Minutes with Charlie Vol 2 No 5
By Charlie | September 21, 2008
Classroom assessment offers teachers a tool which if used correctly makes the student a great benefactor and if used incorrectly makes the student a victim. In the last Minutes we looked at four ways we use classroom assessment and make students the benefactor of assessment. In this Minutes we examine how, regrettably, we often use classroom assessments and the student becomes the victim.
Most of the misuse and abuse of classroom assessment that makes the student the victim fall under the category of using it as an instrument of threat. The threat to the student, while destructive in and of itself, unfortunately, often is carried out using the tool of classroom assessment. The threats seem to focus on attempting to alter student behavior, improve student performance, punish poor performance, and complete a personal vendetta.
Quality student involved classroom assessment does improve student behavior through active engagement in learning. But a threat such as “If you misbehave the test Friday will be really hard”, or “If you misbehave for the sub you will have more work than you ever imagined.” are both ineffective for managing behavior and a fundamental misuse of classroom assessment.
Student involved classroom assessment for learning holds an unequaled potential to improve student performance. But when classroom assessment is used in a threat such as “If you do poorly on this test, the retake will really be hard” or “This test will show us if you are really trying” or “I made this test really hard so you guys better be ready”. These statements rarely motivate student to improve or even to try harder. They represent the common mistaken belief that the threat of failure somehow promotes success in students.
Quality implementation of classroom assessment practices has the greatest impact on lower achieving students thus providing a real answer for poor performance. However, a poor use of classroom assessment results in students perceiving assessments of any type as a punishment for their learning struggles. Rather than serving as motivation to success they serve as a punishment for failure.
A quality balanced system of classroom assessment is a system based upon student performance as measured against established standards. When teachers veer from that model and use assessments based upon personal feelings regarding students, all too often the student becomes the victim of a vicious tool over which they have no defense. This is usually not deliberate, but in the absence of standards based assessments, the strong force of teacher emotions often plays a strong hand.
Used correctly, quality classroom assessment for learning will assist a teacher in improving behavior in the classroom, improving student achievement, minimizing poor performance, and measuring student progress against an established standard. In this way, the students become the overwhelming benefactors of the assessment system.
Conversely, when used poorly, a student stands in danger of becoming a victim of abuse by assessment. Learning decreases if not ceases when threats permeate the learning environment. Growing in assessment literacy and competency provides a learning environment where students are free to take risks in learning and excel in achievement.
Personal Reflection: Am I using assessment in my classroom in such a way that the student is a benefactor or a victim? Do my students view classroom assessment as an ally or an enemy in the learning process?
Topics: Assessment FOR Learning, Student Involvement | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie Vol 2 No 4
By Charlie | September 14, 2008
Classroom assessment offers teachers a tool which if used correctly makes the student a great benefactor and if used incorrectly makes the student a victim.
Generally speaking when we have discussed classroom assessment for student learning we focus upon the quality of the assessment instrument.
The development of quality classroom assessments, while essential, is not sufficient to reap the full promise of student involved classroom assessment for learning. We must use those quality assessments in the right way.
There are many elements involved in using classroom assessment in a right way. There are certainly others that are important, but in this Minutes we will only examine four essential ones.
First, if we are to use classroom assessment correctly we must have a purposeful focus of the assessment. We simply as the question of each assessment, formal and informal, “What information do I need to gain from this assessment?” or “Why am I giving this assessment?” If we cannot clearly articulate the purpose of a given assessment, the odds of us using it in a productive manner that supports student learning greatly reduce.
The second element in using assessments correctly links directly to the first: we must use the information gained from the assessment to make quality instruction decisions regarding the next stages of learning for our students. If we do not use assessment derived information to guide instructional decisions in the classroom, we become like the physician who, upon receiving results of medical tests, ignores the results and proceeds with the same treatment he had already planned. Such action would be clear case of malpractice in the field of medicine, yet common practice in the field of education.
If we have a clearly focused purpose, the information gained in the assessment is much more likely to be useful for instructional decision.
The third element in using classroom assessments correctly relates to communication. Our communication of the results of these assessments must be both accurate and meaningful to the recipients. The information we gain in these assessments is not intended solely for our use. We must communicate them clearly to others such as the parents and students.
