View
214
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Assessment for Learning – the story so far
Challenging the Ascendancy of Summative Assessment
Val Brooks
Traditional approach• “The giving of marks and the grading
functions are over-emphasised, while the giving of useful advice and the learning function are under-emphasised” (Black and Wiliam, 1998, p. 6)
• With little opportunity or incentive to develop formative assessment, many teachers have modelled their own classroom assessment on summative assessment
TRADITIONAL APPROACH
PLAN TEACH ASSESS
(Traditionally, assessment treated as a terminal activity)
Mid-1990s onwards
• Upsurge of interest in AfL in England, initially within the academic community
• National government convinced of the importance of research findings
• Teachers spurred on by policy initiatives and by their own positive experiences of AfL
Aims
To identify
• the principles underpinning AfL and how these principles differentiate formative from summative assessment
• studies which have been instrumental in bringing about change
• key ways in which teachers are changing how they teach and assess
Note on Terminology
• Assessment for Learning (AfL) = Formative Assessment
• Assessment of Learning (AoL) = Summative Assessment
• Terms used interchangeably but with AfL and AoL representing popular usage
Principles underpinning Practice: What differentiates AfL from AoL?
1. Using assessment for different purposes– SA measures the learning that has taken
place – The goal of AfL is the improvement of
learning
FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT• Takes place during the learning process and
is integral to it. The main beneficiaries are the teacher and pupil because they are provided with FEEDBACK about areas of strength and weaknesses. Formative assessment should have a FEEDFORWARD function, informing decisions about how teaching should be adapted and how learning can be taken forward.
Quotation from a child
“If I only do what I did before then I’ll only get what I got before”
(Using feedback for feedforward purposes is essential if real learning gains are to be made)
Principles underpinning Practice: What differentiates AfL from AoL?
1. Focus on improving teaching and learning
2. Pupils actively involved (e.g. through self and peer assessment)
Principles underpinning Practice: What differentiates AfL from AoL?
1. Focus on improving teaching and learning
2. Pupils actively involved (e.g. through self and peer assessment)
3. Timing: as well as taking periodic snapshots of attainment, assessment forms an ongoing, integral element of teaching
Using assessment to inform planning
“The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows: ascertain this and teach him [her] accordingly.”
(Ausubel 1968)
Principles underpinning Practice: What differentiates AfL from AoL?
1. Focus on teaching and learning
2. Pupils actively involved
3. Timing: assessment forms an ongoing, integral element of teaching
4. Rich, detailed feedback replaces summary information
Principles underpinning Practice: What differentiates AfL from AoL?
5. Effective communication with a small, intimate audience – not the broader audience interested in the results of summative assessment
Distinguishing AfL from AoL
FORMATIVE• TIMING (ongoing and
continuous feature of teaching and learning)
• PURPOSE (Enhancing teaching and learning)
• FORM (Written/verbal feedback + feedforward)
• AUDIENCE (Pupils, teachers and parents)
SUMMATIVE• TIMING (Snapshot taken
at particular point in time)
• PURPOSE (Measuring the learning that has taken place)
• FORM (Summary e.g. a grade, level, mark or percentage)
• AUDIENCE (Other interested parties: FE and HE, government, employers)
TRADITIONAL APPROACH
PLAN TEACH ASSESS
(Traditionally, assessment was a terminal activity i.e.summative)
INNOVATIVE APPROACH
PLAN TEACH ASSESS
ASSESS ASSESS
(Assessment is an ongoing and integral part of teaching and learning i.e. formative)
Teaching/learning/assessment:
a cyclical process
Plan
Teach
Assess Assess
Assess
Research which was instrumental in stimulating change
Version 1 (for the academic community)Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) “Assessment and
Classroom Learning” Assessment in Education 5 (1), pp. 7-78.
Version 2 (for policy makers and practitioners)Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) Inside the Black
Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment (London, King’s College).
Distinctive Features of Black & Wiliam’s Research
• Focus - neglected topic of formative assessment
• Literature review (aim: to ensure that policy and practice are evidence-based)
• Scale - in-depth survey of 250 separate studies
• Scope - international/ covers learners of all ages and types/different subjects
Distinctive Features of Black & Wiliam’s Research
• Emphasis on quasi-experimental studies which produced measures of effect
• Well-suited to a climate where there is a preoccupation with measurable outcomes in the form of improved test and examination results.
Principal findings of Black and Wiliam (1998)
• No evidence of an adverse effect on attainment• Positive effect sizes ranging between 0.4 and 0.7• Compares favourably with effect sizes produced
by other initiatives designed to raise attainment• AfL reduces the spread of attainment whilst
raising it overall
Issues Arising from the Research• Some of the studies on which conclusions are
based did not take place as part of normal classroom life
• “It is hard to see how any innovation in formative assessment can be treated as a marginal change in classroom work” (Black and Wiliam 1998, p. 16)
• “… formative assessment is not well understood by teachers and is weak in practice” (Black and Wiliam, 1998)
• So for them the question was not “Does it work?” but “How do we get it to happen?”
Follow-up Study
• KMOFAP (Kings, Medway, Oxfordshire Formative Assessment Project)
• Empirical research involving 6 secondary schools and teachers of 3 subjects (Science, Maths and English)
Research focus
Original• Questioning• Feedback• Sharing criteria• Self-assessment
Revised• Questioning• Feedback through
marking• Peer and self-
assessment• The formative use of
summative tests
Main Publications arising from the Research
• Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D (2003) Assessment for Learning: Putting it into Practice (Open University Press)
• Black, P. et al. (2002) Working Inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom (London, King’s College).
