized for seeking guidance. As part of the learning process, teachers will read and give advice to students on ONE draft of the work. The teacher will provide oral or written advice on how the work could be improved, but not edit the draft. The next version handed to the teacher must be the final version for submission.

3.9 Performing Arts

3.9.1 Context

Performing Arts at the FIS are placed differently within the curricular frameworks of each school section.

3.9.1.1 Primary

In the Primary years, the performing arts are seen as valuable tools to aid in student learning across subject areas and disciplines. The performing arts enable students to develop all areas of the FIS’ definition of high-quality learning. They encourage creativity, inquiry, authenticity, and critical thinking. They are natural venues in which to examine the IPC personal goals.

Music:

• From EY5 to Grade 3, students work with a Music specialist 3 times/2 weeks to develop their musical literacy and performance skills.
• In Grade 4 and 5, students work with the music specialist 2 times/2 weeks to continue their musical development.

Drama:

• In Grade 4 and 5, all students work with a Drama specialist 1 time/2 weeks to begin developing their expressive skills.

PA/ELA:

• In Grade 4 and 5, all students have Performing Arts integration sessions in their ELA lessons 2 times/2 weeks. One week, this session is co-taught with the Arts specialist and homeroom teacher, and the other week the session is led by the homeroom teacher.

3.9.1.2 Middle Years Program

In MYP 1-5 (Grades 6-10) the performing arts work under the umbrella of the MYP Arts subject group.

In MYP 1-2, all students take Performing Arts 4x/2 weeks. This is taught as 1 period per week with a Music specialist and 1 period per week with a Drama specialist.

In MYP 3, students choose one of the three Arts subjects (Music, Drama, Visual Arts), and meet with the subject-specialist teacher 7 times/2 weeks.

In MYP 4-5, students choose one of the three Arts subjects (Music, Drama, Visual Arts) and meet with the subject-specialist teacher 6 times/2 weeks. This is considered a 2-year program, and students are recommended not to switch subjects between years 4 and 5. This culminates in their Arts ePortfolio, which goes towards their MYP Certificate.

3.9.1.3 Diploma Program

In DP 1-2 (Grade 11-12) the performing arts are elective courses which fit into the Group 6 subject block. Students that choose to study either Music or Theatre at the DP level will elect to study the subject at Standard Level (SL) or Higher Level (HL). They will complete internally and externally assessed coursework that will count towards their DP Certificate.

3.9.2 Subject Specific Assessment Practices

3.9.2.1 Assessment practices with examples

In the PA department, students are most often assessed using project-based work. In these instances, task-specific rubrics will be presented to students when the project is introduced. They will be discussed in class, and in MYP/DP, published on Managebac.

For occasions when exam-based assessments are given, criteria is discussed when the test is announced.

For Primary, music students are assessed 3x per year using the chosen IPC learning goal and rubric for each grade level.

For MYP, students are assessed using the four MYP Arts criteria rubrics, and broken down in task-specific language.

For DP, students are assessed using the supplied DP Theatre and Music rubrics.

3.9.2.2 Two opportunities per year

Primary students will be assessed 3x per year against the chosen IPC learning goal and rubric for their grade level.

MYP Arts students will be assessed at least 2x per year on each criteria (across Music, Drama, and Visual Arts).

DP Theatre and Music students will be assessed on task criteria as and when they complete coursework and/or mock versions of coursework. Each criteria will be assessed at least 2x over the 2-year program.

3.9.2.3 Timely Feedback

Students who are turning in work late are responsible for communicating with their teachers and abiding by an agreed upon final deadline, in order to give the teacher reasonable time to turn the feedback around by the reporting deadline.

3.9.2.4 Mechanisms of repeating assessments

In the PA department, students are entitled to repeat summative assessments only with a new topic. In certain cases, it might not be possible for the teacher to provide additional performance assessment opportunities, due to logistical and environmental constraints.

In MYP 1-2, prior to receiving a grade on a performance-based summative task, students are given up to two additional opportunities to perform if they are unhappy with their initial performance. From MYP 3 onwards, students are expected to treat performances as exams, and may not re-do the same performance task, barring extenuating circumstances.

