curriculum-assess-design

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Assessment Blueprint & Rubric Design

评估蓝图与评分标准设计

Design valid assessments aligned to learning objectives and create rubrics with clear performance criteria following backwards design principles.

设计与学习目标对齐的有效评估，并遵循逆向设计原则创建包含清晰表现标准的评分标准。

When to Use

适用场景

Automatically activate when the user:

Needs to design assessments for learning objectives
Asks "create assessment blueprint"
Wants rubrics for assignments or projects
Requests "align assessments to objectives"
Says "how should I assess [learning objective]"
Needs formative or summative assessment planning

当用户有以下需求时自动启动：

需要为学习目标设计评估方案
询问「创建评估蓝图」
想要为作业或项目制定评分标准
请求「将评估与目标对齐」
询问「我应该如何评估[学习目标]」
需要形成性或总结性评估规划

Required Inputs

必要输入

Learning Objectives: From
```
/curriculum.design
```
or user-provided
Educational Level: K-5, 6-8, 9-12, undergraduate, graduate, or post-graduate
Assessment Purpose: Formative, summative, diagnostic, or authentic
Constraints (optional): Time limits, format requirements, accessibility needs

学习目标：来自
```
/curriculum.design
```
或用户提供
教育阶段：K-5、6-8、9-12、本科、研究生或博士后
评估目的：形成性、总结性、诊断性或真实性
约束条件（可选）：时间限制、格式要求、无障碍需求

Workflow

工作流程

1. Load Learning Objectives

1. 加载学习目标

Read curriculum design artifact to get:

All learning objectives with IDs (e.g., LO-1.1, LO-1.2)
Bloom's taxonomy levels for each
Standards alignments
Performance expectations

读取课程设计工件以获取：

带ID的所有学习目标（如LO-1.1、LO-1.2）
每个目标对应的Bloom's taxonomy层级
标准对齐情况
表现预期

2. Map Objectives to Assessment Types

2. 匹配目标与评估类型

For each objective, determine appropriate assessment method based on Bloom's level:

Remember/Understand:

Multiple choice
Matching
Short answer
Fill-in-the-blank
Labeling diagrams

Apply:

Problem sets
Demonstrations
Simulations
Lab activities
Case applications

Analyze:

Compare/contrast essays
Diagramming relationships
Categorization tasks
Error analysis
Data interpretation

Evaluate:

Critiques
Judgments with justification
Recommendation reports
Peer review
Editorial analysis

Create:

Projects
Designs
Research papers
Portfolios
Original artifacts

根据Bloom's层级为每个目标确定合适的评估方法：

Remember/Understand：

选择题
匹配题
简答题
填空题
图表标注

Apply：

习题集
演示
模拟
实验活动
案例应用

Analyze：

对比分析论文
关系图绘制
分类任务
错误分析
数据解读

Evaluate：

评论
带理由的判断
建议报告
同伴互评
编辑分析

Create：

项目
设计方案
研究论文
作品集
原创成果

3. Create Assessment Blueprint

3. 创建评估蓝图

Document the complete assessment strategy:

markdown

undefined

记录完整的评估策略：

markdown

undefined

Assessment Blueprint: [TOPIC]

Educational Level: [Level] Based on: [Link to curriculum design] Blueprint Date: [Date]

Assessment Philosophy

Approach: [Formative-heavy, summative-focused, mastery-based, etc.]

Balance:

Formative Assessment: [Percentage]%
Summative Assessment: [Percentage]%
Authentic/Performance: [Percentage]%

Alignment Principle: Every learning objective has at least one directly aligned assessment item

Approach: [Formative-heavy, summative-focused, mastery-based, etc.]

