Personal Assessment
Philosophy
Minh David Pho
Stevenson University
Personal Assessment
Philosophy
Assessment is a
key topic in education because it is how we determine if students are meeting
curriculum standards or how they are performing academically. There are
different options when it comes to assessments that include formative vs.
summative and traditional vs. authentic. The focus of this paper will be on the
value of authentic assessment for both formative and summative assessments.
To start with, defining what
is meant by formative, summative, and authentic assessment is necessary because
each person defines authentic assessment differently and constantly changing
(Yu & Frempong, 2012). Formative assessment is a method of evaluating
student comprehension while the activity is taking place. Teachers use this
assessment method to identify problem areas for students and make adjustments
as the students are learning (Formative Assessment, 2014). Whereas summative
assessment is an evaluation that takes place after all the learning has taken
place in a certain period of time. This type of assessment evaluates students
based on their knowledge of the material and then scored. Summative
assessments, typically standardized tests, are assessments “of learning” while
formative assessments are “for learning”, but the differences can still be
unclear at times due to varying opinions on the subject (Summative Assessment,
2013).
While formative and summative
assessments are what the student is being evaluated on, authentic assessment,
sometimes used interchangeably with performance assessment, is about how the
student is assessed. Authentic assessment is when a student performs a task and
they are evaluated based upon a set of standards. These standards are sometimes
in the form of a rubric while other times the teacher merely evaluates students
on their ability to demonstrate their abilities in terms of the standards.
These tasks are given in the context of real world problems in order to see if
students are able to think creatively to tackle challenges they may experience
after they graduate (Mueller, 2014). Authentic assessment provides that bridge
between “a learner’s social context to the community of practice in the field”
(Eddy & Lawrence, 2013).
Authentic
assessment can be helpful in both formative and summative assessments due to
the real world context. I think that it will be incredibly beneficial for both
students and teachers. In general, the characteristics and goals of authentic
assessment are beneficial for students and can help achieve the standards that
are being used in the classroom. Four main characteristics of authentic
assessment show these benefits and they are the ongoing process of assessment,
the root in performance tasks, the possibility of evaluations by any person,
and the abundance of opportunities for diverse assignments (Eddy &
Lawrence, 2013).
Authentic assessment is never
ending and so teachers are constantly evaluating students based on their
performance in class. This benefits the student because it means the classroom
is always adapting and never stagnant. The teacher is able to modify lessons
and unit plans in order to best fit the level of the students. In addition,
this evaluation can be used by students as a source of motivation and
achievement (Nolan, 2011). Authentic assessment feedback and evaluation are
invaluable to both teachers and students. Effective assessment is able to do
both so that authentic learning can take place in the classroom.
Second, the basis behind authentic assessment
is the emphasis on performance tasks or assignments given a real world context.
This benefits the student by achieving educational standards so it is two birds
with one stone. The Common Core standards for English language arts/literacy
and Mathematics are meant to make sure that students graduate with the
knowledge and skills necessary for anything post graduation. By putting real
world context for assessments, students are able to practice their life skills
that are reflected in the Common Core standards.
Third, the use of rubrics to
evaluate students for authentic assessment means that anyone can look at a
student’s performance and be able to see exactly how the student is doing.
Future employers or teachers can look at previous assignments and the relevant
rubrics to see what the student’s strengths and weaknesses are.
Lastly, because authentic
assessments are performance based, it allows great freedom for the teacher and
students to choose what type of assignment to give. The teacher just needs to
make sure that whatever type of assignment they choose that it invokes “higher
level thinking and problem-solving, and open-ended task demands that truly
challenge gifted learners” (VanTassel-Baska, 2014).
In addition, the use of
ePortfolios as a means of authentic assessment is a good example of the
benefits of this type of assessment. This method “invites self-assessment for
students via their reflections, curriculum assessment for faculty from student
reflections, and programmatic assessment for institutions when ePortfolios are
examined holistically” (Hubert & Lewis, 2014). ePortfolios essentially
provide feedback from students throughout the year for teachers to act upon as
well as evaluation of the entire program as a whole across the board of all
classes.
Looking first at the benefits
of student feedback, with ePortfolios students not only provide examples of
their work to include, but they also provide reflections along the lines of
what did they do correctly, what was their thinking and how it has changed so
far in the class, and making connections to other classes. Doing this at
multiple points throughout the year, quarter, or unit allows the teacher to see
progression of the student and how the students are doing with certain topics.
The teacher can look at the reflections to see what are common misconceptions
students have or how they are thinking when tackling problems they encounter in
class. This benefits student learning because it allows the teacher to better
tailor lessons for the class based upon their performance and reflections.
