Assessment Strategies that Enhance Learning
“How we assess students drives both what and how we teach. Good teaching is inseparable from good assessing” (Davies and Wavering, 1999). Many researchers, politicians, teachers, and even parents delve into the education assessment fray by discussing their judgments, opinions, and research into what constitutes a good assessment of student learning and ultimately good teaching practices. Teachers and educational researchers argue that the summative type of standardized testing of a student shows nothing of the depth of student knowledge and problem solving and that authentic or alternative assessment and formative testing is the better way to judge a student’s comprehension and their higher-order thinking skills. Whereas, politicians looking for educational accountability, state that the standardized test shows how well the student has mastered curriculum standards and, therefore, how well the curriculum is being taught. So just what is the answer to this problem between accurate student assessment and teacher accountability?
Every teacher has asked themselves the question: Now that I’ve developed my lesson, followed through with my plan, and taught my students; how do I know they’ve actually learned something? Genuine assessment can be a seemingly complex and elusive target. Sorohan, (2004) states that “assessment should be objective, continuous, valid, reliable, comprehensive, systemic, and efficient”. That’s quite a lot to incorporate when developing a strategy for evaluating student knowledge and progress. However daunting, assessment can be a rewarding experience for both teacher and student. By using a variety of assessment techniques, such as supplementing traditional approaches to assessment with alternative assessments, which incorporate active and multi-sensory strategies; a teacher can determine depth of student knowledge while allowing the student the ability to take control of their own learning, gain much needed analytical thinking abilities, and aid in improving the teacher’s own instructional strategies. Standardized testing has its place in education, but only when included with other more student-based ways of assessing learning.
Kaiser (2000) argues that high-stakes standardized testing has jeopardized our educational system by not addressing student achievement in problem solving, cooperative learning, and higher-order thinking. She suggests that knowledge can be demonstrated in other more creative ways. By providing multiple ways of assessing student competency, students can freely show their ability to comprehend complex skills in a manner that is aligned with their learning style. The use of an array of assessments, including portfolios, reflection journals, exhibitions, theses, and demonstrations in which students are required to exhibit understanding and application of subject matter makes for a wider encompassing comprehension of their intellectual base. In fact, by using teaching and assessment strategies that incorporate multiple intelligences, developed by Howard Gardner, a student can easily learn and then communicate their comprehension of a subject in a style that is their strength and, in turn, that enhances student confidence and enjoyment of learning (Emig, 1997). A standardized test with its one-test-one-score attitude provides for a narrow view into a student’s capacity of knowledge and increases stress on students that may not be “good” test takers.
Valdez (2001) discusses the ability of using alternative assessment to determine not only student comprehension, but also to evaluate her teaching practices and the teaching strategies used to impart information to the students. It is this alternative type of evaluation that provides continual feedback to teachers on how well the students comprehend the lessons taught. The summative type of assessment on which standardized testing is based, does not provide a continuous evaluation of student achievement. Without this continuous feedback on how students are learning, a teacher can not adjust his/her teaching strategies to help students grasp the reins of comprehension. “Schools must do more than teach the basic skills, they must ensure that every student is able to think creatively and use problem solving skills. These skills are essential for all students’ endeavors” (Kaiser, 2000). To do this requires that alternative assessment be a continual and an integral part of education.
Communication of the concept learned and level of application by the student is also important for a teacher to determine. Standard paper and pencil tests cause a problem in the ability of teachers to accurately evaluate just what the student knows and whether they can apply and transfer the knowledge. When writing an answer to a test question; a student may write a wonderful essay, but have little substance in content and, yet; another student, whom is a poor writer, may have numerous grammatical mistakes and spelling errors, but writes with insight into the content. Interpreting writing can leave doubt in a teacher’s mind about student comprehension, application of a concept, or the topic studied (Lorsbach, Jinks, and Templeton, 2004). A multiple choice test adds to the confusion for the teacher. A student has no way of communicating the reason for their choice of an answer to the teacher. Alternative assessment allows for communication to be a two-way street between the teacher and student. By using a variety of evaluations such as, research papers, theses, research projects, portfolios, interpretive drawings, exploratory labs, web quests, skits, and oral presentations; a student has more opportunity to accurately show comprehension and mastery of a skill. By actively participating in learning, a student can apply their knowledge learned and then transfer it to real life skills which aids in retention of skills over time.
