Third journal entry, ‘Assessment as Learning’
One of the recurring themes in our class’s responses to the mid-term assessment was “let’s get back to the readings!” As one of the people who contributed to the hew and cry, I now feel an obligation to go back to the readings and think about my reactions to them (also, Dianne asked us to 
). I went back to my reading notes, marginalia and apparently random slashes of highlighter, and tried to come up with at least one idea that I found important, impressive or illuminating from each article.
If you’re interested in the article titles, let me know.
Admittedly, some of the readings proved denser than others, and some seemed merely to reiterate the litany of “Clear objectives! Learner-centred! Feedback!”, which we’ve been reading, and discussing, since Day 1 of Course 1. This is not to say that the concepts don’t bear repeating, simply that rereading them confirmed their importance without adding a lot to the mix.
Having said that, once I went back to my notes and gleaned the kernels from each article, I was able to find something of value in each one. In Cross and Angelo’s discussion of CATs, the two most important concepts for me were that (1) we’re already always assessing, albeit not always consciously, and (2) that we need to become conscious of assessment, and use it effectively. I love the idea of establishing a feedback loop, and I am already incorporating the concept into the Writing Workshop I’m leading this term. In fact, in this week’s session, I performed two CATs – a round-table discussion of each student’s ‘Big 3’, including immediate feedback, and a minute paper at the end of the session. I’ll use the feedback from both CATs to help determine the content of the next few sessions, and I’ve already told the students that this is my plan.
I got a lot out of the Crooks article. I think the most important idea is that we need to help students redefine assessment as an opportunity for practice, and an indicator of what to focus on. Crooks also stresses the idea of corrective feedback that focuses on progress, which I think is particularly important. What it boils down to is that students should be shown that assessment is not a big, scary, life-determining, now-or-never monster, but rather an ongoing process through which they can practice their new skills and get constructive feedback on how they’re doing. Unfortunately, in many cases, students are still faced with a mid-term and a final exam, nothing else counts, pass or be doomed scenario. Presumably, though, one could apply Crooks’ concept of ongoing assessment throughout the term, using a series of unmarked assessments with feedback as a means of preparing students for the EXAMS they have to write.
Knight, who is one of the writers who reiterates the importance of clear objectives and frequent reminders thereof, does make at least one important point: the complexity of the assessment task determines the complexity of student learning. If we employ the ongoing assessment strategy, we can incorporate this idea and make the series of assessments of varying complexity, thus demanding a range of cognitive skills from our students. Shephard, whose article also revisits some familiar themes, approaches assessment in much the same way, pointing out that a good assessment task is by definition a good learning task. Shephard echoes Vigotsky’s idea of the zone of proximal development, and proposes that assessment is an opportunity to stretch our students’ abilities by providing the necessary scaffolding but still asking them to go beyond their current learning. As she points out, this conception of assessment is quite different from the historical model of assessment as a measure of mastery which determines whether or not a student can move on.
Who could ask for a better segue? Walvoord also addresses the idea of assessment as a measure of mastery, referring to teachers as gatekeepers. I got a lot out of the Walvoord articles. Her discussion of our role as judges was a revelatory as the idea that it’s OK to “teach to the test!” After all, as she points out, we are professionals – we know our subject, we know the objectives and the standards, and we know (or we should) that our students need assessment and feedback. On the other hand, as Walvoord says, our role as gatekeeper – determining whether or not a student can move on – should be the very last step.
Initially, I struggled with the term ‘judge.’ As we discussed in one of our earliest sessions, the term carries with it some negative baggage. No one wants to be labeled ‘judgmental.’ But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the metaphor fits. A judge – as in a bona fide member of the judiciary – must (1) assume innocence, (2) evaluate evidence, and (3) render judgment. A teacher, then, must (1) assume ability, (2) evaluate performance, and (3) render judgment. In other words, we must assume from the beginning of the course that all the students are capable of performing all the tasks required to the standards set, help them get there (through ongoing assessment, naturally), and finally determine, based on their performances, whether or not they have proved their ability.
This brings me to Wiggins and his idea of backward design, to which I have latched on completely. If, as discussed, we are to pass judgment on our students at the end of the course based on their ability to perform certain tasks to specific standards, then it makes perfect sense that we can use those tasks and standards to determine the path along which we take the students. As I discussed in an earlier journal, this is the strategy I am now using to create the framework for my courses. I have to admit this is easier to do with 101 than it is with a genre or theme course, at least so far. Of course, when it comes to genre and theme courses, I tend to approach them in terms of the kind of material I like to work with, rather than the course objectives. I’m now trying to find a happy compromise – I’m thinking of 102/103 courses in terms of what I want to teach generally, then looking at the objectives, and working backward to determine the specifics such as actual materials and assessment tasks.
Our readings so far have given me much food for thought. I look forward to our discussions as a group – goodness knows, if any group can milk a reading for all it’s worth, we’re the group!