Finally, the fourth element in using classroom assessments correctly involves the inclusion of the students actively in the assessment process. If we succeed in gaining the desired information about learning from the assessment (focused purpose) and use that information to make decisions about instruction for learning, communicate it well, yet fail to include the learner in that process we close the door to truly maximizing student achievement.
As a reminder in the last Minutes with Charlie we addressed the four most essential avenues of student involvement:
· Involvement with the clearly defined learning target,
· Involvement in the form of self-assessment,
· Involvement in tracking his own progress in the learning process, and
· Involvement in communicating with others about his learning.
In our quest to achieve both assessment literacy and competency we must achieve as common practice both quality and the correct use of those assessments. When we succeed in this, our students will be the greatest benefactors.
Personal Reflection: Do I, have focused purpose for my assessments? Do I avoid educational malpractice in my use of assessment data? Are my students regularly engaged in the assessment process?
Topics: Assessment FOR Learning, Data, Student Involvement | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie Vol 2 No 2
By Charlie | September 1, 2008
Over the next few weeks in the Minutes with Charlie we are going examine some general principles regarding the use of classroom assessments to promote student learning.
This week we will consider that, “We must broaden our classroom assessments in order to avoid the narrowing of learning.” Conversely, we must broaden our assessments in order to expand the horizons of learning.
To understand this principle, we must clearly understand the need to “broaden our assessments”.
The experience in most classrooms in America is that of a very narrow range of assessments. Some classroom teachers rely almost exclusively on publisher developed assessments that accompany the adopted textbook to assess the learning progress of students.
Some teachers tend to default to a given method of assessment whether derived from a publisher or developed on campus. The most common default assessment method prize probably goes to the multiple choice test. Other contenders for the prize are other selective response methods (matching, fill in the blank, true-false, etc)
When we gaze into most classrooms in our schools, the single most common assessment we see is an assessment OF learning.
If we are to broaden our assessments in order to prevent the narrowing of learning we must do so by effectively and consistently addressing four areas.
First, we broaden our assessments when we develop and maintain a balanced assessment system consisting of a proper use of both assessments OF learning and assessments FOR learning.
Second, we broaden our assessment by expanding our use of informal formative assessment. Again, the default setting on assessments usually falls to either some paper/pencil task or some form of project or oral presentation. A vast array of assessment techniques and strategies exist that provide formative assessment information to teachers on a daily basis.
Third, we broaden our assessments when we learn to use the data generated from those assessments in a timely, sound manner to make decisions that impact instruction, curriculum, and learning.
Finally, we broaden our assessments when we truly bring the student into active engagement in the assessment process.
All of these actions to broaden our assessments not only serve to prevent the narrowing of learning, but serve to broaden and deepen student learning.
However, we clearly recognize that these skills:
· Balancing assessment of learning and assessment for learning in the classroom,
· Learning to use a wider array of assessment methods including informal classroom assessments,
· Using assessment derived data in a timely and effective manner for decision making, and
· Including students in an active manner in the assessment process,
do not develop in a vacuum. Skills are developed through training and practice. If we, as educators, want to broaden and deepen student learning, we must broaden our assessments.
We must broaden our assessments in order to prevent the narrowing of learning and we do that through aggressively working to become both assessment literate and assessment competent.
Personal Reflection: How broad is the assessment process in my classroom? How do I measure up on each of the four areas needed to broaden our assessment practices?
Topics: Assessment FOR Learning, Data, Minutes with Charlie, Quality Assessment Components, Student Involvement | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie vol 2 no 1
By Charlie | August 25, 2008
Great enthusiasm, fresh hope, and renewed vision mix with imposing challenges and changes to form all the emotions associated with the beginning of a new school year.
We will once again produce Minutes with Charlie this school year. The purpose of Minutes is to provide information on various aspects of classroom assessment and to encourage discussion on those aspects. I believe that if we are to achieve the improvements we desire in student learning we must increase our assessment literacy and our assessment competency.
Assessment literacy refers to the knowledge and conceptual understanding of the principles of quality classroom assessment. When we possess assessment literacy, we can engage in intelligent conversation regarding classroom assessment, we can recognize good and poor quality assessments and assessment practices, and we can develop quality plans for implementation.