Balance:

Formative Assessment: [Percentage]%
Summative Assessment: [Percentage]%
Authentic/Performance: [Percentage]%

Alignment Principle: Every learning objective has at least one directly aligned assessment item

Assessment Map

Unit 1 Assessments

Objective ID	Objective	Bloom's Level	Assessment Type	When	Weight
LO-1.1	[Full objective text]	Remember	Multiple choice (10 items)	Week 1	5%
LO-1.2	[Full objective text]	Understand	Short answer (3 questions)	Week 2	10%
LO-1.3	[Full objective text]	Apply	Problem set (5 problems)	Week 2	15%
LO-1.4	[Full objective text]	Analyze	Case analysis essay	Week 2	20%

Unit 1 Total Weight: 50%

Objective ID	Objective	Bloom's Level	Assessment Type	When	Weight
LO-1.1	[Full objective text]	Remember	Multiple choice (10 items)	Week 1	5%
LO-1.2	[Full objective text]	Understand	Short answer (3 questions)	Week 2	10%
LO-1.3	[Full objective text]	Apply	Problem set (5 problems)	Week 2	15%
LO-1.4	[Full objective text]	Analyze	Case analysis essay	Week 2	20%

Unit 1 Total Weight: 50%

Unit 2 Assessments

[Same structure]

Final/Cumulative Assessments

Assessment	Objectives Assessed	Type	When	Weight
Final Performance Task	All course objectives	Authentic project	Week 7	30%
Final Exam	LO-1.1, LO-2.2, LO-3.1, LO-3.4	Mixed format	Week 8	20%

Assessment	Objectives Assessed	Type	When	Weight
Final Performance Task	All course objectives	Authentic project	Week 7	30%
Final Exam	LO-1.1, LO-2.2, LO-3.1, LO-3.4	Mixed format	Week 8	20%

Assessment Schedule

Week	Assessment	Type	Objectives	Rubric Needed
1	Formative Check #1	Quick quiz	LO-1.1, LO-1.2	No
2	Unit 1 Assessment	Mixed	LO-1.1-1.4	Yes
3	Formative Check #2	Exit ticket	LO-2.1	No
4	Unit 2 Assessment	Performance	LO-2.1-2.3	Yes
[Continue for all weeks]

Week	Assessment	Type	Objectives	Rubric Needed
1	Formative Check #1	Quick quiz	LO-1.1, LO-1.2	No
2	Unit 1 Assessment	Mixed	LO-1.1-1.4	Yes
3	Formative Check #2	Exit ticket	LO-2.1	No
4	Unit 2 Assessment	Performance	LO-2.1-2.3	Yes
[Continue for all weeks]

Rubrics Required

Unit 1 Case Analysis Essay Rubric (for LO-1.4)
Unit 2 Performance Task Rubric (for LO-2.3)
Final Project Rubric (for all objectives)

[Each rubric detailed below]

Unit 1 Case Analysis Essay Rubric (for LO-1.4)
Unit 2 Performance Task Rubric (for LO-2.3)
Final Project Rubric (for all objectives)

[Each rubric detailed below]

Rubric 1: [Assessment Name]

Assessment Type: [Essay, project, performance task, etc.] Objectives Assessed: [LO-X.X, LO-Y.Y] Total Points: [Point value] Rubric Type: [Analytic or Holistic]

Analytic Rubric

Criterion	Exemplary (4)	Proficient (3)	Developing (2)	Beginning (1)	Points
[Criterion 1]	[Detailed descriptor of exemplary performance]	[Detailed descriptor of proficient performance]	[Detailed descriptor of developing performance]	[Detailed descriptor of beginning performance]	/4
[Criterion 2]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	/4
[Criterion 3]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	/4
[Criterion 4]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	/4

Total: /16 points

Criterion	Exemplary (4)	Proficient (3)	Developing (2)	Beginning (1)	Points
[Criterion 1]	[Detailed descriptor of exemplary performance]	[Detailed descriptor of proficient performance]	[Detailed descriptor of developing performance]	[Detailed descriptor of beginning performance]	/4
[Criterion 2]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	/4
[Criterion 3]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	/4
[Criterion 4]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	[Descriptor]	/4

Total: /16 points

Performance Level Conversion

Exemplary (A): 14-16 points (87.5-100%)
Proficient (B): 12-13 points (75-87%)
Developing (C): 10-11 points (62.5-75%)
Beginning (D/F): < 10 points (< 62.5%)

