Assessment Blog

November 9, 2011

Report Card Redesign: What Should Be Reported?

By Susan M. Brookhart, author of Grading & Learning: Practices That Support Student Achievement

On October 25, GOOD magazine announced the winner of its “Redesign the Report Card” contest.  The winning entry is a design by Polly d’Avignon. (See a full-size version of the design here.)  As a visual design effort, it’s a success.  It’s gorgeous.  It’s interactive, designed to be posted on a website and support parent and teacher dialog.  The example design is a high school report card.  Each subject has its own tab, and includes six-week grading period averages, a pie chart displaying the elements that went into the average, and a day-by-day log of graded work, displayed as bars, with roll-over explanations.

Unfortunately, what has been designed into this lovely display is the traditional report card, with single grades for each subject that mix measures of a student’s current status on intended standards with measures of practice (like homework) and participation.  Not one point of the current best thinking about effective grading practices summarized in the November 2011 issue of Educational Leadership has been followed.

As my own article in this issue suggests, the purpose of a report card must be very clear.  The purpose of this report card seems to be home/school communication, mostly but not entirely about parents keeping track of a students’ running grade average.  Other communication purposes (like announcements about school activities) are served on the same form.  I question the purpose of keeping track of a grade average – much better, I think, to keep track of what knowledge and skills are being learned, in such a way that substitution of new information is possible as the student learns.

If I read my colleagues correctly, every author who writes about grading in this special issue of Educational Leadership would take exception to several of the practices encoded into this design.  For example, figuring homework and class participation into a final grade confuses what Guskey calls product and process criteria, and the result would be an uninterpretable composite that penalizes students for the ways in which they practice as they are learning and mixes unlike things.  As a teacher was quoted as saying, “I realized that bringing a pencil to class was not one of the algebra standards.”

And keeping a running average means as the reporting period progresses, students have less and less control over their final grade, depressing motivation for new learning or improvement.  More advanced grading practices privilege recent evidence, with the promise that reports of student learning will be revised to reflect what they know and can do right now.  Modern grading recommendations promote a future-looking, learning-focused concept.  The traditional running average saddles students with their past.  Why should a student work if, by the middle of a report period, the student realizes no matter what they do they will get a poor grade?

I was so disappointed!  Here is all this wonderful work by a talented designer, and yet all it does is pretty up and perpetrate aspects of traditional grading that desperately need changing.  It would have been nice if Ms. d’Avignon’s design talents had been applied to a more educationally defensible report card.

October 6, 2011

Reaching the Tipping Point Through Common Formative Assessment

By Kim Bailey, coauthor of Common Formative Assessment: A Toolkit for PLC at Work™

When a school begins its journey to become a professional learning community, it’s fairly common for teacher teams to experience a lack of clarity about their purpose. Not only are they unclear about how they’re supposed to spend their time, they might even be questioning the premise that working collaboratively could lead to improved student learning.

In an effort to comply with administrative directives, many teams simply go through the motions of developing key products. While these are all valuable activities, teams may engage in them with little understanding about “why” each of the products was created, or the role they play relative to improvements in student learning. Upon completion of each product, teams might perceive that their task is indeed finished. In fact, you can almost hear the brushing of hands and the declaration that they are “done” with the work.

1. Create team norms. Check!
2. Define your essential standards. Check!
3. Develop your SMART goal for the year. Check!

In our work to support the development of professional learning communities, we’ve seen a consistent pattern emerge. The tipping point at which members truly realize their potential impact as a team is when they design and implement common formative assessments. Each step inherent in the common formative assessment process provides focus to the team and a direct connection to student learning.

For example, through the unwrapping process, teachers become collectively clear on what students will know and do as a result of their teaching (Bailey & Jakicic, 2011). In the next step, designing assessments that are aligned to these learning targets, teachers become clear about the “end in mind” and as a result, instruction becomes far more intentional and aligned (Ferriter & Graham, 2008).

