ASSESSMENT BRIEF for

Modern College Algebra

I. Learning Outcomes

1. Explore the applications of linear equations/inequalities

2. Communicate learning in Algebra
3. Apply technology and numeracy
4. Solve problems

II. Method of Assessment

1. Written research output

2. Oral presentation
3. Group project
4. Rubrics

III. Weight: 20% for Final Grading Period

IV. Schedule

1. Orientation: Week 5
2. Presentation of proposed research titles: Week 7
3. Oral presentation and showcasing of project: Week 17

V. Title: Linear Equation (or Inequality) Assessment

VI. Weight: 20%

VII. Specific Guidelines

The project should contain the following:

Accomplished Linear Inequality Assessment Report form

Group output
 Documentation to be submitted as attachments to serve as
evidence to support other assignments, including a copy of
your presentation.
VII. Grading System
Rubric for the Linear Inequality Report Form & Presentation
To pass (grade of 75%) all criteria identified in the project are met.
Criteria Very Good Excellent
(86 100)
Modelled equation Represented the situation
/ application of the given accurately through a
concept model using an inequality
Approach to Provided solid bases ,
decision making rationale and justification for
the decision made with
provision of innovative
solutions
Range of Used more than 2 books,
information interview at least one
gathered person; cited sources
properly
Use of technology Used the functions of a
spreadsheet or word
processing to generate
automatic computations;
used presentation software
Oral and written Answered questions
Communication regarding the paper with
confidence and appropriate
technical language was used
in the written report
Managing tasks Objectively narrated the
significance of individual
contribution and group
mates contribution that
were consistent with others
report
Evaluation of the Analysed and critically
relevance of the evaluated and the
tasks importance of the task in the
light of its relevance to ones
learning in and outside the
Fair Good
(51 85)
Represented the situation
through a model but there
are minor mistakes
Attempted to provide solid
bases for decisions made but
was not able to sustain
Used 2 books but no
interview was conducted
Used two software
applications
Answered questions
regarding the paper with
limited technical language
Narrated the individual
contribution and group
mates contribution that
were consistent with others
but were not significant
enough
Attempted to evaluated the
relevance of the task that is
primarily descriptive but
some attempts at critical
analysis is evident
Poor
(0-50)
Used an incorrect model
that shows little
understanding of the
concept
Provided a weak basis or
justification for decision
made
Used 1 book
Used technology that was
limited to presentation or
word processing
Answered questions
regarding the paper with
much hesitation and
inappropriate language was
used
Narrated the individual
contribution and group
mates contribution that
were consistent with others
but tasks were insignificant
Attempted to evaluate the
relevance of the tasks; the
attempt made was purely
descriptive
 Criteria Very Good Excellent Fair Good Poor
(86 100) (51 85) (0-50)
classroom
Quality of output Turned in excellent , Turned in very good output Turned in a very ordinary
complete and neat output; but may be missing some output with incomplete
professionally presented minor parts documents

VIII. Individual Project Reflections

1. What was your overall impression of this project? What did you like, dislike?

2. What difficulties, if any, did you encounter while completing this project?

3. Describe the process that you and your group members followed while completing the
project.

4. In your professional opinion, did all group members equally contribute to the
completion of this project? Explain.

5. What grade would you give your group for this project? Explain. (Use the rubric listed
on the project handout)

IX. Assessors

Mr. Armando C. Mendoza, Jr.

Assistant Professor

Mr. Robert F. Norberte

Math & Science Coordinator