Classroom activities
Original tasks for adaptation, with a clear goal and a check of student reasoning.
Claim, design and inference
Goal: Research-method judgment
Provide a real study summary selected and checked by the teacher. Ask students to identify the design, describe one measured variable and write the strongest justified conclusion. Then supply a changed design and ask what conclusion would now be possible.
Check: Score the design identification, fidelity to the result and justification separately.
Access and care: Use a text handout or accessible digital document; no personal disclosure is needed.
Read the sample behind the claim
Goal: Generalization and cultural context
Choose two accessible papers cited in a course reading. Record participant location, recruitment, age and inclusion criteria where reported. Compare the scope of each finding with the wording in the course reading. Mark missing information as missing.
Check: Require a justified revision of one claim, rather than a count of countries.
Access and care: Do not ask students to represent a national, ethnic or religious group.
Retrieve, explain and revisit
Goal: Recall and application
Ask students to answer a distinction question without the reading, explain the reason and compare with a teacher-provided answer. Later use a new scenario requiring the same distinction.
Check: Inspect the later unfamiliar application as well as the initial recall.
Access and care: A text-only version works without polling software. Feedback should explain the reasoning.
A syllabus comparison
Goal: Alignment of outcomes and assessment
Select two dated public syllabi and one current qualification framework. Choose one outcome. Find the associated practice, assessment and scoring information, if published. Separate “not listed” from “not taught.”
Check: Produce a comparison with direct source links and clearly marked missing fields.
Access and care: Use accessible documents. Do not copy restricted assignments or infer current policy from an archive.
Reasoning in an asynchronous discussion
Goal: Evidence-based argument
Supply two plausible interpretations of a checked research finding. In the first window students defend one using the evidence. In the second, they respond to a counterargument and revise one sentence. Give the same short rubric to everyone.
Check: Score evidence use, reasoning and revision, rather than post length.
Access and care: Allow text-only participation and a window suitable for time zones and caring responsibilities.
Moderate a short answer
Goal: Consistency of assessment judgment
Write three fictional answers to one task, including a borderline answer. Two teachers independently score them with the same criteria, compare reasons and revise ambiguous wording before grading real submissions.
Check: Keep a note of the disputed criterion and the change made.
Access and care: Fictional answers avoid exposing student records. This is a local moderation exercise, not an official AP or IB process.