Assessment for Learning Essay Example

self assessment. It is claimed that alternative assessment is more valid and reliable, more closely matches today’s educational goals, better accommodates cultural diversity, is consistent with cognitive learning theory, and measures deep understanding (Frank and Barzilai, 2004).

They outlined eight necessary characteristics of alternative assessment, of which the most critical are that the assessment is formative, relating to the learning processes not just to the final result, as a continuous process embedded in instruction and that assessment of this nature seeks to assess knowledge, understanding, skills, attitudes, values, motivation, higher-level cognitive skills and affective outcomes in a real life context. Also important, it indicates that the student is responsible for the learning process.Engaging students in the assessment process helps them to be self-reflective and self-regulated learners. Formative assessment If there is an opportunity for students to improve on the same task then the assessment is essentially formative. The main purpose of formative assessment is diagnostic and enables students to obtain sufficient information to identify their own strengths and weaknesses in terms of current knowledge and skills (Morgan, 2004).

Formative assessment not only provides useful feedback to the student, but also gives important feedback to the teacher about how to modify teaching and learning activities.Elwood et al (2002) argue that to include and promote alternative assessment practices that are formative in both function and purpose requires a major shift in how learning is viewed, how students’ own learning is understood and how assessment is integrated into teaching practices. In a review of current thinking on student learning and formative assessment in higher education, Taras (2002) concludes that “the current accepted theory no longer separates formative-summative assessment and requires

all assessment to be primarily formative in nature”.She emphasizes the centrality of the learner and suggests that feedback cannot be a one-way system as the learner who is receiving it must be an active participant and use the information to alter the “gap”. Taras outlines three conditions that must be met for effective formative feedback to take place:

1. a knowledge of standards – students must have access to the tutors’ knowledge and assumptions
2.  the necessity to compare these standards to one’s own work – met through practice on the part of the student and guidance from the tutor
3. aking action to close the gap – requires learners to use this new information at the same time as producing.

Black and William (1998) reviewed 250 research articles on teachers’ assessment practices, from pre-schools to colleges, and found that there is strong evidence to show that improving formative assessment produces significant and often substantial learning gains.

However, they suggest that the current practice of formative assessment could be improved and identified five key ways to enhance formative assessment:

1. feedback to any student should relate to the qualities of the work with advice on what the student can do to improve and should avoid comparisons with other students
2. students should be trained in self-assessment so that they can understand the main purposes of their learning and thereby grasp what they need to do to achieve
3.  opportunities for students to express their understanding should be designed into any piece of teaching, for this will initiate the interaction whereby formative assessment aids learning
4. the dialogue between students and a teacher should be thoughtful, reflective and focused to evoke and explore understanding.

It should

be conducted so that all students have an opportunity to think and to express their ideas 5. tests and exercises can be an invaluable guide to learning, but these must be clear and relevant to learning aims. The feedback on them should give each student guidance on how to improve, and each must be given opportunity and help to work at the improvement (Black and William, 1998, cited by Elwood and Klenowski, 2002:245) Authentic assessment It is also now recognized that learning is situated in particular contexts and therefore not necessarily transferable to other contexts (Maclellan, 2001:308). This realization has led to the concept of “authentic assessment” which has gained widespread use in education.

Maclellan (2004a) outlines three standards by which intellectual achievement is judged authentic: 1. Analysis – the response reflects higher-order thinking about content by organizing, synthesizing, interpreting, evaluating and hypothesizing to produce comparisons, contrasts, arguments, application of information to new contexts, and consideration of different ideas or points of view. Disciplinary concepts – the response reflects an understanding of ideas, concepts, theories, and principles that are central to the academic or professional disciplines into which the student is being inducted.

Elaborated written communication – the response explains understandings and conclusions. It is clear, coherent, and provides richness in details, qualifications, and argument. While traditional assessment tasks such as the reproduction of cued knowledge and the performance of drills and exercises may be a prerequisite for subsequent knowledge development, they do not themselves reflect understanding – the quality that Wiggins (1993) argues is at the core of authenticity. Wiggins suggests that the essence of authentic achievement is the intellectual achievement of using knowledge “wisely, fluently,

flexibly and aptly in particular and diverse contexts” (1993:200) to address real-world tasks and problems. Thus, for Wiggins, any number of assessment items could be authentic, as long as the central criterion is its fidelity to the way in which knowledge is used in the real world.

There is wide evidence that students respect assessment tasks that are ‘real’, provide serious challenges, and mirror the skills needed in the workplace (James et al, 2002). In a review of 36 empirical studies of students’ perceptions about assessment in higher education, Struyven and her colleagues (2002) found that most students perceived traditional assessment tasks as arbitrary and irrelevant, a “necessary evil” that allowed them to accrue marks. In contrast, students’ believed alternative authentic assessment was fairer because it appeared to measure qualities, skills, and competencies that could be valuable in other contexts. More authentic assessment enabled students to show the extent of their learning and allowed them to articulate more effectively what they had learned.

In an effort to increase the authenticity of assessment tasks in a pre-service teacher education course, students presented their work at education conferences, published articles in professional journals, tendered their unit plans (the final assessment task of the course) as evidence of their competence when applying for teaching positions. Goos and Moni (2001) suggest that this evaluation of students’ work by practicing teachers reinforces the meaningfulness and purpose of the original assessment tasks, and legitimates the criteria and standards we use to judge the quality of students’ performance. One of the main criticisms of authentic assessment is that validity is achieved at the expense of reliability (Wolf, 1995). However, as Herrington et al (1998)

point out, standardized tests, even in large-scale assessments; do not necessarily guarantee greater reliability. Some critics also argue that focusing on authentic student achievement means that important content will be eliminated from the curriculum.

