After publishing the second blog on engineer engaging learning and assessment content, I promised I would publish a blog illustrating the use of content features to motivate student engagement. In the blog today, I fulfill that promise by presenting two versions of the same NGSS-aligned, phenomenon-driven science task. The first version lacks most of the features of assessment tasks that inspire engagement and, sadly, looks like most assessment tasks. The second version is packed with just those features I discussed in the earlier blog demonstrating how to engineer engaging learning and assessment content.
No field or profession can prescribe what is or isn’t validity or efficacy evidence. Different fields have distinctive ways of asking questions, addressing a literature, criticizing ideas, and presenting arguments. The differences make sense from a socio-cultural perspective as each of these stakeholders—you might call them customers if you are in marketing or users if you are in product development—is coming from a different culture of evidence and set of life experiences. But this seems chaotic if you are trying to collect validity or efficacy evidence and construct an argument with it.
This is the second part of a two-part blog series on engaging learning and assessment content. In part one, I explained why engaging learning and assessment content is important for the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), the NAEP Technology and Engineering Literacy Framework, and the 2025 NAEP Mathematics andContinue reading “How Do We Engineer Engaging Learning and Assessment Tasks?“