As student learning data is gathered and analyzed using these meaningful assessments, teams actually see the fruits of their labor and “own” the results. The connection between their efforts and improvement in student learning is clear. We call this efficacy. By going through this cycle of improvement, teams experience that what they do makes a difference. As a result, rather than merely complying and completing “activities” or holding random discussions around teaching, teams shift and begin focusing on how their teaching actually impacts learning. There is the momentum necessary to keep moving forward in the improvement process with new focus and intention.

So here’s the bottom line. We need to make sure that teams don’t get stuck muddling through the completion of discrete tasks or checklists that are viewed as disconnected from the improvement process. Let’s empower teams with tools and support in the design and use of common formative assessment so that they can begin realizing the power that comes from meaningful work to improve student learning. Let’s help them experience efficacy.

Sources:

Bailey, K. & Jakicic, C. (2011) Common formative assessment: A toolkit for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Ferriter, W. & Graham, P. (2008, Summer).  One step at a time: Many professional learning teams pass through these seven stages. Journal for Staff Development, 29 (3), 38-42. Oxford, OH:  National Staff Development Council.

September 2, 2011

Assessment the Right Way

By Chris Jakicic, Solution Tree author and associate

Teachers often talk about the pressure they feel to raise their school’s test scores, especially in the current environment which suggests that teachers should be evaluated on the results of high stakes state tests. However, because most states have now adopted the new Common Core standards, and because we don’t know exactly what the assessments for these new standards will look like, I believe that we have an opportunity right now to begin assessing our students the right way; the way we know will make a difference for their learning.

What do I mean by the right way? First, the Common Core standards demand higher levels of thinking from our students, and the rigor of the expectations increases at each grade level. If we really expect this level of rigor from our students, it becomes critical that teachers work collaboratively to decide which of the standards they believe are their essential standards—the standards they will monitor frequently and formatively, and will provide additional time and support for students who don’t master them after initial instruction. Teams then align these power (essential) standards vertically to assure a quality instruction and assessment plan. (Reeves, 2002)

In most schools, the reality is that teachers feel they must review many concepts from the previous year’s curriculum because they aren’t assured that all kids in their class will have the prerequisite knowledge required for new learning. In fact, as a middle school principal, I remember having a discussion about students who don’t capitalize the first letter of the sentence and don’t put punctuation at the end. This is a concept taught in kindergarten, and yet we review and reteach it every year thereafter. No wonder students do not apply the concept, even by the 8th grade; they have learned that no one expects them to follow through.

This is an extreme example, but the reality is that this happens in every curricular area and every grade level. Imagine the amount of time we would “capture back” by not having to review and reteach the same concepts year after year. If we are really expecting students to meet the more rigorous Common Core standards, we will need that teaching time.

Thus, power standards are learning standards that we guarantee all students will know when they leave a course or grade level. We monitor them frequently and provide time and support when students haven’t learned them. They are not the total curriculum.

Assessing the right way also includes unwrapping the standards into learning targets that are clear to teachers as well as to students. These new Common Core standards require collaborative discussions about their meaning and about what proficiency will look like. When common formative assessments are written around a few very specific learning targets, the resulting data tell teachers exactly what their students did or did not learn and what they need to provide corrective instruction about.

Our common formative assessments should be designed around three or less learning targets that have been chosen by teams of teachers because they are either the most important targets currently being taught, they are the targets that students most often misunderstand, or they are prerequisite skills for upcoming learning. Short (20 minutes or less) common formative assessments done frequently (weekly to every three weeks maximum) will provide the information teachers need to know what to do next for students. (Bailey and Jakicic, 2011)

Finally, the right way means designing assessments that allow students to demonstrate learning at high levels, not rote memorization or simple comprehension. Common formative assessments that allow students to demonstrate their ability to analyze and respond to information, to show critical reasoning, to integrate information from a variety of sources, and to problem solve in new situations will look very different (think constructed response and performance items) than common formative assessments that require only knowledge and comprehension (think selected response).

