Assessment Practice. Prt 3.

Regardless of the intended and actual uses of assessment data, the main focus of assessment has to be on developing pupils in both their knowledge and cognitive processes. Summative assessment may traditionally place a right/wrong dichotomy or pupil knowledge over their ability to demonstrate cognitive processes in formative assessment, but it does not mean that one is necessarily more beneficial than the other. It is better to view both as equal tools which can facilitate the process by which pupils construct their own learning. As has already been stated, pupils cannot move forwards without knowing where they are. This is the reason why summative assessment is important, and it is also the reason why sharing learning objectives and modelling are equalled important. They serve as a road-map: once a pupil can understand the assessment criteria or the task, they will understand what they need to learn and demonstrate in order to show they have reached the next level. However, it should be noted that even this approach has its critics. Torrance (2007, p. 291) states, "In a very real sense we seem to have moved from 'assessment of learning' through 'assessment for learning' to 'assessment as learning', for both learners and tutors alike, with assessment procedures and processes completely dominating the teaching and learning experience." Torrance goes on to suggest that rather than promoting learner autonomy, the sharing of assessment criteria makes pupils reliant on teachers and tutors. Once again, this falls into the either/or dichotomy: either you think sharing learning criteria is useful, or you don`t. But what is the alternative? Blind tests work well in drug trials, but in education pupils want to know where they are going.

Developing My Own Assessment

It is important to note that the best type of formative assessment can come from self-reflection, and that is where I find myself now. Do I want to fall on either side of the either/or dichotomy in assessment discourse? Is formative assessment an educational `panacea` that will ensure every child increases their attainment exponentially? Is summative assessment really just a convenient way for external groups to hold schools accountable? The answer to those questions is no, no, and no. However, instead of focusing on the negatives, it is better to state the positive ways in which this review of assessment discourse and practice has informed my pedagogical approach. Firstly, and this was obvious before starting this review, it is clear that my collection and use of assessment data needs to be improved. Daugherty (2009, p. 1) states, "For an assessment of learning to be valid, the inferences drawn from the evidence of learning should be demonstrably aligned to learning outcomes." My experiences with assessment so far have meant that my marking has been largely cumulative, retrospective marking whilst I have concentrated on improving my behaviour management and questioning. It needs to be an aim of mine to get a better understanding of the knowledge and cognitive processes at work within the classroom, and develop effective tools for developing pupils` learning. Secondly, it will be necessary to continue with my level of feedback to pupils as much as possible. Frequent feedback is an important part of formative assessment and enhances learning (Black and Wiliam (1998, p. 3)). At both my placement A schools I was advised by teachers that the amount of feedback I was giving pupils could not be maintained because of the amount of time it took to write. However, decreasing the quantity should not necessarily mean a decrease in the quality of feedback being given. Thirdly, as mentioned earlier, there are a few simple things that can be done in lesson that will help improve my approach to formative assessment. For example, as mentioned when discussing observation 1, simply noting down when a pupil says they will check something against marking criteria/assessment foci, and then asking them if they did the following lesson. If they haven`t, or still don`t understand, then I can offer to go through it with them. If they have, and they can explain to me what it means, then learning has taken place. Finally, there are two further pieces of research that interested me whilst reading for this review. The first, "Formative and Summative Confidence-Based Assessment" by Gardner-Medwin and Gahan (2003), looks at how confidence-based assessment is used at University College London (UCL). It uses a student assessment system where students answer questions, and then mark how confident they were in answering the question. It then goes on to explain how students are marked down for answering a question confidently and wrong, whilst marking them at a normal level when they are right. I found this interesting as it links into my belief that pupil cognitive processes are important to understanding their learning. This would provide a positive and anonymous way for pupils to express their confidence in their work. However, I feel that it would be counterproductive to penalise them for being wrong. The second, "Who`s Supposed To Be Making The Decisions In The Classroom Anyway?", by Rudd (1996), was about how a teacher engaged low-attaining pupils by involving them in the planning of her scheme of work, and subsequent assessments of learning, for the following term. Six out of the seven pupils responded positively, engaged with the scheme of work, and improved academically. This study was interesting as it showed that involving the pupils in the construction and structure of their learning had a positive effect and changed the outcomes for a number of low-attaining pupils. It also reinforced what Black and Wiliam (1998, p. 3) said about AfL improving learning outcomes for low-attaining pupils.