Exemplary (A): 14-16 points (87.5-100%)
Proficient (B): 12-13 points (75-87%)
Developing (C): 10-11 points (62.5-75%)
Beginning (D/F): < 10 points (< 62.5%)

Criterion Descriptions

Criterion 1: [Name] - [What this criterion assesses and why it's important]

Exemplary (4):

[Specific indicator 1]
[Specific indicator 2]
[Specific indicator 3]

Proficient (3):

[Specific indicator 1]
[Specific indicator 2]
[Minor gap compared to exemplary]

Developing (2):

[Specific indicator 1]
[Noticeable gaps]

Beginning (1):

[Minimal evidence]
[Significant gaps]

[Repeat for each criterion]

Criterion 1: [Name] - [What this criterion assesses and why it's important]

Exemplary (4):

[Specific indicator 1]
[Specific indicator 2]
[Specific indicator 3]

Proficient (3):

[Specific indicator 1]
[Specific indicator 2]
[Minor gap compared to exemplary]

Developing (2):

[Specific indicator 1]
[Noticeable gaps]

Beginning (1):

[Minimal evidence]
[Significant gaps]

[Repeat for each criterion]

Assessment Validity & Alignment

Constructive Alignment Check

✅ Objectives → Assessments: Every objective has aligned assessment ✅ Bloom's Match: Assessment types match cognitive levels ✅ Content Validity: Assessments measure intended learning ✅ Authenticity: Real-world application where appropriate

Alignment Matrix

	LO-1.1	LO-1.2	LO-1.3	LO-2.1	LO-2.2
Quiz #1	✓	✓
Unit 1 Exam	✓	✓	✓
Lab Report			✓	✓
Final Project	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓

	LO-1.1	LO-1.2	LO-1.3	LO-2.1	LO-2.2
Quiz #1	✓	✓
Unit 1 Exam	✓	✓	✓
Lab Report			✓	✓
Final Project	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓

Accessibility & UDL Considerations

Universal Design for Assessment

Multiple Means of Expression:

Accommodations Available:

Extended time
Read-aloud
Scribe
Simplified language
Visual supports
Alternative formats

Multiple Means of Expression:

Accommodations Available:

Extended time
Read-aloud
Scribe
Simplified language
Visual supports
Alternative formats

Bias Review

Potential Barriers Identified:

[Barrier 1]: [Mitigation strategy]
[Barrier 2]: [Mitigation strategy]

Potential Barriers Identified:

[Barrier 1]: [Mitigation strategy]
[Barrier 2]: [Mitigation strategy]

Assessment Item Specifications

Item Type 1: Multiple Choice

Objective: [LO-X.X] Quantity: [Number of items] Bloom's Level: [Level]

Stem Format: [Question style] Options: [Number of distractors] Time per Item: [Estimated minutes]

Sample Item: [Example question demonstrating format and difficulty]

Objective: [LO-X.X] Quantity: [Number of items] Bloom's Level: [Level]

Stem Format: [Question style] Options: [Number of distractors] Time per Item: [Estimated minutes]

Sample Item: [Example question demonstrating format and difficulty]

Item Type 2: [Type]

[Same structure for each assessment type]

Grading Workflow

Formative Assessments: Quick feedback, no formal grade or completion only
Summative Assessments: Apply rubrics, provide criterion-level feedback
Authentic Tasks: Use analytic rubrics, conference with students
Final Grades: Weighted average per assessment schedule

Formative Assessments: Quick feedback, no formal grade or completion only
Summative Assessments: Apply rubrics, provide criterion-level feedback
Authentic Tasks: Use analytic rubrics, conference with students
Final Grades: Weighted average per assessment schedule

Next Steps

Use
```
/curriculum.develop-items
```
to create actual assessment items based on this blueprint
Use
```
/curriculum.develop-content
```
to create lesson plans aligned to assessments
Use
```
/curriculum.review-pedagogy
```
to verify alignment after development

Artifact Metadata:

