top of page

Standard 5

Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning


APST 5.3: Make consistent and comparable judgements.


APST 5.3 Graduate: Demonstrate understanding of assessment moderation and its application to support consistent and comparable judgements of student learning.

This is a three-part piece of evidence, consisting of all three tasks completed for EDU766 (Assessing Learning), which required understanding of all the principles of assessment and moderation, the creation of assessment artefacts and, finally, a justification of the artefacts, showing their alignment with the Australian Curriculum.


The first task was a test, requiring wide reading on assessment, moderation, alignment and calibration, including Sadler (2009) and Grainger and Adie (2014). I scored 100% on this test.

The second task, creation of artefacts, involved the creation of an authentic assessment task for year 10 music students (to the right of this text) and an accompanying Guide to Making Judgements (GTMJ) (below), which is an assessment rubric using a nested and continua model (Grainger et al., 2017; Grainger et al., in press). I was required to demonstrate understanding of assessment literacy in relation to task design, and design of grading tools with alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. The task required me to apply the concepts of Backwards Mapping (McTighe & Thomas, 2003), specifically alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (Weir, 2009), to the conceptualisation and design of an assessment task with accompanying task sheet for students and a GTMJ. The assessment task I created aligned with the Australian Curriculum F-10, specifically with the Band Description for Music, Years 9-10, and with Content Descriptors ACAMUM100, ACAMUM101, ACAMUM103 and ACAMUR104 (ACARA, n.d.). I received 90% for this task.

The final task was a justification of the artefacts with reference to (and showing alignment with) the literature and the Australian Curriculum. I received 96% for this final assessment task and the comments:


"One of the best Task 3 submissions I have read.

Congratulations Amanda, you have excelled in a difficult course."

Overall, this course gave me the tools to make consistent and comparable judgements when assessing students’ work, which is the requirement of APST 5.3.


This task also satisfies standards 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5


Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (n.d.). The Australian Curriculum: Retrieved from:


Grainger, P., Christie, M., Thomas, G., Dole, S., Heck, D., Marshman, M., & Carey, M. (2017). Improving the quality of assessment by using a community of practice to explore the optimal construction of assessment rubrics. Reflective Practice, 18(3), 410-422.


Grainger, P., Christie, M., & Carey, M. (In press). Assessing written communication using a Continua model of a GTMJ. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice.


Grainger, P. R., & Adie, L. (2014). How Do Preservice Teacher Education Students Move from Novice to Expert Assessors? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(7).

McTighe, J., & Thomas, R. S. (2003). Backward design for forward action. Educational leadership, Feb, 52-55.


Sadler, R. D. (2009). Moderation, grading and calibration Good Practices in Assessment Symposium, Griffith University.


Weir, C. (2009). Curriculum and Assessment: Aligning what you value with what you teach. In J. Millwater & D. Beutel (Eds.), Stepping out of the real world of education (pp. 109-132). Pearson SprintPrint.

bottom of page