We want to see student reasoning around specific learning targets and how they use and apply the new information and skills they’ve learned. For example, an eighth grade language arts team may agree to assess the target “analyze two pieces of text that have conflicting information about the same topic.” As they develop the assessment item(s), they may debate what the expectations for students will be: to point out if they are conflicting in point of view, specific facts, or interpretation of facts. Ultimately, they will need to develop an item that specifies what the expectation for responses and the scoring rubric will look like. For example:

Based on the results of this common formative assessment, teams can provide corrective instruction for students who scored a 1 or 2 with additional instruction and practice on how an author supports a claim or argument for the reader. They can also provide enrichment for those students who have learned this target and would benefit from some more complex text examples.

We want our students to learn at high levels and we must design our common formative assessments to provide the information we need to know what they’ve learned and what they still need to learn. Let’s take this opportunity to do this the right way.

References

Bailey, K. & Jakicic, C. Common formative assessment: A toolkit for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Reeves, D. B. (2002). The leader’s guide to standards: A blueprint for educational equity and excellence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

August 8, 2011

Teacher Checklists to Assess the Common Core

By Kay Burke, Solution Tree author and associate

Last fall Dr. Atul Gawande, a surgeon and leader of the World Health Organization’s Safe Surgery Saves Lives program, appeared on the Jon Stewart Show to talk about his latest book called The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. He discussed how we have accumulated stupendous know-how in the twenty-first century but that know-how is often unmanageable. Gawande says we need a different strategy that takes advantage of the knowledge of others to make up for our inadequacies. I bought his book the next day and immediately started using the following quote in my assessment workshops: “And there is such a strategy—though it will seem almost ridiculous in its simplicity, maybe even crazy to those of us who have spent years carefully developing ever more advanced skills and technologies. It is a checklist” (Gawande, 2010, p.13).

It makes sense that if surgeons, pilots, and engineers need checklists, a teacher would also need a checklist to help fifth graders write an informative essay. Using checklists to teach the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) helps teacher teams better understand the components of the standards. I have been using a strategy I call “Repacking the Standard” to help teachers analyze the descriptors and “chunk” them into a framework that helps them teach the standard more effectively.

(The above figure comes from this reproducible PDF.)

Let me illustrate this process by showing how it could be used to help teachers better understand the Grade 5 Language Arts Standard for Informative Writing from the CCSS:. Review the first two sentences of that standard. The students will:

Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly. Introduce a topic clearly, provide a general observation and focus, and group related information logically; include formatting (e.g., headings), illustrations, and multimedia when useful to aiding comprehension.

I selected the power standard of informative writing (Step 1) and then chunked the main categories (examine a topic, convey ideas, and provide a general observation and focus) for Step 2.

Step 3 involves placing the chunks in a logical sequence for teaching the skills and Step 4 uses three-by-three-inch sticky notes to include all the rest of the performance indicators and the language of the standards (LOTS). Step 5 adds clarifying information using two-by-two-inch sticky notes to add definitions, examples, symbols, pictures, and sample problems to make the abstract ideas more concrete. The “Repacking the Standard” graphic above is available by going to http://go.solution-tree.com/assessment/. Click on the book Balanced Assessment: From Formative to Summative and look for Reproducibles. After I completed my repacking strategy using the sticky notes, I created a teacher checklist just for those two sentences. The entire standard is longer, but the process is the same.

I will be modeling this process as well as strategies to create student checklists and rubrics at the Ahead of the Curve Conference sponsored by Solution Tree in Atlanta, Georgia, on October 28. I will show examples of K-12 user-friendly student checklists that help scaffold the problem-solving and organizational skills that will help all students master the CCSS. If surgeons, pilots, engineers, and teachers can use checklists to succeed, I am sure fifth-grade students can also benefit.

References:

Burke, K. (2010). Balanced Assessment: From Formative to Summative. Bloomington, IN. Solution Tree Press.

The Common Core State Standards Initiatives. June 2, 2010. Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subject Writing Standards, K-5, p. 20.