Assessment competency refers to the consistent practice of quality student involved classroom assessment principles in such a way that greatly impacts student learning. When we possess assessment competency, we can consistently apply the knowledge and understanding of assessment literacy in a variety of classroom settings and thereby impact student learning and motivation.
Neither assessment literacy nor competency is easy to develop. We must realize that we can possess considerable assessment literacy and be void of assessment competency.
As professional educators, we bear the responsibility for our own professional development. We work in a district that puts great emphasis upon providing professional development, but the responsibility for the development of my abilities as an educator falls directly upon my shoulders.
Hands down, without any reservation the best method of developing personal assessment literacy and competency is through the active participation in an Assessment Learning Team. A number of teams are forming on several campuses. It is professional development as you have never known it before.
Participation in an Assessment Learning Team consists of meeting about every three weeks with a few other teachers to review practices in assessment, discuss reading assignments completed since the last meeting, at times view videos, share experiences, and make plans for the next stages of learning and practice. The greatest learning for an Assessment Learning Team occurs, not in the every three week meetings, but in the three week interval where members put in practice in the classroom new learning about assessment.
Assessment Learning Teams provide the very elements we have often claimed were missing in professional development:
· It is ongoing throughout the year, not a one-time training.
· It is job embedded and applies to our specific classroom, grade level, and subject area.
· It is flexible to meet the needs of team members.
· Team members learn as a team, from each other rather than from some outside expert.
If you are interested in forming or participating in an Assessment Learning Team on your campus, talk to your principal about your plans for moving your professional development into your classroom practice.
Personal Reflection: What professional development have I done that has truly impacted my classroom practice? What will I do this year to enhance my personal professional development?
Topics: Assessment Learning Team, Minutes with Charlie, Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Minutes with Charlie - 18
By Charlie | May 12, 2008
Once understanding the concept or definition of common assessments - collaboratively developed formal measures of essential student learning, standardized across the discipline that are administered in a systematic, timely fashion whose results are disaggregated, analyzed, compared and contrasted for the specific purpose of improving student achievement- the next step is beginning the development process.
In developing any quality assessment, the first step is to clearly determine the purpose of the assessment. Common assessments can either be classed as assessments of learning or assessments for learning. The determination of whether an assessment is of or for learning is not based upon the style of assessment but a function of both the timing of the assessment and how the results are used. An assessment given at the end of a unit of study to gain results to inform someone beyond the classroom of student learning is clearly an assessment of learning. An assessment given during the course of instruction to inform both teacher and student of progress and guide toward the next stages of learning is an assessment for learning. An assessment during the course of instruction to inform only the teacher and others outside of the classroom regarding progress in achievement at that time would be an assessment of learning.
In looking at the purpose(s) of common assessment several questions must be answered. First, what is the timing of the administration of the assessment? Is it given at the end of the unit of instruction to measure student achievement or during the process of instruction where both student and teacher can still alter behavior to improve learning? Second, who is using the information and what decisions are to be made based on the results? The answer to these two relatively simple questions will give the answer to “why?” of common assessments. With a clear grasp of the purpose of the common assessment we can proceed to other important considerations.
Our next consideration is “What are we going to assess in these common assessments?” Based upon our operational definition, we are looking to assess essential student learning. Our district is on a path to identify district power standards, but we have not yet arrived at that point. Until then, grade level/campus level determinations need to be made as to what to assess in common assessments. General guidelines for that determination could be the enduring understandings identified in our district curriculum documents. Similarly the principles of power standards will be that they are: endurance (Are students expected to retain mastery of the skill or knowledge beyond the assessment?), leverage (is the knowledge or skill applicable to other academic areas?), and readiness for the next stages of learning (Does the knowledge or skill prepare the student for success at the next stage of learning?)
These learning targets must be determined prior developing the assessment and prior to instruction. They therefore define what we believe essential to be included in instruction and essential goals of student learning.
It is essential, that by whatever method, we produce clearly defined, articulated, and understood learning targets that are commonly accepted prior to proceeding to the next steps in developing common assessments.
