9
This article was downloaded by: [The Aga Khan University] On: 24 November 2014, At: 04:24 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/caie20 Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam E. M. Sebatane a a National University of Lesotho, Institute of Education , PO Roma 180, Lesotho Published online: 28 Jul 2006. To cite this article: E. M. Sebatane (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5:1, 123-130, DOI: 10.1080/0969595980050108 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050108 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

  • Upload
    e-m

  • View
    214

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

This article was downloaded by: [The Aga Khan University]On: 24 November 2014, At: 04:24Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & PracticePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/caie20

Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response toBlack & WiliamE. M. Sebatane aa National University of Lesotho, Institute of Education , PO Roma 180, LesothoPublished online: 28 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: E. M. Sebatane (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam, Assessment inEducation: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5:1, 123-130, DOI: 10.1080/0969595980050108

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050108

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

Assessment in Education, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1998 123

Assessment and Classroom Learning:a response to Black & WiliamE. M. SEBATANEInstitute of Education, National University of Lesotho, PO Roma 180, Lesotho

Introduction

The review paper by Black & Wiliam is opportune given the emphasis on assessmentin much recent debate on educational reform and its role in influencing studentlearning. The authors have to be complimented on their efforts to review relevantresearch literature. Classroom activities are the nerve centre of any educationalsystem, in particular, the teaching and learning processes and their concomitantassessment component. The authors could as well have used the title 'Assessmentand Classroom Teaching and Learning' because in most of the studies reviewedsome element of teaching was in place. It is significant even in this day and age thatwe can only 'hope' that one day we will be able to unravel the mystery of howassessment supports learning, considering that assessment has always been anintegral part of classroom regime. As Gipps (1996) observes 'Assessment does notstand outside teaching and learning but stands in dynamic interaction with it'(p. 261). Over the past few decades our understanding of the three-way interactionbetween teaching, learning and assessment has been driven by contrasting theories,without universally accepted meanings of some of the concepts involved. The terms'formative assessment' and 'feedback' are cases in point, as the review clearlyindicates. The current shift of focus towards the role of assessment in classroomlearning is a welcome development (see also Gipps, 1994, 1996) which mighthopefully give us some clear answers in the future.

As indicated, the review is extensive and covers a variety of issues. My responsewill look at only some of the points which I think need to be addressed. In particular,my comments will in cases be biased towards the perspective of the so-calleddeveloping countries because I am much more familiar with the education systemsof those countries.

The authors' thesis is that formative assessment, with the embedded concept offeedback, is the key factor in the promotion of classroom learning. Obviously, it isnot the only factor. As Madaus & Kellaghan (1992, p. 143) put it,

A number of possible mechanisms can be suggested to explain howassessment might help to promote student learning. First, assessmentdirects teachers' and students' attention to particular topics and skills.Second, responding to questions or testing requires active participation on

0969-594X/98/010123-08 ©1998 Carfax Publishing Ltd

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 3: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

124 E. M. Sebatane

the part of students, to process the material being assessed. Third, assess-ment provides practice for students on material, which helps to consolidatelearning. And finally, assessment can provide feedback that clarifies under-standing and corrects misconceptions.

The conclusions of the review may be regarded as somewhat disheartening forthose who see reform of assessment procedures as producing an immediate impacton student learning. While the authors conclude that the research evidence theyhave reviewed shows conclusively that formative assessment does improve learning,at the same time they say that reform of teachers' assessment procedures will takea long time. There are at least two reasons for this. First, while the principlesunderlying successful change can be identified, there is no one optimum model. Andsecondly, the changes in classroom practice and pedagogy that are required areradical rather than marginal. If this is so, there would seem to be little point inidentifying particular assessment procedures for teacher use in the hope that theiradoption would impact on teacher practice.

While one might well subscribe to a radical reform of pedagogy that would involvea substantial assessment component there is evidence that non-radical interventionsin teachers' information base can impact on student achievement. For example, theprovision of diagnostic information based on the performance on standardised testsof pupils in primary schools, compared to the provision of norm-referenced infor-mation only, has been found to improve pupils' achievement as measured bystandardised tests (Kellaghan et al., 1982). This finding indicates that changes inassessment can have a role in improving student learning without radical changes inteacher pedagogy.

Influence of High Stakes in Assessment

There is very considerable evidence that the attachment of high stakes to assessmentprocedures (e.g. selection for further education) can impact seriously on a variety ofaspects of teacher and student behaviour. This evidence was not considered in thepaper since it was decided that studies relating to the use of assessment forcertification and selection (two high stakes situations) would be excluded. However,the paper does recognise that the context of national or local requirements foraccountability will exert a powerful influence on teachers' assessment practices.Given this situation, it does not seem entirely satisfactory to have excluded fromconsideration such contextual factors in dealing with teachers' assessment. Theauthors refer in a number of places to the 'ecological validity' of studies which theyreview. If one applies the same concept to teachers' assessment practices, one isreminded that use of assessment for one purpose is likely to be influenced by its usefor other purposes.