AfL and Planning: Research Evidence
• Large-scale study involving 800+ American kindergarten children
• Children came primarily from economically disadvantaged homes
• 8-week experimental programme– 29 teachers in experimental group trained to use
assessment at the planning stage to match provision to needs
– 27 teachers in the control group adopted their usual approach
Findings• Pre- and post-tests (reading ability,
mathematics and science) used to measure effects
• Children in the experimental group achieved significantly better results in post-tests than those in control group
• Incidence of special education referrals– Control group: 1 in every 3.7 – Experimental group: 1 in 17
AfL and Planning: Putting it into Practice
• Creation of flexible plans containing space to respond to feedback
• Baseline assessment of a topic that is about to be introduced– Use of end-of-topic test as a pre-test– Concept-mapping
AfL and Feedback: Research EvidenceIsraeli study investigating the effects of
different types of feedback on pupils’ motivation and attainment
• Comment only (individually composed comment on the level of match between a child’s work and the assessment criteria which were explained to all beforehand)
• Individual comment plus grade• Grade only
Group Performance Motivation
Comment only Raised and the improvement was sustained over sequence of tasks
Influenced by ability:
High achievers maintained a high level of interest irrespective of feedback type
• Low achievers who received grades quickly lost interest
Grade + comment
Steady decline across tasks
Grade only Initial improvement which was not sustained
Note: both feedback types which used grades were associated with a deterioration in performance and motivation.
AfL and Feedback: Putting it into PracticeComment-only marking• Task-involving feedback focuses on knowledge,
skills and concepts necessary to be successful• Detailed guidance on what pupils are doing
well, what they need to improve and how to make the improvements
• Feedback should “scaffold” improvement• Opportunities must be built into lessons for
pupils to read feedback and respond• Feedback needs to be regular and rapid
AfL and Questioning: Research Evidence
• Teachers ask too many questions to be able to give serious thought to the quality of their questioning
• Pupils who are over-questioned tend to become passive and teacher-dependent
• The goal: fewer, better questions
Encouraging Thoughtful Behaviour• One study found an average wait time of
0.9 of a second before teachers re-worded a question or answered it
• Requiring an almost instant response only works well with knowledge/recall questions
• Some teachers are increasing their wait time, to allow students to formulate more thoughtful answers
Effects of increasing the wait time after a question:
• In one study the average wait time was about a second but: ‘where a longer silence was left – even as short as three seconds – the quality and extent of pupils’ responses improved dramatically… not only longer but also more thoughtful’ (Woods 1998:176).
• More pupils offer answers• The number of ‘I don’t know’ responses decreases• The number of hypothetical answers increases• The frequency of answers from less able students
increases• Students more likely to challenge and/or improve
each other’s answers
Bloom et al’s Taxonomy: A Hierarchy of Thinking Skills
Higher order
• Evaluation
• Synthesis
• Analysis
Lower order
• Application
• Comprehension
• Knowledge
Engaging more learners
‘No hands’ policy
• Pupils are trained not to raise their hands to answer a question
• Works well with increased thinking time/questions requiring more thought
• Everyone is expected to provide an answer if called upon
Other Strategies for Obtaining fuller feedback
• Response partners/groups• Pupil votes• Answers written on hand-held dry-wipe
boards• True/false cards• Traffic lights (green = fully understood,
amber = partial understanding, red = not understood)
• Thumbs (up = confident; horizontal = limited confidence; down = not confident)
Peer and Self-Assessment: Research Evidence• Portugese study• Pupils (N= 354) taught by teachers in the
experimental group were trained to use self-assessment on a regular, usually daily, basis in Mathematics
• Pupils in the control group (N=313) did not use self-assessment in Mathematics
• Pre- and post-tests of performance: children in the experimental group made almost double the progress of pupils in the control group
Peer and Self-Assessment: Issues• Self-assessment is “essential” rather than
a “luxury” (Black and Wiliam 1998)
• Some teachers – Confuse self-assessment with self-marking– worry that students cannot be trusted to mark
their own work accurately and honestly
• A difficult and demanding skill which can take a long time to master
Requirements• Assessment criteria shared with pupils in
an accessible language and format• Pupils must develop a ‘nose’ for standards
so that they can recognise how well work meets criteria (Exemplification material de-mystifies assessment providing concrete examples of what success looks like)
• Best completed during rather than at the end of an activity
Use of traffic light icons• Pupils use them to
– Indicate how well they have understood a topic (Green = completely understood; amber = partial understanding; red = not understood)
– To formulate a revision strategy ( e.g. pupils who have coded a topic green or amber can work together leaving the teacher free to work intensively with the ‘reds’)
Review of Aims
To identify
• the principles underpinning AfL and how these principles differentiate formative from summative assessment
• studies which have been instrumental in bringing about change
• key ways in which teachers are changing how they teach and assess
Sources of Information• Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) Inside the Black
Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment (London, King’s College)
• Black, P. et al. (2002) Working Inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom (London, King’s College)
• Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D (2003) Assessment for Learning: Putting it into Practice (Open University Press)
• Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (2005) Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms (Paris, OECD).
Useful websites• King’s College Assessment for Learning Group
www.kcl.ac.uk• Association for Achievement and Improvement
through Assessment www.aaia.org.uk• Suffolk Learning and Management Network
www.slamnet.org.uk• Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
www.qca.org.uk• Scotland: Assessment is for Learning
www.ltscotland.org.uk
Recommended