1. Administers assessments OF learning (i.e. summative assessments)
2. Almost no schools administer assessments FOR learning
Assessments FOR learning include, but aren't limited to, formative assessments. Stiggins states that assessments designed FOR learning must include the students as part of the process, and not just passively act as the receiver of such assessments. To quote: "In short, the effect of assessment for learning, as it
plays out in the classroom, is that students keep learning and remain confident that they can continue to learn at productive levels if they keep trying to learn. In other words, students don’t give up in frustration or hopelessness."
The one claim that Stiggins makes that seems outlandish is when he states that: "Hypothetically, if assessment for learning, as described above, became standard practice only in classrooms of low - achieving, low-socioeconomic-status students, the achievement gaps that trouble us so deeply today would be erased."
That is an incredible assumption to make!
Stiggins concludes by recommending several courses of action in order to improve the state of assessment in U.S. schools, one of which being that all teachers should be given comprehensive training in assessment both OF and FOR learning in order to become certified. Do you feel that is appropriate?
So my questions for all of you:
Do you think you have been given enough training in assessments (of all kinds) in your teaching preparation courses?
If the answer is 'No', what kind of training would you like?
Do you think Stiggins is correct in his idea of better assessments would close the achievement gap among the poor?
Let me know what you think!
Great post, (love the visuals)
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question about given enough training in assessments in my teaching preparation course, I would say… I am not sure. I think assessments (making/giving/grading) are really hard to do. Though, I have received some guidelines and it has been brought up several different times, it is also one of those things that you cannot just hear about and understand, but need to put into practice, play around with and experiment with until you find an understanding. I also think, that there is a preference among different teachers as to the type of assessments they like to do and how they like to use them. For some is just a grade others like to use them to assess themselves and how well they taught something. As for the types of assessments we have: midterms and finals work great, multiple choice, true or false, short responses, essays, take homes, etc. All of which are there for your choosing. There is also differentiation of assessments base on student interest, skills, and preferences. Giving options on assessment as an idea to improve motivation and so forth. (VERY OVERWHELMING!)
Yet, I would like to add that in my program there has been little talk about the affects of assessments on students. How do you “help” a student that has been through almost 10 years of schooling, has had different experiences with assessments and has given up, categorize him/herself into the loser box. How do you turn 10 years of failure around and help them gain confidence. If assessment can be such a great tool, how do you teach student to use it as a tool when thus far is has been presented to them as an unconnected exchange of work= some grade. Those would be the things I would like to learn more about.
Nice post Monte. I mostly agree with your statement on how Stiggin's assumption that the "achievement gaps....would be erased" is quite out there. However, I do agree with his overall sentiment in that assessment for learning is a good direction to go in order to work on bridging the gap. I absolutely believe it makes sense to be assessing along the way, including creating assessments with students as opposed to just concluding some unit/class/semester with some grandiose summative assessment.
ReplyDeleteAs far as teacher training, I feel as though more assessment training would be helpful in order to better serve my students. Perhaps including one class as part of a teaching prep program that is specifically dedicated to assessment would be helpful. We have talked often about assessment in some of our classes here and there, however I feel it has been sort of a "throw-it-all-at-me" kind of manner, where I am looking at all of these rubrics and trying to make sense of how/what to do to use them successfully in the classroom.
Also, loved your visuals too.
Monte,
ReplyDeleteI loved this post! To answer some of your questions... I feel as though I have a pretty good idea of assessment (the difference between formative vs. summative, when/ what to do with those), however I like what Natali said: what are the effects of these on our students? I also feel like Jacki as if a lot of this information has been thrown at us. Like I said I do have an idea, however a more in meaningful, in-depth look at both types of assessments would really benefit us all. We really should be looking at these types of assessments and be able to really justify why we would use one over the other, while also showing and using the results in a meaningful and productive way.
I think the closing the achievement gap is a bold statement, however I think it is just relating back to not leaving students behind with all of the assessments OF learning. Therefore if we look at it in this aspect, it would be much more effective in closing the achievement gap if we were only focused on assessing student growth.
I agree with Maggie that an in depth look at both types of assessments and their effects on students would be very beneficial in our teaching programs. I do feel like I have received some good pointers on assessment but could always use more instruction on this. I think that assessment FOR learning would truly benefit students because they become a part of the assessment process which will let them know where they need more help, as well as let the teacher know. Assessments is something that we should definitely be taught more about and in the long run that will only help us be better teachers and allow us to better serve our students and their different learning needs.
ReplyDeleteI really like the visuals Monte!
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, have we been given enough training in assessments, my answer would probably lean more towards yes. Although we are all still new at making assessments, I think the courses we've taken thus far have given us as future teachers a great backbone to the assessment process. For instance, we learn a lot about differentiation, catering and modifying to meet student needs. Our courses have also stressed the importance of creating assessments based on our own research of the students, making it more student centered and focusing on what will make them better learners. We learn to create better assessments through their interests and are able to give them the opportunities and agency to showcase their learning.