Gawande, A. (2010) The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. New York, Metropolitan Books, Henry Holt and Company.

Reproducibles for Balanced Assessment: From Formative to Summative

July 7, 2008

Moving Beyond Super Job: Descriptive Feedback that Inspires and Requires Action

By Nicole M. Vagle, Solution Tree author and associate

Maya is in second grade. On Wednesday of each week, students in her classroom receive an object. With this object, they are asked to create something and write about it using details. They bring the “imagination creation” and description back to school on Friday to share it with their peers. Maya brings her writing home on Monday and most often the feedback provided is “Super Job.” After doing these imagination creations for about two months, I looked more closely and was struck by a few things in Maya’s writing. First, her spacing was getting progressively worse. She was putting spaces in the middle of words, connecting words that shouldn’t be connected, and tossing capital letters in the middle of words. As a former English teacher and her mother, I decided to ask her about it. The conversation went something like this:

Mom: Hey, Maya. It looks like you have some really creative ideas in your writing.
Maya: Yeeessss… Miss Johnson loves my ideas.
Mom: Take a look at this (I pull out a copy of her latest description). Do you see anything you might want to revise to make your writing even more clear?
Maya: Nope.
Mom: What about the spacing? It looks like this is one word and it looks like this one is two words.
Maya (exasperated): Mom, it doesn’t matter. Miss Johnson puts ‘Super Job’ on it anyway.

Stunned by her response, I started thinking about this idea of descriptive feedback: What are the implications for Maya’s learning about quality writing given this scenario? What messages do we need to send to students with our feedback if we are to promote learning?

I have come to believe that when we, as teachers, offer feedback for the purpose of increasing learning, we must inspire and require our students to act. In order for our students to act, they must understand very clearly what the intended learning looks like and they must identify the very next step in their learning. If students understand what to do, there’s tremendous opportunity and possibility that they will be inspired to take that next step. If these next steps are required and we provide the time, structure, and support for students to take and act on the feedback, learning will follow.

This notion of inspiring and requiring draws from Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam’s (1998) landmark review of over 200 studies that concluded quality formative assessment practice leads to increased learning. However, while implementing quality formative assessment practice seems like an obvious step, evidence in this review of literature suggests a gap in actual implementation. Black and Wiliam (1998) and Wiliam (2007) described descriptive feedback among other effective components of formative assessment: students and teachers knowing and being clear about the intended learning; teachers offering descriptive feedback and students acting on it; meaningful student involvement where peer and self review are regularly practiced; and deep questioning that promotes dialogue among students and teachers.

I advocate that we must bring students in as active partners in this descriptive feedback process. If this is to be an authentic partnership, then both teachers and students share the roles of analyzing work, identifying strengths, identifying next steps, and revising the work appropriately. In order to bring students in as partners in their learning, we must provide opportunities for students to become actively involved and reflective in the feedback process. Effective feedback practices involve students in the following ways:

• Helps students understand and articulate more deeply the intended learning;
• Helps students understand the steps in the journey in achieving the intended learning; and
• Helps students determine where they are on the journey and their very next step

Finally, these three practices are a progression and align to inspire and require action in order to increase learning.

Let’s take a look at how this process might play out in response to Maya’s comment. What if her teacher realized that students had lost sight of the reason they were writing these “Imagination Creation” descriptions and decided to respond in this way.

Step 1. Helping Students Understand the Intended Learning
In small groups, Maya’s teacher asks students to brainstorm the following: What is quality writing? What does quality writing look like?

As a whole class, Maya and her peers come to consensus on the most essential criteria (2-3) and brainstorm “quality” and “not yet” descriptions of writing.

Step 2. Helping Students Understand the Intended Learning and the Steps in the Journey
Using a sample piece of writing, small groups of students identify the following:

• Two strengths of the sample and evidence to support
• One area to work on and evidence to support
• One possible next step in the area to work on

The strengths and areas to work on come from the criteria and descriptions of quality writing in Step 1. The evidence to support comes directly from the writing in the sample.