Newmann et al believe that this assumption is unwarranted because the selection of content is a matter of continuing revision and dispute, and “whatever the particular content of the curriculum, it should be addressed in ways that stress the qualities essential to authentic intellectual achievement” (1996:44). More serious concerns are raised by Maclellan (2001, 2004a, 2004b) who has undertaken extensive research into authentic assessment practices in higher education. Using in-depth interviews with 12 academics, Maclellan found that interviewees’ conceptualization of authenticity was incomplete and ‘their own understandings of the construct were not comprehensive’ (2004a:31). In a subsequent study Maclellan (2004b) analysed 300 student-teachers’ essays and concluded that students do not routinely engage in disciplined inquiry (a criterion for authentic achievement).

She suggests this is “because knowledge is seen to be non-contestable by the students, they see no need to analyze, critique or evaluate the content to which they are being exposed” (2004b:79). An earlier study by Maclellan (2001) of the assessment experiences of 80 higher education tutors and 130 teacher education students revealed that although staff maintained that the full range of learning was frequently assessed, the dominant mode was the traditional academic essay. Although academics in the study declared a commitment to the formative purposes of assessment they appeared to engage “in practices that militated against formative assessment being fully realized” (2001:317). Of greater concern to Maclellan was the finding that students do not exploit assessment to improve their learning and fail

to appreciate their central role in the assessment process. Maclellan concluded that: Only when all assessment tasks can be fully authentic and only when staff and students can put students’ learning at the very center of the educational enterprise, can the assessment practices be consistent with the standards model (1991:317). Metacognition is a term used to describe our knowledge about how we perceive, remember, think and act – that is, what we know about what we know (Metcalfe et al, 1994).

Morgan describes the process as “reflecting on one’s own thinking processes while reading, writing and addressing problems, with the aim of sharpening and honing one’s efficiency” (Morgan et al, 2004:166). Metacognition is a precursor to good self-assessment skills and can help students to become self-regulated learners. Krause et al (2003) suggest that students who are self-regulated learners take responsibility for their own learning progress and adapt their learning strategies to meet task demands. Elwood et al (2002) suggest that metacognition can be enhanced through learners actively engaging in constructing their meaning from their learning experiences, actively making sense of new knowledge, and deciding how to integrate it with previously held concepts and information.

Therefore, it is important that teachers provide opportunities within their assessment practice for students to become aware of their own learning strategies and to take more responsibility for them. It is recommended that learning environments that develop metacognition should have the following characteristics: •The teacher is the facilitator of learning Students are encouraged to demonstrate their learning •Students are given opportunities to peer or self-evaluate •Group and pair work is encouraged •Student-teacher dialogue about the student’s learning is fundamental •Support and collaboration are

consistently available (Elwood et al, 2002) Morgan et al (2004) suggest that the development of metacognition is best suited to small group activities where students are given a problem to tackle and are encouraged to articulate their patterns of reasoning, which are discussed using criteria such as precision, relevance, depth, accuracy, and sufficiency: Through a metacognitive process, students become aware of the gaps in their reasoning, and any need to broaden their perspectives in order to sharpen their process. It can be a fascinating and eye-opening experience for students to compare their own processes with others, particularly when there are marked differences (Morgan et al, 2004:167) Assessment of metacognition may take the form of a reflective journal or written piece where students record their developing insights during their discussions with the group or critical friend. ConclusionWith an ever-changing educational system and society, it is imperative that students engage in enriching and challenging activities that prepare them to be successful individuals.

The means by which students are assessed can greatly enhance the learning process. Rather than simply testing students’ knowledge at the end of a unit, we are now engaging students in the learning process through such activities as journals and portfolios. They are developing higher order thinking skills and gaining practical experience to apply in the world. This shift from assessment of learning to assessing for learning makes students more accountable for their understanding and helps teachers better learn about their students and their abilities,, allowing them to cater to their needs and promote deeper acquisition. Students will ultimately take more from such experiences and have confidence in knowing they can show their understanding in a

form they feel they feel is best suited to match their abilities. They will feel great reward displaying their knowledge and hopefully develop a deeper appreciation for the process of learning,

References

1. Angelo, T.1999) Doing assessment as if learning matters most. AAHE Bulletin, May 1999. Barr, R. and Tagg, J. (1995) From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education.
2. Change, 27 (6), 12-25. Cross, K. (1998) Why learning communities? Why now? About Campus, 1998, 3 (3), 4-11. Black, P.
3. and William, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, policy and practice, 5 (1),. Elwood, J. and Klenowski, V.
4. (2002) Creating communities of shared practice: The challenges of assessment use in learning and teaching. Assessment and Education in Higher Education, 27, (3), 243-256.Frank, M. and Barzilai, A. (2004) Integrating alternative assessment in a project-based learning course for pre-service science and technology teachers. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29 (1),
5. Goos, M. and Moni. K. (2001) Modelling professional practice: A collaborative approach to developing criteria and standards-based assessment in pre-service teacher education courses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, (1), Herrington, J.
6. and Herrington, A. (1998) Authentic assessment and multimedia: How university students respond to a model of authentic assessment.Higher Education Research and Development, 17 (3), 305-322. James, R.
7. , McInnis, C. and Devlin, M. (2002) Assessing Learning in Australian Universities. University of Melbourne: Melbourne. Krause, K. , Bochner, S.
8. and Duchesne, S. (2003) Educational psychology for learning and teaching. Nelson: Melbourne. Maclellan, E. (2001) Assessment for learning: The differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26 (4), 307-318.
9. Maclellan, E. (2004a) Authenticity in assessment tasks:
   

A heuristic exploration of academics’ perceptions. Higher Education Research and Development, 23 (1), 20-33. Maclellan, E. 2004b) Evidence of authentic achievement: The extent of disciplined enquiry in student teachers’ essay scripts. Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology,