It's such a divisive topic. While I understand the historical reasons for why it is divisive, I usually am nonetheless surprised by the differences in how we define assessment in the first place. That's not even talking about how it's practiced or implemented!
A few people from Ontario was engaging in related conversations back in October. They planned on meeting at some sort of conference which I was unable to attend because it occurred during OAME leadership conference.
Just commented on - Assessment - The Challanege - http://t.co/trTf8dvvMj via @BeuckelareNic - @lkdsb @DaveDoey @ICprin @TracyVDB #lkdsb
— Brian Aspinall (@mraspinall) November 27, 2014
and figured I will spend a few moments to share some thoughts on that post...
Please don't take my opinion as any sort of "expert" opinion. It is merely a combination of the literature that I've been swimming in, and my own practices as a teacher. Afterall, I don't believe that there should be "one way" of thinking about, or doing things anyway. These are just going to be my 2 cents as an immediate reaction without supporting every statement with a citation.
Okay so I will copy and paste and then write some of my comments in black underneath:
There are a few things I know for sure. That's better than me! I am torn on many things on the front what is true and for sure - as per recent conversation with Brian and Bryan.
Assessment is necessary for growth. Without it how do we know where to go next, how to improve and what we need to work on? I definitely agree with this. But I think that is because our definition of assessment is likely pretty similar - where feedback is a major and integral part of any assessment, and therefore necessary for the development of student learning.
Assessment is subjective. Assessment using the same guidelines can still vary between teachers based on experience and personal opinions. I agree with this, and I think most people would agree with this as well. The problem that people have is usually not agree that it is subjective, but they take issue with the fact that it is subjective. There is good evidence to show that even the best designed - most "standardized" assessments are still influenced by subjectivity. But I think that's a good thing. People often have an unhealthy fascination with "being objective" because they think it carries more fairness.
Assessment influences people in different ways. Some people are motivated to do better based on harsh feedback or assessment, others need positive feedback and gentle nudges to improve their motivation to improve. I am unsure if I 100% agree with this one. I think it depends on the quality of feedback. And by quality I would include: the context in which the student receives the feedback, the task on which the student receives the feedback, the way the feedback is structured and delivered...etc etc etc... I am unsure if we can claim that student A always performs better if they get a harsh feedback.
Assessment needs to take many forms. Students need to be able to demonstrate their learning in multiple ways. They need to showcase creativity, inquiry and good old test taking skills. Hmm... I am unsure about this one as well. I agree that variety is extremely important, but I am unsure about the items which they are showcasing. What would be a "good old test taking skill" and what would it be good for (besides taking the good old tests)?
However, there are many more things I don’t know. A few of my questions include:
- What is more important, process or product? Are we talking about learning? or are we talking about assessment? If we refer to learning, then I think the process of learning is more important. The product is more like the icing on top. But also I don't believe that we should separate the two like this. One comes with the other! On the other hand if we are talking about assessment, then I also think the process is more important. If we define the process of assessment with a cycle of elicitation, interpretation, and action, then the entire process is important. I am unsure if there is even a tangible "product" from every assessment cycle. For example, if we encounter a group discussing a mathematical concept, then we interpret what they are saying, and we act by providing some descriptive feedback that moves their learning forward -- what is the product? Is it the feedback? Is it the interaction with the students? Is it the learning that perhaps the students are able to better achieve? I am unsure if this distinction is helpful here!
- Why the focus on marks? This one is an annoying topic, but it seems to be a trend through the next few questions. Why the focus? I think it's a combination of history, current societal perceptions, and lack of conceptual understanding of what we are doing.
- What exactly does 87% mean? Nothing. Ok, well not completely nothing. Depends on what we are talking about, it might be a bit more than nothing.
- How does 75% tell me anything about a student? We have long moved from norm-referenced (where we rank students within the class) to criterion and construct-referenced models (where we make judgements concerning student achievement according to expectations). Ideally, I would like any sort of "grade" to disappear - and in its place, feedback that continuously promotes growth and learning. Even if under a "grading system," I would like it to embody and consider prior knowledge + next steps. But I digress. I think our current model of "75%" would represent a students' achievement according to the curriculum expectation from a specific instance in time, while considering a variety of contexts. It would also be a combination of a variety of different assessments which lead to the enumeration.
- Why do we compare students to each other using numerical values? Because we suck. Just kidding. I don't know. Same historical, societal...etc reasons from above, I suppose.
- Why do these values matter in real life? The idea that these values can sometimes be high-stakes is quite devastating. I am unsure about this one as well. I don't want it to matter, but it does. Why does it matter? I suppose our political and societal structure is largely influenced by comparisons and motivated (at least partially) by competition.
- How do we eliminate “life problems” from assessment? I don't know what you mean here...? I can imagine a variety of things you could be talking about, but each of those would take a bit of time, so I think I will skip it for now and get back to work!