3.9.2.5 Absences in group assessments

Teachers may request a medical certificate in case of absence on the day of a previously announced assessment.

Students who have an absence from a solo performance are entitled to reschedule their performance in a comparable setting within a reasonable amount of time, after consultation with the teacher.

When students are absent for a group performance, the rest of the group will still be required to perform, with stand-ins from the class. The absent student will be given a mark of zero, but will have the opportunity to perform a comparable performance, in a reasonable time frame, after consultation with the teacher, in order to achieve a summative grade.

3.9.3 Subject specifications for monitoring assessment standards

3.9.3.1 Expectations for collaboration

Teachers who teach in the same subject and grade level will have a weekly collaborative planning block built into their timetables. They are expected to use this time to plan for learning and moderate assessments.

For MYP 1-2 Performing Arts classes, Music and Drama teachers are expected to plan units in consultation with one another. Teachers should check in with each other regularly about progress and/or student concerns, and should moderate grades together at the end of each semester.

3.9.3.2 Standardisation protocol

Because of the nature of our lessons and assessment calendars, the Performing Arts department will set aside one collaborative planning session every other month to dedicate to standardisation. Teachers will bring in assessment examples and rubrics, and work together to achieve common understandings of rubrics.

The majority of standardization will be conducted as confirmatory reviews and/or in-situ standardization (although other formats may be used when appropriate).

In the DP, where the teacher and HoD are the same person and only teacher of a subject, standardisation of the IA takes place via checking assessment practices with other DP Theatre teachers in a professional network, comparing work produced during previous years, from reading yearly examiner reports, etc. Where the teacher is the only teacher of that subject but is not the HoD, a confirmatory review or peer standardisation model will be used where the HoD reviews assessment grades given against the criteria or also grades students’ assessments.

3.9.4 The organisation of feedback

The majority of regular feedback in the PA domain is done verbally between teacher and student. This is constant formative feedback. Students will receive comments (reflecting the student’s achievement against the rubrics/descriptors) and a grade on all summative assessments. Students will receive written comments and/or verbal feedback on formative assessments.

3.9.4.1 Primary School

The majority of feedback is given verbally. Students are assessed three times over the course of the year on the dedicated learning goal, this is reflected in their reports.

3.9.4.2 MYP

Teachers will give either verbal or written feedback on one (at a minimum) formative assessment or draft leading up to the summative task. Feedback should be reflective of the student’s achievement against the rubric criteria. Students receive one grade for Performing Arts on their reports.

3.9.4.3 DP

Teachers will give official written feedback on one draft of each official DP Coursework task prior to the final deadline. Feedback should be reflective of the student’s achievement against the rubric criteria. For all other summative assessments, students will be given either verbal or written feedback on one (at a minimum) formative assessment or draft leading up to the final deadline. Feedback should be reflective of the student’s achievement against the rubric criteria.

3.10 PHE

3.10.1. Context

Physical and Health Education (PHE) is found within all FIS programs, IPC, MYP, and Grades 11 and 12. Within IPC, PHE is assessed through the Assessment for Learning process, where students are provided with feedback for improvement in relation to Learning Goals. Students seeking IB-validated physical and health education course results must demonstrate their achievement of the subject group’s objectives by submitting a Portfolio at the end of Year 5. At the FIS, PHE is a required course. An extension of PHE and Science, Sports, Exercise and Health Science is an IB Diploma course offered at the FIS, where students will need to submit internal and external assessments. It is a graduation requirement for students to participate in Grades 11 and 12 Physical Education.

3.10.2 Subject specific assessment practices

3.10.2.1 General assessment practices with examples

IPC:

• Teachers will complete one formal (written) AFL for each student per year. This is completed over three checkpoints.
• Assessment For Learning (AFL) – students will set goals based on a Learning Goal, receive formative feedback and then summative feedback, including one of the following descriptors: “Beginning”, “Developing”, or “Mastering”
• Performance-based assessments are usually spread over at least 2-3 authentic performance situations. This allows students to have multiple opportunities to demonstrate their skills.