On the student side of the
ePortfolio, it allows students to see for themselves how they have progressed
and improved over time. Often when there are only little changes and improvements
on a day-to-day basis, you do not see the overall change from the beginning.
These ePortfolios can let students see where they were on the very first day
and then compare to where they are at now to see their progression, which can
help motivate them to keep up the hard work because they see the tangible
results of their efforts (Snowman & McCown, 2012).
One factor that I only just
recently considered to be an important aspect of assessment is time. Time is a
limited resource for both the teacher and the students and I have not
encountered much research into the effect this has on student learning.
However, I have developed my own thoughts on the subject. Time decides not only
what type of assessment you can give, but also how well the student can demonstrate
their understanding.
We use assessments, as
mentioned before, in order to evaluate a student’s understanding so the
question becomes how much time do we have to prepare students and how much time
do we allow them to demonstrate their abilities and knowledge. If time is
limited in the classroom then it limits the sort of assessment I can employ.
For example, if I have lots of time to work with in the classroom with students
I can do more involved assessments such as performance assessments or portfolio
assessments whereas if I have only a short amount of time with students
relatively then I’m limited to more convenient assessments that fall under the
traditional and summative assessments. These can be multiple-choice tests that
merely allow the student to show that they know the content.
The other factor with time is
how much we allow for students to show us that they understand the concepts. I
think that what is more important is that students are allowed time to show
that they understand the material rather than them being able to do it in a set
amount of time. However, this does not mean allowing students as much time as
needed to complete an assessment, but focusing more on whether or not the
students are successfully demonstrating the necessary abilities. I would rather
have students come in during lunch or afterschool in order to finish a test
than either not finish or rush and get questions wrong that they would have
otherwise gotten right if they weren’t on a time crunch. Some may worry that by
allowing students to come another time to finish an assessment that they may
cheat, but we should trust students to do what they are meant to and the right
thing. Given the chance, students will want to prove to the teacher and,
hopefully, themselves that they can do the work. Fostering this can help
improve student motivation and learning inside the classroom.
Going hand in hand with
assessments are the grades students are given based upon their performance. The
type of assessment the teacher chooses directly affects the grades of students.
As Brookhart (2011) states, grades are about a certain meaning being presented
to a core audience. In the usual case the audience can be parents, students, or
administrators. Just as how teachers have to decide on an assessment that
measures what it sets out to measure, grades have to reflect what the
assessment is trying to measure.
Determining this is not just
placed under the responsibility of the teacher, however. Something as important
as assessments and grading is a collaborative effort between teachers, parents,
students, and administrators (Hollenweger, 2011). When you collaborate on assessments, you are able to create more
effective, valid, and reliable assessments for all student types that can even
cross various disciplines and learning styles.
References
Brookhart, S. (2011). Starting the Conversation
About Grading. Educational Leadership,
69(3), 10-14.
Eddy, P. p., &
Lawrence, A. a. (2013). Wikis as Platforms for Authentic Assessment. Innovative
Higher Education, 38(4), 253-265. doi:10.1007/s10755-012-9239-7
Formative Assessment.
(2014, April 29). In Glossary of Education Reform online. Retrieved from
http://edglossary.org/formative-assessment/
Hollenweger, J. (2011). Teachers’
Ability to Assess Students for Teaching and Supporting Learning. Prospects: Quarterly Review Of Comparative
Education, 41(3), 445-457.
Hubert D. A., & Lewis,
K. J. (2014). A Framework for General Education Assessment: Assessing
Information Literacy and Quantitative Literacy with ePortfolios. International
Journal Of Eportfolio, 4(1), 61-71.
Mueller, J. (2014). What
is Authentic Assessment?. Retrieved from http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/whatisit.htm
Nolan, S. B. (2011). The
Role of Educational Systems in the Link between Formative Assessment and
Motivation. Theory Into Practice,
50(4), 319-326.
Snowman, J.
& McCown, J. (2012). Psychology
applied to teaching, 13th Ed. New York: Cengage Learning.
Summative Assessment.
(2013, August 29). In Glossary of Education Reform online. Retrieved
from http://edglossary.org/summative-assessment/
VanTassel-Baska, J. j.
(2014). Performance-Based Assessment. Gifted Child Today, 37(1),
41-47. doi:10.1177/1076217513509618
Yu, K., & Frempong, G.
(2012). Standardise and individualise – an unsolvable tension in assessment?. Education
As Change, 16(1), 143-157. doi:10.1080/16823206.2012.692210
No comments:
Post a Comment