Hoping to continue the conversations :)
Wiliam, D. (2013). Assessment: The bridge between teaching and
learning. Voices from the middle, 21(2),
15-20
Wow! I'm happy to see that I'm not the only one that appears to over think the topic of assessment! It seems to be the topic that causes me the most amount of thought and the most intense arguments, sometimes downright anger at my own resistance as a parent to see the argument I have as a teacher. If I can't convince myself "grades" don't matter, how am I supposed to help others change their views?
ReplyDeleteNow..on the topic of test taking skills...my only reason I think students need to do them is because unfortunately (as you also stated above) evaluation and assessment in post secondary, entering post secondary and in some parts of society still exist. If we don't take the time to help students gain the skills, such as taking tests under pressure, answering scripted and rigid test questions they won't be prepared for the place we call the real world. I really don't agree they necessarily tell us anything about the student in particular except that they can handle sitting for long periods of time, focusing on the task regardless of the environment around them, and if they have the ability to script answers the person evaluating the test wants to see.
It's probably best that you decided to skip one of the hardest questions..."life problems" can take many forms. Lack of food, support at home, mental health, friends, bullies, learning disabilities, physical health, socioeconomic status...i think you may get my point. When assessments occur at set times on set topics, students can be dealing with a small heap of personal issues that distract from their demonstration of learning. To top it off, imagine as a student having a bad day, doing poorly on an assignment only then to be assessed by a teacher who is also human. Teachers have baggage, busy lives, too many commitments, mental and physical health issues, family problems, financial problems...as you can imagine that list also is a mile long! I'm not sure how as "humans" we have the ability to disregard any of these issues and to perform at our best upon demand. This is a skill that very few can master.
I can't tell you how good it made me feel to see you answer the one question with "Because we suck". To be honest, many of my assessment arguments have ended with this exact statement! I''m not sure we will ever have all the answers, but I'm happy too see that others care enough to realize we have a long way to go. I look forward to continued discussion and debate!
" If I can't convince myself "grades" don't matter, how am I supposed to help others change their views?"
DeleteThe difficulty in dealing with the concept of grades is because it has had so much impact on our society as it developed over the past century - for good and bad. Perhaps it's enough to get people to realize that it's something worth thinking about - and not stress over coming up with a systemic solution.
On the topic of test taking, I draw a similar argument for focusing on what we can and should do, instead of attempting the manage what we cannot control. We may still have tests, but the tests themselves can be different. If our goal is to develop "test taking skills" (which, of course, is a skill whose use is debatable) then there are many things we can help the students with beyond just giving them tests. Identifying strategies, reusing the same tests afterwards and having them develop formatively...etc etc etc.
With respect to life problems, I think I know what you mean now.
"How do we eliminate “life problems” from assessment?"
Now that I know what you mean, here are some thoughts: we don't, we can't, and we shouldn't. There is no reason that assessments should be undertaken without a consideration of the contexts. "life problems" can be part of that context (along with prior knowledge, teacher knowledge, group dynamics...etc). If a kid is sick and missed an assignment - it does not and should not influence our judgement on their understanding of a concept. It merely means we didn't get that chance to see what they understand. If a kid has mental and physical issues, family problems...etc. then first and foremost they should be getting support from multiple sources. With respect to what we do as teachers - there is no reason that we should "disregard" these issues. We should understand them, work with them, and help the students to work on what they would like to prioritize.
I don't know if this quick response made any sense, but I hope to continue the conversation :)
Mathematics isn't a natural ability - just as nothing is
ReplyDeleteYou're wrong and you know it.
Put a random male and a random female in an arm wrestle, and 99 times out of 100 the man will win. Wimpy guys will beat fit females. Because genetics is very, very important. You can fight biology, but you can't beat it.
The London Taxi test actually doesn't show what you think it shows. People study very long hours, sit multiple times, and yet fail. Because some people do not have the required memory skills.
We need to say to our students that not everyone is equally good at Maths, but that doesn't mean we can't all do it. Most people are never going to be racing drivers, born without the right reaction speeds etc, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't learn to drive. Some basic skills are important to all.
But if you tell people who aren't good at Maths, despite trying, that everyone can do it, they will think you a deluded fool. Much better to admit that some people find it easy, some find it hard, but that everyone can at least do the basics.
Thanks for your comments, I look forward to more discussion. First, I didn't actually find the initial quote from this blog post. After a while of attempting to locate this quote, I finally found it in another post recapping the leadership conference:
Deletehttp://intersectpai.blogspot.ca/2014/11/oame-leadership-pt2-promoting.html
While I am able to defend the point of view from my own lenses, those were ultimately not my words. It was an attempt to synthesize points made during the conference. I agree that genetics have a big influence on people, as well as what we define as "ability." Lacking the time right now to find appropriate references to support an argument, I will instead pose some questions that will hopefully push for some more discussion:
1) What is maths to you? Are we referring to mathematics as construed in school? This is probably the most important question that I can pose.
2) What did you see the London Taxi example as showing? I am unsure that we are talking about the same thing here. Through my recap, I did not mention it as a "test", and merely that there is structural change in the brain.
3) What would be the "basics" of maths? Arithmetic?
4) You mentioned something about reaction speed, and so I wonder: For you, does being "good at maths" involve some sort of measure of speed?