Step 3. Helping Students Determine Where They are on the Journey and Their Next Steps
Maya and her peers then review their own writing. First, they identify two strengths in the writing and evidence to support. Then, they identify one area to focus on, the evidence that led them to their area and their very next step.

Step 4. Inspiring and Requiring Action
After Maya and her peers have identified revisions, the teacher posts the criteria in different areas of the room. Students move to the area of the room where the criteria they need to work on is posted. The teacher has prepared a brief activity for each criteria. For example, if a student needs to work on organization, students may receive a list of sentences they need to revise to make a paragraph that has a beginning, middle and end. Once they have created the paragraph together, they check their thinking with the teacher’s model paragraph by discussing the similarities and differences between their paragraph and the teacher’s model. Once the students have worked through the group activity, they return to their own work to make revisions in their own writing.

When we share our thinking and our intentions with students, we begin to draw them in as partners on this learning journey. Then, when we gather their voices and specifically invite their thinking to help shape our assessment and instruction, we take another step in this partnership. Questions that promote this level of partnership look something like: What do you think we’re saying? What do you think we’re learning? Why do you think this learning is important? How would you describe quality writing? What do you find most challenging about this learning? Finally, once we tap student voice, it’s time to use it as a rich source of information that informs our next steps in planning for increased student learning. Moving beyond “super job” to descriptive feedback creates a learning environment that capitalizes on the insights gained from those at the center of our work-our students.

References

Black, P. and D. Wiliam. 1998. Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 80, no. 2:1-20.

Wiliam, D. (2007). Keeping learning on track: classroom assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K. Lester Jr (Ed.), Second handbook of mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1053-1098). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

April 10, 2008

Continuous Learning Cycle

By: Gwen Doty

A focused assessment plan follows a specific learning cycle to determine student understanding and teacher effectiveness. There are various stages of assessment and each stage would pose a unique purpose. Some assessments are used to assess student readiness before the learning begins. Some are used during the learning cycle to assess current understandings as teachers are providing the instruction. Others are implemented after the lesson has ended to determine how well students have understood the concepts that were presented. In planning assessment with a continuous learning cycle, the conscious and purposeful use of assessments for different stages of learning should be utilized.

1. Pre-Assessment

Pre-assessments determine what students already know as you are about to begin instruction on a new skill. This informs both the teacher and student regarding students’ current level of understanding. Teachers then have opportunities to adjust or customize the various assessments that will be used throughout the lesson or unit. Students are assessed at their own readiness level. This doesn’t mean that some students would not be accountable for learning the standard to the same degree as other students. It simply means that some students would need additional teaching, practice, and feedback before being expected to become proficient to the degree that the target or goal is requiring. Scores from pre-assessments would never be recorded in a grade book, as this tool is used to inform and guide instructional practices. Examples of pre-assessment formats would include whole class discussions with teacher questions, graphic organizer tools, journal entries, or a multiple choice format.

2. Informal Assessments

Informal assessments should be happening in conjunction with all stages of learning. These assessments involve multiple opportunities, especially in the beginning stages of learning, for teachers to monitor student understanding. During direct instruction, an effective teacher will stop every few minutes to assess how well students are learning. He might say, “Now turn to a partner and explain this concept in your own words.” As students are explaining to their partners, the teacher is walking around and listening to the level of understanding. This gives the teacher valuable information as they ponder the questions:

• Do I need to re-teach this content?
• Do I need to approach this differently or try a different teaching strategy that might make more sense to students?
• Do I need to work with a small group of students who need additional teaching?
• Which students know it and which students aren’t getting it?
• How will students be informed of their progress and specific areas needing improvement?

Another example of informal assessment would occur as students are working on a practice assignment following an initial lesson. Students at this point are not expected to have mastered the content or process, but as they practice, the teacher is assessing. Often these assessments are as simple as walking around the classroom with a checklist in hand. It might be sitting next to a student and saying, “Tell me how you arrived at this answer.”