Personal Reflection: Does my team of teachers determine a clear purpose of a common assessment at the outset of planning? Do we have clearly defined targets for each common assessment? Do they represent agreed upon essential student learning?
Topics: Assessment OF Learning, Minutes with Charlie | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie - 17
By Charlie | May 5, 2008
Common assessments have been part of the educational landscape for many years. Many campus, grade level or subject area teams have engaged in developing and using common assessments. Both research and most instructional leaders recognize that common assessments, properly developed and used promote increased student achievement. However, the common understanding regarding common assessments is anything but “common”.
In the next few Minutes we are going to examine the concept, development, and use of common assessments.
In essence common assessments are collaboratively developed formal measures of essential student learning, standardized across the discipline that are administered in a systematic, timely fashion whose results are disaggregated, analyzed, compared and contrasted for the specific purpose of improving student achievement.
Let’s look at the important components of that definition. Collaboratively developed means it is not a test made by one teacher and used by many. It is developed specifically by teachers of that discipline on that grade level. Essential student learning means that not every possible student expectation is assessed on a common assessment. Common assessments address the more important (essential) standards or power standards. Standardized across the discipline refers to standardized across the district. For now, we are going to be really happy to have quality common assessments across a campus. Administered in a systematic timely fashion refers to the administration as guided by the district scope and sequence of learning. Results that are disaggregated, analyzed, compared and contrasted means the results of the common assessments are examined somewhat differently than classroom assessments in one classroom. They provide information useful in various arenas by several stakeholders. Finally, for the specific purpose of improving student achievement refers to the primary purpose of developing and using common assessments - improving student achievement.
There are a couple of prerequisites that need to be in place prior to developing and using common assessments.
First, there must be a commitment on the part of the teachers to collaboratively produce and use an assessment that focuses upon what students need to learn and not upon what teachers may or may not have taught. These assessments, as are most assessments, are developed prior to instruction. This commitment to collaboration extends beyond the development and administration of the assessment. It must also be in place during the examination of the results and the implementation on needed changes as indicated by results. This entire process brings a new dimension to teacher collaboration.
Second, it requires the identification of the essential student learning. This, if not done on the district level, must be done on the campus or discipline level. Doing so is no small process but its completion brings a great clarification for assessment and instruction.
In the next Minutes we will begin an examination of the development of common assessments. As with the development of any assessment, we will look at the purpose of common assessments, clear targets, matching they assessment type to the targets (design), the communication tools of the assessments, and student involvement. If you want a review see Minutes 2, 3, and 4.
Personal Reflection: Do I as a teacher recognize the value and importance of common assessments? Am I committed to work collaboratively with fellow educators to accomplish this?
Topics: Assessment OF Learning, Minutes with Charlie | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie - 16
By Charlie | May 3, 2008
An important part of harvesting the benefits of a quality assessment program lies in the proper and effective use of data garnered from the assessments. In the last few Minutes we have examined the traits and development of summative assessments of assessment of learning. We will now examine the proper and effective use of data generated from the assessments of learning.
A guiding principle in our discussion will be the difference between the purposes of the data from assessment for and assessment of learning. Data from assessment for learning provide information teachers and students should use, in the course of instruction and learning, to make decision to improve instruction and learning at that point in time. Data from assessment of learning provide information for teachers and administrators, after the instruction is completed, to make decision regarding the instruction and curriculum for the next time the unit of study is taught. In simple terms, data from assessment for learning are used now, and data from assessment of learning will be used later.
Upon the completion of a unit of study, the results of a summative assessment will reveal the level of mastery that students attained over the course of study. Assuming we have a quality summative assessment, this potentially allows us to examine the quality and effectiveness of three areas in the learning progress. Each area requires a considerable amount of openness and honesty as we evaluate. We will look at each one briefly.
It seems that the results of a summative assessment can fall into three broad categories: everyone passed marvelously, everyone failed miserably, or the scores were distributed somewhere between the two extremes.
The results of a summative assessment potentially allow us to examine the quality and effectiveness of our curriculum. As we examine the results, we should ask ourselves, what information do these results give me about the content or pacing of our curriculum? We should examine our curriculum in light of our results.