Communication of what is deemed important, by the teacher, for a student to know is also essential for alternative assessment to work properly. A teacher using alternative means for evaluation of student core skill comprehension must first inform the students of what is expected of them. By providing a pre-established rubric, or grading scale, for each non-traditional project or summative assessment, the teacher has communicated the important tasks or topics that need to be addressed by the student (Sorohan, 2004). The student, after receiving the rubric for each assignment, can understand what the teacher requires of them and allows them to self-evaluate their own work before handing it in. By allowing students the opportunity to see just what the teacher wants, a student can take ownership for their own learning, thereby, encouraging self-esteem and confidence building with regards to their ability for learning. Burson (2004) states research that shows student mastery of a subject is due to 50% self-confidence, 25% IQ, and 25% prior experiences. A student who has confidence in their learning ability and knows what the teacher requires of them can overcome any possible deficits in IQ and prior experiences and enhance their own learning experience.
Assessment must be continual, informative, and formative, not just a summative event to learning. Students need to know where they are, and where they are going educationally. Teachers, also, need to be able to evaluate their own teaching strategies based on students’ on-going evaluations and re-teach content if needed. Tracking this continual performance through alternative assessments, combined with standardized types of testing, help students to see progression in their own capability for learning. By using evaluation methods that can be added to a student’s portfolio of assessment, a student can visualize their progression of understanding.
Accountability for teaching needs to be included in any good assessment program. Teachers need to be aware of their own teaching strategies, and how they affect the students in the classroom. Specifically, are students gaining knowledge, and can they then apply this information in real life? Without accountability, teachers may not consider changing their teaching strategy to fit student learning. Holding an educator accountable for a student’s learning lends credence to the process of continual assessment. Recurrent formative assessments, through both the alternative means and the traditional way, and then evaluation of the scored assessments themselves, allows the teacher to regroup, if needed, and re-teach the content in an instructional style that matches a style of learning that best suits a student.
As asked earlier, just what is the answer to the problem between accurate student assessment and teacher accountability? The answer lies in the balance between alternative means of student assessment and the traditional accountability tied to standardized testing. Both types of testing are imperative to the welfare of today’s education. Without standardized testing, teachers cannot be data driven to improve education; and without alternative types of evaluation, an educator cannot determine depth or application of knowledge and cannot assess their own teaching strategies for maximum effect. By using a collection of student projects, traditional tests, exploratory labs, research papers, etc., in a portfolio; students can gain an understanding of how far they have progressed educationally throughout the year (Valdez, 2001). This visualization of progress aids in confidence building within the student which provides for a continued motivation for learning. Seeley (1994) puts this idea of the connection between learning and assessment succinctly:
Classrooms are moving from a testing culture—where teachers are the sole authority, students work alone, and learning is done for the test—to an assessment culture—where teachers and learners collaborate about learning, assessment takes many forms for multiple audiences, and distinctions between learning and assessment are blurred.
Students need to be actively involved with their own learning. When students take control of their own learning, they have the tendency to excel and retain content information longer. Likewise, as teachers, we must look at alternative assessment as a means to involve our students in their own learning and to look for accountability from standardized tests to better the learning environment for our students. With both assessment of student comprehension and accountability of educators within our education framework, we can enhance the learning environment for every learner.
References
Burson, D. (2004). [Class notes. The teaching of reading and writing. October 10, 2004].
Davies, M., and Wavering, M. (1999). Alternative assessment: New directions in teaching
and learning. Contemporary Education, 71, 39-45.
Emig, V. (1997). A multiple intelligences inventory. Educational Leadership, 55, 47-50.
Kaiser J. S. (2000). Are high-stakes tests taking control? Schools in the Middle, 9, 18-21.
Lorsbach, A., Jinks, J., and Templeton, R. (2004). Communication in assessing student learning: A critique of assessment tasks used in middle school science. The Clearing House, 77, 253-259.
Seeley, M. (1994). The mismatch between assessment and grading. Educational Leadership, 52, 4-6.
Sorohan, B. (2004). [Class notes. Instructional design, management, and technology in the middle school. October 2004].
Valdez, P. (2001). Alternative assessment. The Science Teacher, 68, 41-44.