Informal assessment could also take the form of student self-reflections. As an initial lesson is completed, students may be asked to share their new learning or their current understanding of the concept that was taught. They may be asked to share what was easy and what was difficult. Again, because students had not yet been given adequate practice with feedback, the informal assessment would not be used as a student grade.

3. Growth Assessments

Growth assessments are the next stage of effective assessment. As students gain more skill and higher levels of understanding, growth assessments measure degrees of learning. What distinguishes the growth assessment from the informal assessment is the expectation for the learning. Because growth assessments occur after students have had multiple informal assessment opportunities with teacher feedback, students are now expected to have gained skill and knowledge regarding the learning target. Examples of growth assessments would include essays, mini-presentations, kinesthetic activities, or selected response assessments. Growth assessments are often assessed with performance tasks that utilize a rubric for scoring. At this point, student scores may be included as part of the whole picture of student understanding that will lead to a grade.

4. Final Student Product

The final student product is the big finale and demonstrates the depth of student understanding of the goal. However, don’t mistake the word “final” as meaning “done” with the teaching or learning. Often, the final product is an accumulation of prior learning tasks. It might also take the form of a project, oral presentation, research paper, or demonstration. Although you will likely be converting student scores into grades, the final product is still informing you and the student. Perhaps you will be building on the newly taught concept in the near future. Or, based on assessment results, you may decide that you will go back and re-teach. Questions would arise such as:

• Do I still need to re-teach parts of the content to certain students?
• Will I need to revisit these concepts with students periodically in order to enhance retention of information?
• Will this learning enhance or be a preview for future learning?

Using these 4 stages of effective assessment ensure that students and teacher are continually apprised regarding levels of academic proficiency. Keep in mind that some assessments will be scored or graded, while other assessments can be used as a tool to measure student current understanding. Assessment formats, such as teacher observations, checklists, and oral questions and answers would many times function as information gathering assessments. A general guideline to follow entails using the pre-assessment and all informal assessments to inform and provide specific feedback to students. Use growth assessments and the final student product scores as a real measurement of student proficiency with the learning target. When the teacher designs assessment so that it truly flows naturally from the instruction and the student investigations, it isn’t difficult to motivate students. They will often not view the assessment task as an assessment at all, but simply as a learning activity. And that is the epitome of effective assessment – where the design of goals, instruction, activities, and assessment are viewed as a continuous learning cycle.

March 13, 2008

What is the Purpose and Motivation for Assessment?

By: Gwen Doty

Formative assessment is an ongoing process throughout the learning cycle to determine student understanding and teacher effectiveness. But with each assessment task that is assigned, are all parties clear about the purpose for engaging in the assessment task? Both teacher and student should have a clear understanding of the rationale behind it. For example, is there a need to gather information about how well individual students understand a portion of a lesson or unit? Is the goal to determine what students know prior to the content instruction? Or would it be useful to determine how well students understand essential knowledge before you convey more advanced concepts? One purpose present in every assessment involves providing teachers with feedback about how well they have taught the lesson or unit.

How do we determine the assessment purpose? It starts with a clear understanding of the overall function of assessment. Assessment should be a purposeful and natural process that coincides with instruction. The purpose for assessing can be as simple as observing students as they discuss their understandings. It can be as versatile as a musical student performance or as traditional as a multiple choice quiz. The key functions, however, to effective assessment revolves around three aspects: 1) It must be ongoing, coinciding with instruction 2) It must be varied so that students with different learning styles have opportunities to demonstrate their understanding in ways that make sense to them and 3) It must appropriately reflect the content standards and the information that was actually taught. Making a conscious decision to assess, with a clear purpose and motivation, is key to the success and usefulness of that assessment.

What Questions Must be Asked?

