Heather Schilling
EDTEC 685
Reading Response #2
June 29, 2006
Assessment Technologies
Assessment has always been an important part of teaching. Viewers of the classic television show “Little House in the Prairie” remember scenes of Laura taking tests on slates or participating in spelling bees. Assessment provides teachers with important in formation about their students, information they use to influence how and what they teach.
With assessment as an important element of teaching, educators have long looked for better ways to create assessments and to examine the data collected through the assessments. As a result they have turned to online rubric makers like Rubistar, and after they experienced the joy of spreadsheets, they turned to networked grade books such as PowerSchool which allow teachers to quickly tell the office who is absent and to keep an updated grade book which students and parents can access at any time.
In the past two decades, educational focus has shifted dramatically to the formal, standardized assessment of students’ knowledge such as the annual week of administering the ISTEP as a means for measuring how well Indiana students have mastered the state standards. Unfortunately, though, educators, administrators, and politicians have forgotten the importance of daily and weekly classroom assessments that provide teachers with even more specific information about the students sitting in their classrooms. As the Executive Summary indicates in Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment (2001), schools need “classroom and large-scale assessments that help all students learn” (p. 1).
Decision-makers must remember that a variety of assessments provide a much richer picture of a student’s abilities as well as the success of a program. When educators use only one assessment, such as a standardized test, to gather information for different purposes, they are not getting the best picture.
The Executive Summary also reminds educators “not all children learn in the same way and follow the same paths to competence” (p. 4). They continue by indicating “assessments, especially those conducted in the context of classroom instruction, should focus on making students’ thinking visible to both their teachers and themselves so that instructional strategies can be selected to support an appropriate course for future learning” (p. 4). Obviously, society has turned to standardized tests as a way of measuring student achievement, but in light of the cognition of learning, educators must turn their attention to the thought processes of students who all learn at different rates and in different ways.
Interestingly, the Executive Summary also indicates that frequent analysis of the tool must occur, and those designing the assessment model must keep in mind the cognitive development of students as well. As I think about the Executive Summary, and this statement in particular, I wonder how the designers of the ISTEP test examine their own assessment tool. Too often, we simply assume the designers of the assessment model do this, and yet, they don’t.
Rick Stiggins’ article “New Assessment Beliefs for a New School Mission” really hits home with me, because he examines the need for creating, implementing, and using the data from other forms of assessment. Assessments other than a standardized test given once a year provide just as much, if not more specific, feedback. Interestingly, though, the short synopsis before the beginning of his article indicates that it is a “new vision of assessment;” however, on closer examination of what Stiggins is proposing is really what good old fashioned testing and measurement is all about: understanding how students learn and understanding how the assessment reflects this cognitive process. For years we have talked about developmentally appropriate practices, and even more importantly, how to measure students in ways that are appropriate to their development.
Stiggins doesn’t say educators should walk away from standardized tests, nor does he support a step away from accountability. He does, however, propose that we find more diverse and better ways to measure student success. My favorite quote of Stiggins’ is “high-stakes tests without supportive classroom assessment environments harm struggling students” (p. 3). What a powerful statement that cannot go ignored. After dispelling several myths in assessment, Stiggins concludes with a statement of balance. Schools must balance standardized testing “of learning” with “classroom assessment for learning” (p. 5). This last element of assessment reminds me of the strategies we teach elementary children as they develop their reading skills. Creating independent readers comes as students learn how to assess themselves and their comprehension while they are reading. Explicitly we talk about what good readers do, and we provide them with physical checklists so they can assess themselves while they read. This is only one type of assessment occurring in classrooms. It cannot be turned into raw data for governmental reports, but it is part of the support structure of a good elementary classroom.
Finally, Edward Roeber’s paper “Instructional and Assessment Systems of Successful Schools” brilliantly works around the premise that successful schools do exist, and they exist because of the vision of the administration and the teachers. He indicates that assessment is important in a successful school, but he uses the clever analogy of a bathroom scale…. “Assessment by itself is does not improve student learning any more than stepping on a bathroom scale daily causes one to lose weight” (p. 2). Instead, assessment must be linked to instruction. As he outlines the elements of a successful school, I simply nodded my head. He has not stumbled upon something new; instead, he is reminding us of important elements in education.
I appreciate about Roeber’s encompassing discussion of assessment and how to use it effectively. Successful schools understand how to use assessment to influence instruction, and they share the information gained from the assessment with not only parents, but also with students. It makes perfect sense that students would be involved in this process, but unfortunately, like my own children’s schools, they are left out of the information loop.
I find it extremely ironic that as a community of educators we cannot talk about assessment without negative feelings or comments, and yet, assessment is at the very core of what we do. How can we gauge student learning and progress in order to teach better if we do not assess how they are doing? All three sources for this week’s reading are important elements of the discussion. In the end, three things surfaced for me that underscore where we are with assessment: collaboration, variety, and influence on instruction.
First of all, everyone involved in education must collaborate. Not only should grade level teachers collaborate as Roeber suggests, but administrators must collaborate with teachers. I suggest we take that a step further and fully collaborate with students and parents. Stiggins indicates that the cognitive steps in learning are crucial to remember in assessment; why not involve the very people about whom we are discussing and assessing? We should really listen to the ultimate stake holders: the children.
Secondly, a variety of assessments must be used. Standardized tests make reporting student achievement must easier, because the tests are given at once and everyone is taking the same test. Schools can simply (said tongue-in-cheek, as it is not a simple process to create the annual reports) tabulate what percentage of third graders passed the ISTEP and compare it with the percentage of third graders who had passed the previous year. Unfortunately, this type of data collection removes the human element of teaching. We are not producing cars or some other product that come in as the same raw material and leave as the same finished product. The human element makes that impossible, and yet, we seem to have forgotten that element when we try to apply the same assessment to every single child.
Finally, we must make a concerted effort to use the assessment (in whatever form) to influence our instruction. Assessment, whether formal or informal, does in fact provide crucial information that should have an impact on how we teach. It can be as subtle as observing a child struggling with a mathematical concept in 8th grade algebra, or it can be a well-designed reading comprehension test that applies comprehension strategies explicitly modeled and practiced. Or it can be the examination of specific subtests on a standardized test to see if a trend exists. For example, if a large number of fifth graders are unable to make inferences, then perhaps the fifth grade teachers must examine their practices in how the are teaching how to make inferences while reading.
Assessment is an integral part of teaching. To not assess is to not teach. However, like teaching, assessment must be carefully planned and constructed.