Allyse Appel

The biggest thing I took from this module is the idea that performance isn't only psychomotor. I'd been carrying an unspoken assumption that "performance assessment" meant the hands-on part, the weld or the repair, and everything else was just testing. The Washer and Cochran framing flipped that for me. Students are performing in all three domains nearly every day, and a written memo to a client or showing up on time and on task is performance too, just in the cognitive and affective domains. That sounds small but it changes what counts as evidence of learning.
What I want to… >>>

What stood out to me most was adaptive comparative judgment – judges pick the ‘better’ of two pieces of work, over and over, and the win-loss records sort everything into a reliable rank order without scoring line by line. It hit .96 reliability across judges from different backgrounds, which for open-ended work is remarkable, and I don't need the software – a bracket or a rank-order lineup gets most of the way there. It fixes a problem I'd named but never solved: performance and portfolio work is where trades scoring falls apart, because two instructors looking at the same project… >>>

What I took from this module is less a new concept than a name for a gap I'd already half-noticed. I run external alignment tightly: every pathway anchors to its industry-recognized credential through a certification matrix, and an Industry Advisory Council reviews curriculum for field accuracy. Where I'm weaker (and what the module made explicit) is internal alignment as its own discipline: whether an assessment item actually measures the verb and rigor level the objective claims, independent of whether the content is industry-current.

Two things specifically landed. The first is the table of specifications. I'd been treating alignment as expert… >>>

This module reinforces that formative and summative assessments must function as an integrated, continuous pipeline. A truly coherent assessment model requires intentional backward design--beginning with a high-complexity summative (such as an industry-validated exam or a real-world technical simulation) and systematically deconstructing it into its foundational sub-skills. The key takeaway for me is the strategic role of a "bridge task" late in the unit.

By implementing low-stakes, high-complexity formative instruments that mimic the cognitive load and structure of the final summative--but use familiar content--we can separate a student's technical execution from structural novelty, ensuring the final evaluation introduces zero surprises in… >>>

This module gave me the larger system my POS sits inside. I know my piece well, the secondary-to-postsecondary sequence with credentials / employer engagement, and the module placed that inside the broader WIOA career pathways system that also pulls in workforce boards, adult education, community organizations, and braided funding across public and private sources. The piece that landed hardest is braided funding and cross-agency partnership, because those are exactly the levers that could move the resourcing problems I keep hitting on my own. I intend to apply it by connecting my pathways to the workforce-board side of the system I've… >>>

What this module gave me is a wider job description for my advisory partners. I've leaned on them mostly for curriculum and credential validation, and the module laid out everything else they can do: evaluate facilities and equipment, help justify purchases and maintenance, open job opportunities for students, and act as advocates when a program needs backing. That lands directly on a problem I'm stuck on right now, where access to certain tools and credentials is blocked by resourcing I can't move alone. I intend to apply it by bringing those specific fights to my advisory partners and using them… >>>

What I took away from this module is the anatomy of an articulation agreement: a durable articulation agreement clearly spells out teacher qualifications, prerequisites, postsecondary entry requirements, course locations, tuition reimbursement, and the credit-transfer process. The transfer process has to be explicit and built in, or the credit stalls and  students typically never claim it, nor feel that they are entitled to do so. I intend to apply it by using those six components as the spine when I sit down with our community college, and pinning down the credit-transfer process so the credit moves the moment a student earns… >>>

This module landed on a blind spot in my own work --> I've built strong exit points and almost no entry points. The credentials allow a student to step out at multiple levels with something that holds value, and the module showed me the on-ramps deserve that same attention: the ways a student can enter a pathway at different levels, or earn credit for prior learning and training they already bring. Naming the stacking types -- progressive, supplemental, independent (we have been calling these primary, secondary, and tertiary)-- sharpened that further. I intend to apply it by building the entry… >>>

What I learned from this module is a stronger standard for judging a credential's worth. The push I hear from district leadership is that a credential has to be industry-recognized and industry-validated, and my pushback has always been that recognition depends on who's doing the recognizing -- the entity that cares most about a Microsoft credential is usually Microsoft. This module gave me clearer metrics to grade against: industry-recognized, stackable, portable, and accredited. I intend to apply it by grading candidate certifications against all four criteria and using that as the language to argue for the ones that genuinely hold… >>>

Most of my work sits in vertical alignment: making sure each course builds on the last so students keep stacking skills instead of repeating them.

What shifted for me in this module was seeing two gaps more clearly (1) I underuse university partners in the high-school-to-college handoff, and (2) I’ve treated alignment mostly as a college-readiness issue when many of my students go straight into trades.

The result is a sharper sense that the core of my sequence is solid inside my own programs, and the real leakage happens at system transitions; which is where I need to focus next.