Depending on the entity that is concerned, the purpose and motivation for assessment varies. Motivations are different between the state and the school district, and between the school district and a specific classroom. Each entity is asking questions such as:

State level

How well are our schools doing around the state? Which schools are excelling and what are the causes for their success? How are different districts conducting assessment throughout the school year? Which assessment formats tend to lead to improved teaching?

Schools/Districts

How are we doing in specific areas? In what areas could our students improve overall? What kinds of assessments are the successful teachers employing throughout the year? How can we ensure that students and teachers clearly understand the purpose for each assessment that is undertaken? How do we help teachers to engage in more purposeful assessments?

Classroom

How can I assess accurately, without spending more hours? How well are my students mastering the content standards? How will I use the results of this particular assessment? How do I ensure that I assess throughout the instructional cycle to include pre-assessment, checking and monitoring student progress throughout the lesson, as well as conducting a final assessment? In which areas are individual students falling short of proficiency? In which areas are a high percentage of students having problems? How can I use student assessment to better design my instruction?

Student

How well did I understand the content? How much learning did I gain when I compare my pre-assessment with my current knowledge? In which areas do I still need to improve? Which assessment format makes the most sense to me? How do I best show what I know?

The following components should be addressed when creating or implementing a classroom assessment.

• The teacher and student both have a clear understanding of the learning target. What knowledge or skills are students expected to achieve and to what degree should they learn them? This is usually determined through an analysis of the state standards.
• Performance Criteria is determined, which involves the guidelines, rules, or attributes that will be used to judge the quality of student performance.
• Both teacher and learner have a clear purpose in mind regarding why the assessment is taking place.
• Next, in considering the purpose, the teacher determines the best method for assessing. Prior to creating an assessment, ask the question, “Based on my purpose for assessing, which format for assessment (for example multiple choice, essay, portfolio, presentation) should I use?”
• After creating the assessment, the teacher ensures that the assessment reflects the content standards or goals being taught. The performance criteria are stated clearly, and aligned with the content standards to exclude irrelevant information. Performance tasks create an authentic venue for students to demonstrate their new knowledge.

It’s not possible to create a list of all of the “purposes” for assessment, as this blog has attempted to demonstrate. Assessment purposes would certainly have multiple purposes on any given day. This would be based on the specific learning cycle stage in which the learning is taking place as well as the feedback and cues that the teacher is receiving regarding student readiness. Purposes would also reflect the goals of the person or entity that is promoting or administering the assessment.

January 10, 2008

How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning

By: Thomas R. Guskey

Teachers who develop useful assessments, provide corrective instruction, and give students second chances to demonstrate success can improve their instruction and help students learn. Excerpted from Educational Leadership. 2003. 60(5), 6-11

The assessments best suited to guide improvements in student learning are the quizzes, tests, writing assignments, and other assessments that teachers administer on a regular basis in their classrooms. Teachers trust the results from these assessments because of their direct relation to classroom instructional goals. Plus, results are immediate and easy to analyze at the individual student level. To use classroom assessments to make improvements, however, teachers must change both their view of assessments and their interpretation of results. Specifically, they need to see their assessments as an integral part of the instruction process and as crucial for helping students learn.

Despite the importance of assessments education today, few teachers receive much formal training in assessment design or analysis. A recent survey showed, for example, that fewer than half the states require competence in assessment of licensure as a teacher (Stiggins, 1999). Lacking specific training, teachers rely heavily on the assessments offered by the publisher of their textbooks of instructional materials. When no suitable assessments are available, teachers construct their own in a haphazard fashion, with questions and essay prompts similar to the ones that their teachers used. They treat assessments as evaluation devices to administer when instructional activities are completed and to use primarily for assigning students’ grades.

To use assessments to improve instruction and student learning, teachers need to change their approach to assessments in three important ways:

• Make Assessments Useful for Students
• Follow Assessments With Corrective Instruction
• Give Second Chances to Demonstrate Success

To read the entire text, go to In the Classroom, Articles.