Artifact Type: Assessment Blueprint
Topic: [Topic]
Level: [Level]
Total Assessments: [Count]
Rubrics Created: [Count]
Alignment Verified: [Yes/No]
Next Phase: Item Development or Content Development

undefined

Use
```
/curriculum.develop-items
```
to create actual assessment items based on this blueprint
Use
```
/curriculum.develop-content
```
to create lesson plans aligned to assessments
Use
```
/curriculum.review-pedagogy
```
to verify alignment after development

Artifact Metadata:

Artifact Type: Assessment Blueprint
Topic: [Topic]
Level: [Level]
Total Assessments: [Count]
Rubrics Created: [Count]
Alignment Verified: [Yes/No]
Next Phase: Item Development or Content Development

undefined

4. Rubric Quality Standards

4. 评分标准质量标准

Ensure each rubric includes:

✅ Clear Criteria: Specific, important aspects of performance ✅ Distinct Levels: 3-5 performance levels (4 is standard) ✅ Descriptive Language: Observable indicators, not vague terms ✅ Positive Framing: Describe what IS present, not just what's missing ✅ Student-Friendly: Language students can understand and use for self-assessment ✅ Actionable Feedback: Students know how to improve

确保每个评分标准包含：

✅ 清晰的标准：具体、重要的表现维度 ✅ 明确的层级：3-5个表现层级（4级为标准配置） ✅ 描述性语言：可观察的指标，而非模糊表述 ✅ 正向表述：描述已具备的表现，而非仅指出缺失 ✅ 学生友好：学生能够理解并用于自我评估的语言 ✅ 可操作的反馈：学生清楚如何提升

5. Assessment Type Selection Guide

5. 评估类型选择指南

Use this logic to recommend assessment types:

python

if blooms_level in ["Remember", "Understand"]:
    if level in ["K-5", "6-8"]:
        recommend "Selected response (MC, matching) + some short answer"
    else:
        recommend "Mixed format with emphasis on application"

elif blooms_level == "Apply":
    if level in ["K-5"]:
        recommend "Demonstrations, hands-on tasks, simple problems"
    else:
        recommend "Problem sets, case applications, simulations"

elif blooms_level == "Analyze":
    recommend "Essays, diagrams, comparative analysis, data interpretation"

elif blooms_level == "Evaluate":
    recommend "Critiques, justified judgments, recommendation reports"

elif blooms_level == "Create":
    recommend "Projects, designs, research papers, portfolios, original artifacts"

使用以下逻辑推荐评估类型：

python

if blooms_level in ["Remember", "Understand"]:
    if level in ["K-5", "6-8"]:
        recommend "Selected response (MC, matching) + some short answer"
    else:
        recommend "Mixed format with emphasis on application"

elif blooms_level == "Apply":
    if level in ["K-5"]:
        recommend "Demonstrations, hands-on tasks, simple problems"
    else:
        recommend "Problem sets, case applications, simulations"

elif blooms_level == "Analyze":
    recommend "Essays, diagrams, comparative analysis, data interpretation"

elif blooms_level == "Evaluate":
    recommend "Critiques, justified judgments, recommendation reports"

elif blooms_level == "Create":
    recommend "Projects, designs, research papers, portfolios, original artifacts"

6. Output Format

6. 输出格式

Human-Readable (default):

Formatted markdown with tables

Write to:

curriculum-artifacts/[topic]-assessment-blueprint.md

JSON Format (use

--format json

json

{
  "artifact_type": "assessment_blueprint",
  "topic": "string",
  "level": "string",
  "assessments": [
    {
      "name": "string",
      "type": "formative|summative|authentic",
      "objectives": ["LO-1.1", "LO-1.2"],
      "blooms_levels": ["Remember", "Apply"],
      "weight": 15,
      "rubric": {
        "type": "analytic|holistic",
        "criteria": [
          {
            "name": "string",
            "exemplary": "descriptor",
            "proficient": "descriptor",
            "developing": "descriptor",
            "beginning": "descriptor",
            "points": 4
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  ]
}