MYP:

• Students will typically participate in two assessment tasks per unit. This usually consists of one assessment which focuses on knowledge and understanding (Criterions A, B, D) and one performance-based assessment (Criterion C).
• Performance-based assessments are usually spread over at least 2-3 authentic performance situations. This allows students to have multiple opportunities to demonstrate their skills.

DP PE:

• Students are required to participate in Grades 11 and 12 PE. However, this subject is participation based. Students will not receive a written number-grade upon completion.

SEHS:

• Students will participate in a variety of tasks per unit as well as the official internal and external assessments.

3.10.2.2   Mechanisms for repeating assessments

• If a student is not satisfied with a particular outcome to an assessment, they may choose to repeat the assessment. In the case of a written (non-performance) assessment, the teacher should provide a similar task which will measure the student’s understanding/knowledge of the criterion. Unless it is not possible, due to other responsibilities, timely feedback for a repeated assessment should follow 2.3 above.
• In the case of a performance-based assessment, students should be provided with 2-3 in-class opportunities to demonstrate their skills. In certain cases, it might not be possible for the teacher to provide additional performance assessment opportunities, due to logistical and environmental constraints.
• Internal/external assessments can only be repeated within the procedures and policies of the MYP and DP programmes.

3.10.3 Subject specification of monitoring assessment

3.10.3.1 Standardisation protocol

For all summative assessments, there is an expectation within the PHE department that a process of standardization occurs. If the assessing teacher has a strong understanding for the interpretation of the criteria/rubrics against the student’s work, examples with comments should be shared amongst colleagues. Standardization is particularly important in grade levels that are shared amongst teachers.

For the MYP PHE ePortfolio, a peer standardisation model is used, with the sample including students of each grade. For DP SEHS, a confirmatory review model is used, whereby the HoD PHE reviews the grades of a sample of students.

3.10.3.2 Expectations for collaboration

• Attending collaborative planning meetings for all shared grade levels as well as at department level are a professional requirement for the development of planning, units, moderation and assessments.
• Attending departmental retreats as needed is a requirement for the review and revision of units, approaches teaching and learning and assessments.

3.10.4 The organisation of feedback

Formative assessment through observation should be ongoing throughout the unit and come prior to the engagement of a summative assessment.

In IPC, feedback is to be provided on the AFL documents and provided to the students/parents. Primary students will also receive reporting feedback which will summarize student performance and provide “next steps” for personal development.

• In MYP and SEHS, students will receive feedback on each individual task assessment through managebac “comments”. If applicable, the teacher could make comments on the assessment as well.
• In Grade 11 and 12 PE, the teacher will make anecdotal comments as required for the FIS report card.

3.11 Science

3.11.1 Context

Science is taught as an integrated subject in the Primary School as part of the IPC. MYP Sciences is taught in Grades 6-8, and Biology, Chemistry and Physics are taught as discrete subjects in Grades 9-10 and are assessed together as part of the MYP Sciences eAssessment. In the DP, students study one or two Science subjects. This Science appendix includes information on assessment in DP Chemistry, Physics and Biology. For information on assessment in DP Sports, Exercise and Health Science, please see the PHE appendix. For information on assessment in DP Computer Science, please see the Design appendix.

3.11.2 Subject specific assessment practices

Mechanisms of repeating assessments

1. The re-sitting will be organised based on teachers’ and students’ timetables and available time. All students willing to resit the assessment must attend the new session set by the teacher or, in the case of a longer assessment-e.g. research, to comply with the new due date set by the teacher. Retakes can be arranged during lunchtime, in class or after school.
2. For the resits, the teachers will provide feedback within a time frame that fits into their daily routines and all other responsibilities.
3. Students will only be allowed to have one retake per summative assessment.