Conclusion

At the beginning of this essay was a quote from a Year 10 boy, expressing his frustration that the teachers who used Assessment for Learning in his lessons were answering his questions with more questions. In many respects, this one quotation could sum up this review of current assessment discourse: with every new document, there were further questions of the assumptions made from reading previous documents. It would have been nice to have had someone there who had all the answers, but even the experts in the field cannot seem to agree. The way in which assessment is used within school is not simplistic, and absolutism rarely takes into account the different cultures in which pupils are subjected to assessment. Whilst formative assessment has frequently been referred to as an educational `panacea` in this document, it should be clear that this was used half-seriously: it does illustrate the belief some have in its positive effects on learning, but it was also stated to illustrate how universally transferable approaches to teaching and learning are often a myth. Taras (2008, p. 389), states, "there is no accepted and unifying theory of assessment; there is no agreed explicit theory of the relationship between summative, formative and self-assessment." It should be clear that Taras is a critic of Black and Wiliam`s work on formative assessment, and that she is completely right in this case: there are many disagreements, even about the meaning of the words used to describe types of assessment. In addition, what works for one teacher in one specific class is not necessarily transferable to other classes with learners that have different needs. This is why formative assessment has to be personalised, but it has to be understood that some learners may respond more favourably to summative means of assessment, as well.

Bibliography

Assessment Reform Group, 1999. Assessment for Learning: Beyond the Black Box. London: Economic and Social Research Council, Teaching and Learning Research Programme.

Black, P., 2007. Formative Assessment: Promises or problems. London: Kings College London

Black, P. and Wiliam, D., 1998. Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan Vol. 80 (2) pp. 139 - 148.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C. Marshall, B., and Wiliam, D., 2004. Working Inside the Black Box. Phi Delta Kappan Vol. 86 (1) pp. 9 - 21.

Broadfoot, P., and Black, P., 2007. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. Assessment in Education. Vol. 11 (1) pp. 7 - 27.

Carless. D., 2005. Prospects for the implementation of assessment for learning. Assessment in Education Vol. 12 (1) pp. 39 - 54.

Cowie, B., 2005. Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. The Curriculum Journal. Vol. 16 (2) pp. 137 - 151.

Daugherty, R., Black, P., Ecclestone, K., James, M. & Newton, P., 2009. Assessment of Significant Learning Outcomes in Berry, R. (ed.) Assessment Reform and Educational Change. New York: Springer

Department for Children, Schools and Families. The Assessment for Learning Strategy, 2008. Nottingham: DCSF Publications

Gahan, M., and Gardener-Medwin, A.R, 2003. Formative and Summative Confidence-Based Assessment. In: University College London, Proc. 7th International Computer-Aided Assessment Conference, Loughborough, July 2003. London: University College London

Harlan, W. 2009. Improving assessment of learning and for learning. Education 3-13. Vol. 37 (3) pp. 247 - 257.

Mansell, W., 2008. Every school to get a champion of assessment for learning. The Times Educational Supplement. 20 June, p.7.

Mansell, W., James, M. & the Assessment Reform Group, 2009. Assessment in schools. Fit for purpose? A commentary by the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. London: Economic and Social Research Council, Teaching and Learning Research Programme.

Marshall, B., 2007. Assessment in English. Handbook of Primary English in Initial Teacher Education. London: Kings College London

Rudd, L., 1996. Who`s Supposed to Make the Decisions in the Classroom Anyway? Collaboration For A Change. Wyoming: Wyoming Center for Educational Research, pp. 21 - 42.

Taras, M., 2007. Assessment for learning: understanding theory to improve practice. Journal of Further and Higher Education. Vol. 31 (4) pp. 363 - 371.

Taras, M., 2008. Assessment for learning: sectarian divisions of terminology and concepts. Journal of Further and Higher Education. Vol. 32 (4) pp. 389 - 397.

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Integrative assessment: Balancing assessment of and assessment for learning Guide no 2, 2007. Mansfield: Linney Direct.

Torrance, H., 2007. Assessment as Learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post-secondary education and training came to dominate learning. Assessment in Education Vol. 14 (3) pp. 281 - 294.