Also summative assessment results allow us to examine our instruction. As we examine our results we should ask ourselves questions about how effectively our instructional methods met the learning needs of all students. Did I vary learning opportunity to meet varied learning styles? Did I effectively use the results of assessments for learning during the unit to change my instructional decisions or did I just plow along as planned? Examining instruction in light of assessment results is at once a very difficult but beneficial activity.
Finally, summative assessment results allow us to examine our formative assessments or assessment for learning. If our assessment for learning results indicated that students were progressing as they should, and our summative assessment indicated that a considerable group did not perform as expected, there most probably was a problem with the formative assessments. As we look at our formative assessments in light of our summative results, we should examine both the quality of the assessments as well as they way in which results were used to improve instruction and learning.
We must begin to look at the data from summative assessments as more than simply “a grade at the end of the unit”. They must serve as information to improve our curriculum, instruction, and assessment programs.
Personal Reflection: Am I in the habit of using summative results to examine the quality of my curriculum, assessment, and instruction? Do I do this as a member of a team of teachers?
Topics: Data, Minutes with Charlie | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie - 15
By Charlie | April 27, 2008
The distinction between assessments of learning and assessment for learning is vital if we are to develop and use a balanced assessment program. In simplistic terms, assessments of learning are assessments of the amount of learning accomplished at the end of a unit of study. Assessments for learning are assessments for the purpose of improving learning.
We will continue to examine assessments of learning in this Minutes with Charlie. Last time we examined the traits of quality assessments of learning. This time we are looking at the process of developing quality assessments of learning.
There is a common temptation to develop an assessment of learning in a given unit of study by making it a compilation of the assessments for learning used in that unit. One variation of this is to take the “best of the formative assessments” and combine them to make a “best summative assessment of learning”. In response to this plan, let me just quote the old hymn, “yield not to temptation”.
There are several reasons this plan is counterproductive. One, the assessments for learning used during the unit have a purpose distinct from the purpose of the assessment of learning. The formative assessments are to inform student and teacher about learning to that stage and to help guide decisions about instruction and learning. The summative assessments are to measure the learning accomplished over that time period. Two, the repetition of these assessments becomes simply an assessment of recall ability not of the knowledge and skills demanded by the TEKS. Finally, the nature and content of the assessments for learning used during a unit may change based upon the results, but an assessment of learning should have been developed prior to beginning any instruction.
There are several stages in the development of quality assessments of learning. Let’s examine a few of these:
1. Identify the priority leaning targets and the degree of rigor of each one. Among all the learning targets covered in the unit, determine the desired sampling of the priority targets to assess.
2. Develop a “blueprint” of the assessment. This will indicate the focused learning targets, the number of assessment items addressing each targets (sample), the weight of each items (sort of a relative importance), and the method of assessment to be used for each (selected response, extended response, performance/ project or personal communication)
3. Once you have a blue print that you believe accurately portrays a quality assessment for the unit, set about developing the actual array of questions or items based on the blue print.
4. Upon completing the item development, have the assessment reviewed by peers to check for items that either do not truly assessment the identified target or contain items that could bias the student response.
As the unit of study progresses, periodically review your assessment of learning to insure that both instruction and your assessments for learning are providing opportunities for the students to develop the knowledge and skills to be assessed on the assessment of learning.
Personal Reflection: Do I, as a common practice, invest time to develop a quality assessment of learning prior to planning and starting instruction?
Topics: Assessment OF Learning, Minutes with Charlie | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie - 14
By Charlie | April 27, 2008
Most of the Minutes with Charlie deal with either topics relevant to both assessment of and assessment for learning or topics that relate specifically to assessment for learning. This is because assessment for learning should be the most frequent type of assessment we give and it produces the greatest benefit in regard to student learning. However, we strive to have a balanced assessment program and assessment of learning certainly plays an important role in that system.
As we draw close to the end of the school year many teachers are starting their last unit of study. Many are already into the last unit and some will start immediately after TAKS week.
Over the summer break many grade levels and subject areas meet to plan and prepare for the next year.
So in light of all these facts, we will be looking at assessment of learning or summative assessment in the next couple of Minutes. We will examine the elements or traits of a quality assessment of learning, developing quality assessments of learning, and how to use the data generated from assessments of learning.