Monte, love the visuals! My criticism of this article stems from it seeming like an infomercial. I don't think anyone would argue that they do not want firm, awesome looking abs. We all do. The same holds for teachers in assessments FOR learning. I'm sure all teachers can agree that they would love assessments FOR learning! But what does that look like specifically. To me, this whole issue of assessment lies in the conundrum of how is it measured? Standardized tests are simple and no one really has to look too hard at the outcomes because you get a score and you either passed or failed. Same with tests of multiple choice and fill in the blank. These are all easily assessed. We as teachers see the flaw in this system. We're not finding out if students are really learning anything. So, like the infomercial, yes...sign me up! Please give me as much training in assessment FOR learning as I can take, but until we start getting concrete examples of what that looks like, and how we assess it, in my opinion, we're back to square one. That doesn't mean we stop striving for these assessments, but just like we know that if we want great abs, we need to work for them and be shown exactly how to go about getting them. While Stiggins intentions are spot on, he's asking the political powers that be to fund money into something without specifics. This makes his claim about "the achievement gaps that trouble us so deeply today would be erased," seem like a fantasy. So, in answer to your question of whether these assessments would close the achievement gap among the poor, I want to say yes, but have no proof or way of knowing.
ReplyDeleteI have to give you huge props for the photoshop images (especially the Most Interesting Man in the World". Aren't we now being taught to CONSTANTLY assess ""for learning" through the ubiquitous use of "formative assessment"? Perhaps the issue is do these and how do these tie into the summative assessments. We can certainly make the tie in within our own classroom, but this becomes very problematic on broad standardized tests, which are bell curve distribution based. And that's really the "catch".., isn't it? After all, we can dovetail and formative and summative inside of our own course and classroom, but are helpless outside for the most part. (only thing I can think of are modeling some exercises and assessments on an aspect you know appears on the standardized test. Improving teacher assessment skills through "teacher development" training, etc seems useful and even appropriate to me.(if such seminars, etc proved effective and useful). Anyways - this is my 3rd answer, I shouldn't have even commented, but the Most Interesting Man in the World drew my attention! :)
ReplyDeleteMonte,
ReplyDeleteThe force of the memes is strong with you...kudos.
To answer your questions, namely, "Do you think you have been given enough training in assessments (of all kinds) in your teaching preparation courses?" I honestly feel that I have received probably as much training as any teacher candidate needs on the topic of assessment. I think that what it'll take to get good at planning for and implementing assessments is actual experience, like Natali said above. While the Stiggins article is somewhat infomercial-y (great analogy Jason) and doesn't provide nearly enough concrete examples, I found that Article 5 did give quite a few good examples of formative assessment (of course, they must be tailored to the older crowd as most of them were referencing 2nd graders). What will of course be difficult will be differentiating for the various types of learners we have, and making sure each student learns the same content, even if they take different paths to get there. But I am confident that by truly getting to know our learners, and following Stiggins' pointers like "continuously adjust instruction" and "inform students about learning goals in terms they understand."
Also, while I do find a lot of the critiques legit that other people have made of Stiggins...I think what's important to note is that he has emphasized how student anxiety can actually hamper learning, and I really appreciate that. I also like that he points out how harmful the reward/punishment pattern can be for the school environment and the learning process in general. Of course, no one likes high-stakes tests...not teachers, not students, and not administrators. And because they have become a "national obsession" as Stiggins states, we end up leaving children behind who were behind in the first place, children who have been set up to not do well on these tests, be punished, and lose confidence in themselves, thus perpetuating the cycle.
Have I received enough training in assessment? To answer your question I'm not really sure. I understand the concept and the idea behind it but putting it to practice might be a different story. But I believe I will be able to asses my students to the best of my ability when I become a teacher.
ReplyDeleteMontgomery,
ReplyDeleteDo I feel as though I have received what I would consider adequate training in how to design and implement assessments that promise to facilitate, rather than simply measure, learning or understanding? Nope. But, as is the case with so many of the anxieties that this program has engendered in me, I suspect that my fear of assessments will dissipate once I am out in a real school, learning from experienced teachers.
Stiggins' claim that the achievement gap that exists between economically privileged and disadvantaged students can be closed with better assessments is, well, ludicrous. To believe this is to ignore the complex web of factors that too often preclude disadvantaged students from being successful in the classroom. However, we needn't dismiss out of hand the idea that quality assessments tailored to the particular needs of our students are likely to yield beneficial results.
Hi Monte,
ReplyDeleteIn responce to your question on the level of training for effectively utilizing assessments in my education/methods classes, I can for sure say that no, I don't personally know enough to be comfortable. Should this be something which future teacher candidates should be taught? In my opinion abosolutely. However, this cannot be a class in which the theory is only taught but it must also have observations and participation in creating and assessing as well.
As for Stiggins' claim that the achievement gap can be closed by simply changing and utilizing better assessments, I'll agree with the post above in which it mentions that one must not forget that there are a lot of different aspects which impact the performance of students coming from a disadvantaged background. However, will better assessments prove to be beneficial, I believe so but not entirely by themselves.
I think in my courses I have been taught how not to assess students. I do not think I have been given sufficient practice with assessing students. Assessments should not only address the material covered in class, but should demonstrate that students are able to apply that material to new situations.
ReplyDeleteMonte:
ReplyDeleteRegarding your question addressing the possibility of using assessment for learning as a means to close the achievement gap between wealthy students and poor students, I want respond with a question of my own: if this logic follows, if the low achievers (which Stiggins disastrously conflates with low income students) are ones that stand to benefit from this type of assessment, does this then mean that assessment for learning was already in place in the wealthier schools and thus all that needs to be changed in the "poor schools" are actually the "pedagogically poor" instructors? In other words, are more effective teachers the reason why students in poverty are doing poorly or is poverty itself to blame for its effects on their low performance? If Stiggins logic holds, it would seem that all we need to do is put teachers who use assessment for learning in classrooms with poor kinds and presto! we have a group of poor-high achievers. Is this consistent with his thought?