November 8, 2007

Classroom Policy Questions

Examining the issues of test retakes and late assignments

By: Douglas Reeves

Adapted from The Leadership and Learning Center (www.leadandlearn.com)

We ALL agree that student responsibility and citizenship is a good idea. Kids SHOULD have appropriate consequences for failure to do homework, complete projects, and doing badly on tests. The only question is how BEST to encourage responsibility and citizenship, and what the appropriate consequences should be.

This is very important-we are not starting with the perspective of “I’m right and the teachers are wrong.” We’re starting with the perspective that you, your staff, and I all love kids, care about them, and want them to grow up with a good sense of responsibility and citizenship.

Now that we are starting from common ground, let’s ask some questions:

1. Are our present practices leading students to improve their rates of homework completion and classroom success? If so, then let’s just check the data: What was the percentage of failures five years ago? Three years ago? Last year? If our strategies are effective, I would expect that the failures–particularly failures due to the failure to complete homework–are declining significantly. But that’s not, in fact, what I see around the country. The typical grading practices–zeroes for missing work, refusing to take late work, refusing to allow students to resubmit work, use of the average–are not providing improved performance. In fact, teachers complain to me all the time that students are not completing work, that they are disengaged and non-responsive. In other words, if our goal is improved citizenship and responsibility, what we are doing now apparently is not working very well.

2. What alternatives have we tried? In almost every school, I find wide variation in teacher grading practices. There are some teachers who, quietly and almost anonymously, have been experimenting with different practices. Before you consider anything I have to say, conduct a “treasure hunt” by analyzing those classes where failure rates have declined and achievement has improved. Look in different departments around the district where success is high (e.g., drivers education, music, computer programming). What do those areas have in common that we can learn from? One thing that I know is true in all three is that when you make a mistake, it doesn’t lead to failure, but rather to listening to teacher feedback, respecting teacher feedback, improving performance, and ultimately passing the assessment.

3. What will be our criteria for decision? Can we at least agree that even if people are skeptical, we’ll let the evidence be our guide? I’ve worked in very remote parts of Africa where people did not believe that vaccinations were effective. They didn’t want to see my studies or hear a lecture on Western medicine. But they were willing to look at children who lived or avoided horrible life-long disabilities because they didn’t get polio (it’s still rampant in parts of the developing world). The evidence, not my beliefs or their beliefs, ultimately allowed for more vaccinations. So in our schools, can we agree that even if we’re not sure, we’ll at least try some experiments, and then let the evidence decide? I think that teachers are smart–they care about kids and love them. But they are skeptical because they don’t like to see another “hot idea” come and go. So, let’s take our time and try it out, but let’s also have the intellectual integrity to let the evidence and not personal feelings, decide.

4. Can we agree on some fundamental boundaries? Even if we disagree on policy, can we agree on values such as fairness? Can we agree that grading practices should not be based upon subjective appraisals that can be influenced by gender, race, economic status, or parent activism? Can we agree that the central purpose of feedback, including grades, is the improvement of student achievement?

5. What’s in it for the teachers? Can we agree that if we can improve policies that will reduce our failure rate, that we would have happier, more engaged, and better-behaved students? Can we agree that if we have fewer students repeating grades and courses, we’ll have fewer angry and bored students?

6. What’s in it for the school and community? Can we agree that if we have fewer students repeating math and English, that ultimately we’ll have more opportunities for art, music, technology, service learning, and other things that both students and teachers find engaging and worthwhile?

Once we have settled these questions, let’s try some experiments. I’m not saying I have all the answers, but perhaps different teachers would try different things. Some might just eliminate the zero. Some might stop the average. Others might try a “menu” system such as I use, where the consequence for missing work or blowing a test is selecting other items from the menu. Others might experiment with rewards for work that is on time or early rather than punishment for work that is late.

In other words, I’m not asking you to use MY system, but rather that you use your good judgment and the thoughtful goodwill of your colleagues to: a) admit that what we are doing now could be improved, b) experiment with different ideas that improve achievement and reduce failures, and c) agree that the final school-wide decision will be based on evidence and not personal prejudices.