The above situation has obvious implications for the reform of formative assess-ment procedures also. Approaches to reform might have to differ depending onwhether or not high stake assessment procedures operate in the education system.Examinations can serve to drive teaching and learning procedures (Noah &

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 4: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

A Response to Black & Wiliam 125

Eckstein, 1992). By its nature and purpose formative assessment focuses on theclassroom teaching and learning processes and may operate without reference towhether or not students will end up sitting for public examinations. But until andunless high stakes cease to be attached to these examinations, it will be difficult toget rid of the well-known 'backwash' effect. Teachers will continue to preparestudents for the examinations, whether or not students are learning much in theprocess. For as long as there are limited places in higher levels of education, publicexaminations will continue to be used as selection devices in developing countries(Kellaghan & Greaney, 1992). Further, research has shown that teachers maysometimes have the theory but do something different in practice so long as it dealswith preparation of students for examinations (Sebatane et al, 1992). The impli-cation of this is that teachers may be trained on both the theory and practice offormative assessment, but that circumstances may force them not to use theknowledge and skills acquired.

Assessment Role Conflict

The phenomenon of assessment role conflict or tension is linked with the debateabout whether assessment meant for one purpose can be used to fulfil another,different purpose (Little & Wolf, 1996). Examples of such tensions are betweenassessment for learning on the one hand and that for either selection, accountabilityor monitoring (or a combination of these) on the other. Little and Wolf argue, forinstance, that whether assessment has high or low stakes determines how it isperceived by teachers, students and parents. Fitness of purpose has a bearing onboth the design and content of assessment. There are also conflicts among the rolesof high stake situations themselves.

Simpson (1990) contends that a single assessment procedure cannot serve bothselection and accountability on the one hand and improvement of teaching andlearning on the other. According to Nitko (1995), because of the dynamic nature ofassessment information in the classroom summative assessment information may beused for formative assessment purposes: 'Thus, summative assessment may turninto formative assessment' (p. 327). Not everyone agrees with this position, however(Harlen et ah, 1992). Gipps (1996) argues that the form of assessment should notbe considered in isolation but rather in conjunction with its purpose. Teachersshould be trained to acquire assessment skills. Multiple assessment techniquesshould be used, but appropriately. Gipps's stance is that 'assessment for selection,monitoring and accountability can be assessment to support learning' (p. 261) ifteachers are well trained to use it for that purpose and where the whole populationrather than a sample is involved. Little & Wolf (1996) state that Gipps's confidencethat conflicting roles of assessment can be reconciled is based on the experience ofthe British education system where both school-based assessment and trust inteacher judgments have long been established. They cite the case of Sri Lanka wheresuch trust is hard to come by, a situation which has thwarted efforts to reformassessment in that country. Their conclusion is that context has to be takeninto account. Generalisations to all countries would not be justified. They say:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 5: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

126 E. M. Sebatane

'Historical, economic and political characteristics will shape the pattern of domi-nance of assessment's roles' (Little & Wolf, 1996, p. xiv). Shepard (1995) has shownthat the mere introduction of an innovation will not automatically improve learning.It is a struggle to make it work, including winning the support, co-operation andcommitment of teachers. She agrees with Gipps that effort must be made to supportand train teachers: 'If teachers are being asked to make fundamental changes in whatthey teach and how they teach it, then they need sustained support to try out newpractices, learn new theory, and make it their own' (p. 43).

Other Contextual Factors

The literature reviewed by Black & Wiliam relates to empirical research and as suchcommands much scientific credence. However, one is not sure whether the samekinds of results would obtain if the experiments cited were replicated in a differentcontextual setting, say in the educational system and environment of a developingcountry. The question would still arise whether or not the studies have an ecologicalvalidity by virtue of being conducted within an actual classroom situation of acontrived setting. As Little (1990) observes, there are differences among countriesconcerning the significance of assessment including such issues as the perception ofteachers and parents, the kinds of learning encouraged, and students' attitude. Sheattributes this to the fact that assessment is affected by 'economic, political andsocial factors' (p. 36). It may therefore be safe not to generalise (see also Young,1993; Choi & Hannafin, 1995; Murphy, 1995; Urdan & Maehr, 1995). The authorcites the issue of class size, indicating that in developing countries the size may beas high as 200. How successful would a teacher of such a class be in conductingworthwhile formative assessment? Other situations common in developing countriesof Africa include multi-grade schools (where one teacher is responsible for teachingmany grades); children of varying ages within the same grade (due to education notbeing compulsory); the language of instruction and assessment being different fromthe language spoken at home; lack of resources and materials; a high percentage ofunqualified teachers; poor management and supervision; high drop-out and rep-etition rates; and lack of parental involvement in the instructional activities of theirchildren. This is a gloomy picture. What would be an ideal situation or minimumrequirements for an innovation to work? This scenario perhaps explains why someof the teachers studied are not able to practise the theories they learn in teachertraining institutions. They are confronted by a very different set of circumstances intheir schools and classrooms. In describing a common situation in a Third Worldschool, Bude (1995) states that

we might find that certain teaching methods are not applied, even if theteacher has been exposed to them, because they do not fit into the culturalcontext of the society, (p. 4)