3.11.3 Subject specification for Monitoring Assessment standards

3.11.3.1 Standardisation Protocol

In the DP, where there is only one class and one teacher of a Science subject, a confirmatory review model of standardisation is used, with the DP coordinator checking alignment with criteria. Where there is only one teacher but other trained teachers within the department, a confirmatory review and blind marking model will be used, where other teachers randomly select papers and check marking or check them in collaboration or after the solicitation of the classroom teachers. Where there are two classes and two teachers, a peer standardisation model is used, where the sample size is approximately 20% and must include two middle, top and low range assessments.

In the MYP, teachers of the same grade level standardise common assessments using a peer standardisation model. This applies to integrated Sciences as well as to Biology, Chemistry and Physics.

3.12 Visual Arts

3.12.1 Context

Art is taught from EY3 to Grade 7 as a compulsory subject (MYP Visual Arts in G6/7), and from Grades 8-12 MYP/DP Visual Arts is taught as an elective.

3.12.3.1 Standardisation Protocol

Where the teacher and HoD are the same person and only DP Visual Arts teacher, standardisation of the IA takes place via comparing samples provided by the My IB web site, comparing work produced during previous years, on the knowledge gained while reading yearly VA examiners reports, on the results from previous years, and on the knowledge of teaching Art subjects in IB Program.

Standardisation of the ePortfolio in MYP 5 takes place together with other Arts subjects.

3.12.2 The organisation of feedback

Students in MYP 4 receive written formative feedback on ManageBac for tasks. Students may then improve on their work prior to being summatively assessed. This supports them in the preparation of the MYP ePortfolio.

In the DP, summative feedback is given at the time of the online submission based on the performance in IB tasks following all IB requirements.

3.13 TOK

3.13.1 Context

TOK is a core subject of the Diploma Programme. The subject is taught in grades 11 and 12.

3.13.1.1 Subject specific assessment practices

Grade 11: There are four assessments in the year. Students need to write three ToK exhibition commentaries. The International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) defines the parameters for the assessment. Thus, commentaries need to answer a prescribed question (or Internal Assessment prompt) by presenting a real world object and subsequent ToK analysis. The final assessment is the official commentary that students submit to the IBO.

Grade 12: There are three assessments in the year. Students need to write two mini-ToK essays (600 and 900 words respectively) and a ToK essay draft (1600 words). The essay draft is the draft of the final paper that students will submit to the IBO.

3.13.1.2 Circumstances for and mechanisms of repeating assessments

1. A student can repeat a summative assessment if (s)he has actively participated in class discussions and done all homework over the course of the unit.
2. A student can repeat a summative assessment if personal extraordinary circumstances had an effect on the student’s completion of the final task.
3. A student can repeat a summative assessment if extraordinary health circumstances had an effect on the student’s completion of the final task.
4. A student can repeat a final assessment if (s)he feels his/her performance can be better. In this case, the student needs to complete a  Self-Reflection Form  form to justify why the retake is necessary.

3.13.2. Subject specification for monitoring assessment standards

3.13.2.1 Standardisation Protocol

Standardization of the TOK commentaries follows a Blind Remarking model. All ToK teachers and ToK coordinator assess three essays from each teaching group blindly (so nine in total). Impressions are shared. More essays to be read if further alignment appears necessary.

Standardization of the TOK Essay also follows a Blind Remarking model. All ToK teachers and ToK coordinator assess three essays from each teaching group blindly (so nine in total). Impressions are shared. More essays to be read if further alignment appears necessary.

3.13.3 The organization of feedback

1. All work produced by students, be it in-class or independent, should receive timely, accurate and detailed feedback. This could take the form of a comment in class, a lunchtime meeting to discuss participation and homework, or written feedback on independently produced work.
2. Feedback on different stages of the essay is regulated by the ToK Guide. There is feedback after students produce the essay draft, but no direct feedback must be given between the third interaction and deadline of the final draft.
3. Final drafts of ToK essays will be read and marked as a professional development task by all ToK teachers of a year group, invitation to all others. Representative samples will be shared, studied and analyzed. This is an internal standardization process. Once the process is finished, marks (out of 10) will be shared with students. Students must be made aware that their final grade will be determined by the external marking of the paper and that a difference in estimated grade by their supervisor is no indicator of success for a re-mark.

• Self Reflection Form