Explain why you think these Creative Arts assessment tasks

are or are not examples of authentic assessment.

Music: Composing for Performance

Bailey Grade B
This Creative Arts Assessment task has aspects of an authentic
assessment, however, it is not without its flaws. The activity asks
the students to work in small groups to compose and perform a
piece of music using a simple form of notation (NSW Government,
2015). Learners through this task are required to apply, analyse and
create products using higher-order knowledge. Due to the task being
open-ended there are multiple solutions and not a single
predetermined correct response (NSW Government, 2015). The task
could therefore be considered personally rewarding, intrinsically
motivating, enjoyable, interesting and achievable for all students at
least to some level of achievement (Moyles, 2011). Phrases such as
high level of competence in organising musical ideas and thorough
understanding of concepts of structure are used in the grade
commentary reflecting that the assessment was criteria-referenced
based on the outline criteria for assessing (NSW Government, 2015).
Hayes states that this is important because assessment practices
need to align directly and explicitly to the learning in order for it to
be authentic pedagogy (Kivunja, 2015). That is, the students use of
the pentatonic scale and understanding of structure. The aspects,
listed above, are aspects of authentic assessments. However, there
are a number of aspects that need to be adjusted in order for this
assessment task to be considered a good example of authentic
assessment these are as follows. The emphasis of the task appears
to be on securing a grade, the teacher does not appear to facilitate
the learning but rather test the learner (Connor, 2011). This
assessment appears to be a summative assessment because it

focuses on the outcome(s) of a program which contrast significantly

to formative feedback which focuses on the participants
development. There is no evidence of formative feedback, self or
peer assessment. There does not appear to be negotiation with the
learner(s) about the task. There is no evidence of the student being
given timely or ongoing feedback on how to better themselves.
Feedback could have happened during the previous formative
assessment process but this task is designed as a summative task
(Kivunja, 2015). It therefore would not be considered authentic.
Drama: Danny in the Toybox
Dale: Grade C
The Drama Creative Arts Assessment, Danny in the Toybox, has
elements of an authentic assessment however could be improved
upon. This tasks asks that students collaboratively, perform a
scene from Danny in the Toybox by Richard Tulloch [and to]
incorporate a narrator and adopt and sustain different roles (NSW
Government, 2015). This assessment is contextualised due to it
having real world relevance to the domain of actors and performers.
The assessment is authentic in nature, requiring students to use
higher-order knowledge and skills to apply, analyse and create a
quality product. There is no single-pre-determined response to the
assessment but there are multiple solutions. It is clear from the prior
learning that there has been significant investment of time and
intellectual resources (Kivunja, 2015). The task involves other KLAs
such as English through the inclusion and comprehension of the text
Danny in the Toybox (Kerry, 2010). Collaboration with peers is
encouraged through this Creative Arts assessment and involves an
audience. This assessment could possibly serve as a sample of work
to add to a portfolio. Despite these elements of an authentic
assessment there are areas that would need to change in order for it
to be a good example of authentic assessment. The assessment

appears to be artificial and removed from the assessment task.

There is no evidence of formative, timely or ongoing feedback.
There is no evidence of peer or self-reflection of the Arts
Assessment. Negotiation with learners to allow students to
understand what they need to do to achieve a high product appears
to be absent. There appears to be more emphasis on the grade than
on the learning and the scoring is aggregated, not multifaceted
(Kivunja, 2015). Although the marker had indicated the strengths of
the student through criteria phases such as demonstrated an
adequate level and demonstrated a sound understanding, there
appears to be no enabling effect (NSW Government, 2015). There
is no guidance or advice enabling the student to demonstrate more
sophisticated application of knowledge and skills (Commonwealth of
Australia, 2010).

Music: Composing for Performance

Bailey Grade B
This Creative Arts Assessment task has aspects of an authentic
assessment, however, it is not without its flaws. The activity asks
the students to work in small groups to compose and perform a
piece of music using a simple form of notation (NSW Government,
2015). Learners through this task are required to apply, analyse and
create products using higher-order knowledge. Due to the task being
open-ended there are multiple solutions and not a single
predetermined correct response (NSW Government, 2015). The task
could therefore be considered personally rewarding, intrinsically
motivating, enjoyable, interesting and achievable for all students at
least to some level of achievement (Moyles, 2011). Phrases such as
high level of competence in organising musical ideas and thorough
understanding of concepts of structure are used in the grade
commentary reflecting that the assessment was criteria-referenced

based on the outline criteria for assessing (NSW Government, 2015).

Hayes states that this is important because assessment practices
need to align directly and explicitly to the learning in order for it to
be authentic pedagogy (Kivunja, 2015). That is, the students use of
the pentatonic scale and understanding of structure. The aspects,
listed above, are aspects of authentic assessments. However, there
are a number of aspects that need to be adjusted in order for this
assessment task to be considered a good example of authentic
assessment these are as follows. The emphasis of the task appears
to be on securing a grade, the teacher does not appear to facilitate
the learning but rather test the learner (Connor, 2011). This
assessment appears to be a summative assessment because it
focuses on the outcome(s) of a program which contrast significantly
to formative feedback which focuses on the participants
development. There is no evidence of formative feedback, self or
peer assessment. There does not appear to be negotiation with the
learner(s) about the task. There is no evidence of the student being
given timely or ongoing feedback on how to better themselves.
Feedback could have happened during the previous formative
assessment process but this task is designed as a summative task
(Kivunja, 2015). It therefore would not be considered authentic.
Drama: Danny in the Toybox
Dale: Grade C
The Drama Creative Arts Assessment, Danny in the Toybox, has
elements of an authentic assessment however could be improved
upon. This tasks asks that students collaboratively, perform a
scene from Danny in the Toybox by Richard Tulloch [and to]
incorporate a narrator and adopt and sustain different roles (NSW
Government, 2015). This assessment is contextualised due to it
having real world relevance to the domain of actors and performers.
The assessment is authentic in nature, requiring students to use

higher-order knowledge and skills to apply, analyse and create a

quality product. There is no single-pre-determined response to the
assessment but there are multiple solutions. It is clear from the prior
learning that there has been significant investment of time and
intellectual resources (Kivunja, 2015). The task involves other KLAs
such as English through the inclusion and comprehension of the text
Danny in the Toybox (Kerry, 2010). Collaboration with peers is
encouraged through this Creative Arts assessment and involves an
audience. This assessment could possibly serve as a sample of work
to add to a portfolio. Despite these elements of an authentic
assessment there are areas that would need to change in order for it
to be a good example of authentic assessment. The assessment
appears to be artificial and removed from the assessment task.
There is no evidence of formative, timely or ongoing feedback.
There is no evidence of peer or self-reflection of the Arts
Assessment. Negotiation with learners to allow students to
understand what they need to do to achieve a high product appears
to be absent. There appears to be more emphasis on the grade than
on the learning and the scoring is aggregated, not multifaceted
(Kivunja, 2015). Although the marker had indicated the strengths of
the student through criteria phases such as demonstrated an
adequate level and demonstrated a sound understanding, there
appears to be no enabling effect (NSW Government, 2015). There
is no guidance or advice enabling the student to demonstrate more
sophisticated application of knowledge and skills (Commonwealth of
Australia, 2010).