With regard to assessment, Little (1990) observes that 'the context in whichclassrooms and learning are structured will to some extent condition the type and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 6: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

A Response to Black & Wiliam 127

range of responses to learning stimuli and assessment practices and the definition ofwhat constitutes learning and assessment in the first place' (p. 19). In making allthese observations I am by no means implying that Black & Wiliam anywheresuggest that their findings should be generalized. Rather, I am implying that, whilecertain psychological concepts may have universal application, the success of thatapplication may be determined by contextual conditions. Consequently, it would bea good idea to test out these theories in those contexts. The agenda for such researchwould include both pedagogical and social structures, processes and practices whichhave a bearing on the success of assessment and learning (Fuller, 1987; Fuller &Heyneman, 1989).

Aspects not Adequately Treated in the Review

The review should provide an impetus to explore further aspects of assessment andclassroom learning which it was not possible to treat in detail. Examples of these aresummarised below. The intention here is not to review these issues but rather tosuggest that they could be considered as the process of examining assessment andclassroom learning is driven forward.

Prejudgments of Teachers

In teaching teachers' behaviour is determined by a number of factors related to thestudents. These include not only cognitive factors but also 'gender, participation inclass, self-concept, social competence, independence, classroom behavior, and workhabits' (Madaus & Kellaghan, 1992, p. 126).

Resistance of Teacher Judgments about Pupils to Change

The traditional notion that teachers are providers while students are consumers ofknowledge is hard to eradicate. This goes for the reforms advocated in the reviewand elsewhere. For example, research has shown that student self-assessmentimproves learning. But there has been resistance on the part of some teachers to theidea of giving students the chance to participate in self-assessment. Fontana &Fernandes (1994) report a study showing that the teachers involved had to undergointensive in-service training before they could feel comfortable to let studentspractice self-assessment. The authors also recommend that teacher traininginstitutions should offer a course on self-assessment theory and practice. Thesituation is likely to be exacerbated by students and parents who hold a firmbelief in the traditional roles of teachers in the classroom setting. Nitko (1995)points out, for example, that students who have learning problems in certain areasmay not even be aware of what their problem is, that is, 'they lack the metacognitiveskills needed to evaluate the quality of their own progress' (p. 327). Further researchindicates that students' learning and performance may be affected by the teachers'impression about their abilities, resulting in students actually performing at the level

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 7: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

128 E. M. Sebatane

of expectation by the teachers (Dweck, 1986), described as a 'self-fulfillingprophecy'.

Interaction between Intellectual and Social Aspects of Behaviour of Pupils

Scott, Buchanan & Haigh (1997) describe a study which sought to foster students'learning independence, through a student-centred learning (SCL) programme, in alarge first year university management course. One of the main problems encoun-tered in the study was the resistance to the innovation on the part of the students.The resistance was apparently due to the fact that other courses students were takingused conventional approaches, as well as to students' beliefs which are hard tochange. The authors argue that university students have firmly entrenched beliefsabout their career goals and the skills they will need to meet those goals. Theyconclude by observing that reforms in these kinds of situations come slowly, and thatthere is need for flexibility in introducing them. Metacognition plays a role here inthat the learners' constructed meaning is influenced by their beliefs and attitudes(Baird et al., 1991). The authors suggest that the metacognition of teachers must bemanifested before that of students. They observe that 'The meaning that any learnerderives from a lesson depends on a number of factors: the person's attitudinal state;perception of the nature, purpose and progress of the lesson; existing knowledge;and decisions about what to do as learning progresses' (p 165).

Communication Systems in School

The success of formative assessment as reviewed by Black & Wiliam can beenhanced if communication systems within a school are adequate and involve allrole players. In other words, 'Assessment must provide an effective communicationwith parents and other partners in the learning enterprise in a way which helps themsupport learning' (Harlen et al., 1992). As Radnor (1994) points out, 'The institu-tional structure and ethos will affect the decisions the teacher makes about how toteach' (p. 157).