人类可读格式（默认）：

带表格的格式化markdown

写入路径：

curriculum-artifacts/[topic]-assessment-blueprint.md

JSON格式（使用

--format json

）：

json

{
  "artifact_type": "assessment_blueprint",
  "topic": "string",
  "level": "string",
  "assessments": [
    {
      "name": "string",
      "type": "formative|summative|authentic",
      "objectives": ["LO-1.1", "LO-1.2"],
      "blooms_levels": ["Remember", "Apply"],
      "weight": 15,
      "rubric": {
        "type": "analytic|holistic",
        "criteria": [
          {
            "name": "string",
            "exemplary": "descriptor",
            "proficient": "descriptor",
            "developing": "descriptor",
            "beginning": "descriptor",
            "points": 4
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  ]
}

7. CLI Interface

7. CLI 接口

bash

undefined

bash

undefined

With curriculum design artifact

/curriculum.assess-design --design "photosynthesis-grade5-design.md"

Specify assessment focus

/curriculum.assess-design --design "quadratics-hs-design.md" --emphasis "authentic"

Create single rubric

/curriculum.assess-design --rubric-only --objective "LO-3.4" --type "essay"

JSON output

/curriculum.assess-design --design "neural-networks-design.md" --format json

Help

/curriculum.assess-design --help

undefined

/curriculum.assess-design --help

undefined

Educational Level Adaptations

教育阶段适配

K-5

Simple rubrics (3 levels: Great, Good, Needs Work)
Heavy formative emphasis (frequent quick checks)
Hands-on performance tasks
Visual rubrics with icons/colors

简易评分标准（3个层级：优秀、良好、需改进）
侧重形成性评估（频繁的快速检查）
实操性表现任务
带图标/颜色的可视化评分标准

6-8

Standard rubrics (4 levels)
Balance formative/summative
Mix of formats
Student-involved rubric creation

标准评分标准（4个层级）
平衡形成性与总结性评估
多种格式混合
学生参与评分标准创建

9-12

Detailed analytic rubrics
Authentic performance tasks
Self and peer assessment
Standards-aligned scoring

详细的分析性评分标准
真实性表现任务
自我与同伴评估
与标准对齐的评分

Undergraduate/Graduate

本科/研究生

Professional-quality rubrics
Emphasis on authentic assessment
Research and creation tasks
Discipline-specific criteria

专业级评分标准
侧重真实性评估
研究与创作任务
学科专属标准

Composition with Other Skills

与其他技能的组合

Input from:

```
/curriculum.design
```
- Learning objectives drive assessment design

Output to:

```
/curriculum.develop-items
```
- Blueprint specifies items to create
```
/curriculum.develop-content
```
- Assessments inform instruction
```
/curriculum.review-pedagogy
```
- Alignment verification
```
/curriculum.grade-assist
```
- Rubrics used for grading

输入来源：

```
/curriculum.design
```
- 学习目标驱动评估设计

输出去向：

```
/curriculum.develop-items
```
- 蓝图指定需创建的评估题目
```
/curriculum.develop-content
```
- 评估内容指导教案设计
```
/curriculum.review-pedagogy
```
- 开发后验证对齐情况
```
/curriculum.grade-assist
```
- 评分标准用于评分辅助

Error Handling

错误处理

No learning objectives: Cannot create blueprint without objectives
Missing Bloom's levels: Infer from objective wording
Invalid assessment type: Suggest appropriate type for cognitive level
Rubric criteria unclear: Use best practices for common task types

无学习目标：没有目标无法创建蓝图
缺失Bloom's层级：从目标表述中推断
无效评估类型：推荐与认知层级匹配的合适类型
评分标准标准不清晰：针对常见任务类型使用最佳实践

Exit Codes

退出码

0: Success - Assessment blueprint and rubrics created
1: Invalid educational level
2: Cannot load learning objectives
3: Assessment type not appropriate for Bloom's level
4: Insufficient information to create rubrics

0：成功 - 评估蓝图与评分标准已创建
1：无效教育阶段
2：无法加载学习目标
3：评估类型与Bloom's层级不匹配
4：信息不足，无法创建评分标准