One important trait of assessments of learning is the purpose of the assessments. These assessments are to evaluate student learning at the end of a unit of study on a number of learning standards and provide specific data in that regard.
Another trait of quality assessment of learning is that the assessment was planned and developed prior to planning land delivering the instruction. The nature and content of the final assessment in a unit should not come as a surprise to anyone. It assesses student performance on a given set of standards, not necessarily just upon what is taught.
Another trait of assessment of learning is that it is scored and graded. If the assessment is a quality assessment that accurately assesses student performance against established standards, and if the grading system if proper, assessments of learning provide accurate data on student achievement on an array of standards.
Assessments of learning share many traits with assessments for learning. Both have clearly defined, understood, and articulated learning targets. Both select the assessment method (selected response, extended response, performance) that best matches the learning targets. Both provide data to students and teachers on student performance against learning standards.
As you begin to plan and development assessment of learning or summative assessments a few words of caution are in order:
· We must insure that the degree of rigor in our assessments match the degree of rigor called for in the TEKS.
· While assessments of learning assess an array of learning targets, it is not required that we have a question for each standard. We have to prioritize the targets and provide a good sampling of the targets.
· Traditionally, summative exams have lived shrouded in mystery. However, it is important that through the instruction and assessment process that students know and understand the level of performance expected of them. While the individual questions on an exam are not known, the content of the exam should not be secret.
Personal Reflection :Do I invest time to insure that my assessment of learning are quality? Do I plan and prepare my summataive assessment prior to planning and delivery of instruction? Can I clearly distinguish between assessment of learning and assessment for learning?
Topics: Assessment OF Learning, Minutes with Charlie | No Comments »
Minutes with Charlie 13
By Charlie | April 14, 2008
The fourth type or category of learning target that we will consider is that of the product targets. Products are things created by the student that will give evidence of knowledge and understanding, reasoning, and/or skills. When the standards or TEKS call for the student to create or produce something, it usually calls for a product target.
The number of product targets called for in the TEKS is relatively few compared to the number of knowledge, understanding and reasoning targets. However, it is extremely important to distinguish between the use of a product as a learning target and the use of a product as an assessment tool. The failure to make this distinction results in poor assessment practice and inaccurate assessment results and decisions.
An example might be if we assigned a student to make a poster containing a Venn diagram that illustrated the similarities and differences between chemical and physical changes and giving examples of each. “Create a poster” is not a learning target in TEKS however understanding the difference between chemical and physical change would be an important understanding in TEKS. This is an example of a task that can be used to assess understanding, but it is not a product target.
An example of a product target would be if the TEKS called for the student write a persuasive paper on a current events related science topic. The product would be the writing, the organization of the paper, the use of language, etc. In this case it would be vital that the student have the understanding of the topic and the reasoning skill of persuasion. The target would be to produce a written paper.
We often have students produce a product (a poster, a diorama, a model of an Indian dwelling, a map of a territory, etc) as an assessment instrument. Many times this is, in reality, simply a representation of fact without any real assessment of understanding, reasoning, or skill. Yet we assign a grade based on creativity, neatness, timeliness, etc.
In using products as learning targets we should ask ourselves questions such as:
1. Do the standards (TEKS) call for the student to use the skill required to create this product?
2. Does my assignment give the student opportunity to exhibit his ability?
3. Are there other limitations in this assignment that would prevent it from giving me accurate information on student ability?
In using products as an assessment tools we should ask ourselves questions such as:
1. In order to complete this product, does the student have to possess the skills I am trying to assess?
2. Are there factors in the production that would hide the student’s true level of proficiency in this target?
In the creation of a product, students will use some combination of their knowledge and understanding, reasoning ability, and skills. Some of the TEKS clearly call upon students to be able to and to actually create products. We ignore these demands at the students’ loss.
We must use caution to not confuse products as a learning target and products as an assessment tool if we are to gain the full benefit of products.
Personal Reflection: Do the products my students create provide clear evidence of student learning at the level of complexity demanded of them? Or do the products simply demand a representation of fact without requiring the student to know or understand the subject matter?
Topics: Learning Targets, Minutes with Charlie | 2 Comments »