Conclusion

The authors have done a commendable job of identifying and reviewing relevantliterature. The categories into which the review is classified help clarify an otherwisehighly involved issue. Assessment is a broad subject touching on virtually all aspectsof education. It is clear, however, that more still has to be done in the area directlyrelated to the topic. The review should serve as a benchmark from which furtherstudies may take off. Such studies are even more urgent in developing countries.This will help determine the extent to which learning theories and paradigms can beregarded as being universal, given the fact that they are being developed and testedmostly within the Western perspective. It has been argued in this response thatcontextual factors play an important role in establishing the authenticity andgeneralisations of research findings on assessment and classroom learning.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 8: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

A Response to Black & Wiliam 129

ReferencesBAIRD, J.R., FENSHAM, P.J., GUSTONE, R.F. & WHITE, R.T. (1991) The importance of reflection

in improving science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, pp.163-182.

BUDE, U. (1995) Strategies for Using Information to Improve Learning Conditions and InstructionalPractices at the School Level (Bonn, German Foundation for International Development).

CHOI, JEONG-IM & HANNAFIN, M. (1995) Situated cognition and learning environments: roles,structures, and implications, Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(2),pp. 53-69.

DWECK, C.S. (1986) Motivational processes affecting learning, American Psychologist, 41,pp. 1040-1048.

FONTANA, D. & FERNANDES, M. (1994) Improvements in mathematics performance as a con-sequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary school pupils, British Journal ofEducational Psychology, 64, pp. 407-417.

FULLER, B. (1987) What school factors raise achievement in the Third World?, Review ofEducational Research, 57, pp. 255-292.

FULLER, B. & HEYNEMAN, S.P. (1989) Third World school quality: current collapse, futurepotential, Educational Researcher, 18(2), pp. 12-19.

GIPPS, C. (1994) Beyond Testing: towards a theory of educational assessment (London, Falmer Press).GIPPS, C. (1996) Assessment for learning, in: A. LITTLE & A. WOLF (Eds) Assessment in Transition:

learning, monitoring and selection in international perspective (Oxford, Pergamon Press).HARLEN, W., GIPPS, C , BROADFOOT, P. & NUTTALL, D. (1992) Assessment and the improvement

of education, The Curriculum Journal, 3, pp. 215-230.KELLAGHAN,T. & GREANEY, V. (1992) Using Examinations to Improve Education: a study in fourteen

African countries (Washington, DC, World Bank).KELLAGHAN, T., MADAUS, G.F. & AIRASIAN, P.W. (1982) The Effects of Standardized Testing

(Boston, Kluwer-Nijhoff).LITTLE, A. (1990) The role of assessment, re-examined in international context, in: P. BROAD-

FOOT, R. MURPHY & H. TORRANCE (Eds) Changing Educational Assessment: internationalperspectives and trends (London, Routledge).

LITTLE, A. & WOLF, A. (1996) Foreword, in: A. LITTLE & A. WOLF (Eds) Assessment in Transition:learning, monitoring and selection in international perspective (Oxford, Pergamon Press).

MADAUS, F.G. & KELLAGHAN, T. (1992) Curriculum evaluation and assessment, in: P.W.JACKSON (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Curriculum (New York, Macmillan PublishingCompany).

MURPHY, P. (1995) Sources of inequity: understanding students' responses to assessment,Assessment in Education, 2, pp. 249-270.

NOAH, H.J. & ECKSTEIN, M.A. (1992) Comparing national systems of secondary school learningexaminations, in: M.A. ECKSTEIN & H.J. NOAH (Eds) Examinations: comparative andinternational studies (Oxford, Pergamon Press).

NlTKO, A.J. (1995) Curriculum-based continuous assessment: a framework for concepts,procedures and policy, Assessment in Education, 2, pp. 321-337.

RADNOR, H.A. (1994) The problems of facilitating qualitative formative assessment in pupils,British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, pp 145-160.

SCOTT, J., BUCHANAN, J. & HAIGH, N. (1997) Reflections on student-centred learning in a largeclass setting, British Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), pp. 10-30.

SEBATANE, E.M., CHABANE, C M . & LEFOKA, J.P. (1992) Teaching and Learning Strategies inLesotho: an empirical perspective of primary school classrooms (Ottawa, International Develop-ment Research Centre).

SHEPARD, L.A. (1995) Using assessment to improve learning, Educational Leadership, 52(5),pp. 38^13.

SIMPSON, M. (1990) Why criterion-referenced assessment is unlikely to improve learning, TheCurriculum Journal, 1, pp. 171-183.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 9: Assessment and Classroom Learning: a response to Black & Wiliam

130 E. M. Sebatane

URDAN,T.C. & MAEHR, M.L. (1995) Beyond a two-goal theory of motivation and achievement:a case study for social class. Review of Educational Research, 65, pp. 213-243.

YOUNG, M.F. (1993) Instructional design for situated learning, Educational Technology Researchand Development, 4, pp. 43-58.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

04:

24 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014