Curriculum Project Self Assessment


Curriculum Project • Course Proposal • Project Self-Assessment

This is the self-assessment of my project using the design standards in Wiggins. The possible values reflecting how well each item met the design standard are 3 (extensively), 2 (somewhat) and 1 (minimally). Comments are at the end of the page.

Identify Desired Results

To what extent are the targeted understandings  
  • Big ideas (as opposed to basic facts and skills) in need of uncoverage?
  • Specific enough to aid teaching and assessing?
  • Framed by provocative essential and unit questions?
Determine Acceptable Evidence  
To what extent does the assessment evidence provide  
  • A valid and reliable measure of the targeted understandings?
  • Sufficient information to support inferences about each student's understandings?
  • Opportunities for students to exhibit their understanding through authentic performance tasks?
Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction  
To what extent will  
  • Students know where they're going and why (in terms of unit goals, performance requirements, and evaluative criteria?)
  • Students be engaged in digging into the big ideas of the unit (through inquiry, research, problem solving, and experimentation?)
  • Students receive explicit instruction on the knowledge and skills needed to equip them for the required performances?
  • Students have opportunities to rehearse, revise, and refine their work based on feedback?
  • Students self-assess and set goals prior to the conclusion of the unit?




Comparing the project to the design standards is an humbling experience. In going through the design standards, it became apparent that the hook and essential question (How do you get someone to give you a million dollars?) was not as clear as it could have been as a guiding question at the beginning, although the learning experiences support the hook. The guiding questions also abruptly transition from one kind to another. The intent may have been clear in my mind, but it didn't show up as clearly in the project.

Although the students will know where they are going and why, I'm not sure the evaluative criteria for a good project proposal have been made as clearly as they could have been. Students are engaged in digging into the big ideas of the unit as they are planning their own project, but I wonder if I drifted too far from the hook, in which case I would need a new hook. Also, I don't think I left enough room for the students to experiment and test various aspects of the project they are proposing as they propose it. The assumption was that students had sufficient exposure to various technologies before starting the proposal to help them plan the schedule, but now I think that maybe I should plan some "play time" into the schedule where students spend a period trying one of the small tasks they propose to see how far they get. These results will help them better schedule and plan their time.

For individual accountability, I'm concerned that there are not enough assessments built in to help in the event that three or four students propose a project together.


Criteria from Understanding by Design, Wiggins, Grant and J. McTighe, 1998, p. 187
Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Last maintained 08/23/2003


This site best viewed with browsers released in 2001 or later.

Original Content ©2001-2008 by Derrel Fincher, Other rights reserved by individual authors

Do you have suggestions, questions, or comments about anything you see here? Contact me.