The Latest Information for the Education Practitionerdownloads.pearsonassessments.com/ati/downloads/edgev2n2_0.pdf · The Latest Information for the Education Practitioner ... cent

Volume 2 • Number 2

LOOK INSIDE FOR• Executive Summary

The Latest Information for the Education Practitioner

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2006 • PHI DELTA KAPPA INTERNATIONAL

Executive SummaryThe role of schools has changed. Schools previously

sorted students from the highest to the lowest achievers.But now schools have evolved into places where all stu-dents are expected to meet increasingly rigorous academ-ic standards.

As the role of schools has changed, so have the pur-poses for our assessment practices. Assessments nowmust support the learning of all students so that all cansucceed at meeting standards. A balanced assessmentprogram, used appropriately, promises to accomplishthis.

Profound achievement gains can be realized with ef-fective, formative, classroom assessments. Assessmentsmust go beyond providing merely scores and correspon-ding judgments about student learning. Assessmentsmust provide rich descriptions of the current state ofstudent achievement. In other words, if assessments areto support improvements in student learning, their resultsmust inform students how to do better the next time. Thisrequires communicating results that transmit sufficient,understandable detail to guide the learner’s actions.

Educators must use the evidence gathered through as-sessments for two purposes: to inform instructional deci-sions and to encourage students to try to learn. To meetthese purposes, assessment systems must yield accurateinformation about student learning for use at several lev-els of decision making. And they must be used in a man-ner that leads to productive reactions from both studentsand their teachers.

Assessment systems must serve many users. Decisionmakers at all levels need access to a variety of differentkinds of information in different forms at different times.If any users’ information needs are ignored or if the deci-sion maker is provided with misinformation from inept

Edge is published bimonthly between September and May at Phi DeltaKappa International, 408 North Union Street, P.O. Box 789, Bloomington,Indiana 47402-0789 USA. Online at www.pdkintl.org.

assessments, ineffective decisions will result that willharm student confidence, motivation, and learning, aswell as teacher efficacy.

This issue of Edge describes a vision of the future ofassessment that accounts for each of these ingredientsand advocates for bold movement into a new assessmentfuture, revealing what these new assessments will do forstudent confidence, motivation, and achievement, as wellas school effectiveness.

Managing Editor........David M. Ruetschlin

Designers.........Victoria Voelker, Merridee LaMantia

Typestylist.....Sheila Way-Middleton

Copyright © 2006 by Phi Delta Kappa International

ISSN 1556-6765

Edge is a PDK member benefit. Kappans can go to the PDK website, register, login, and download a free PDF edition as each new issue becomes available.Readers who want paper editions mailed to them may purchase an annual sub-scription for $28.95 — for 5 issues. Kappans can buy an annual subscription at themember discount rate of only $23.95 — a $5 savings. To subscribe, phone 1-800-766-1156 and pay by credit card. Personal orders accompanied by a checkmade out to Phi Delta Kappa International and institutional purchase orders maybe mailed to Phi Delta Kappa International, ATTN: Edge Subscription, P.O. Box 789,Bloomington, IN 47402-0789. Purchase orders may be faxed to 812/339-0018.

ContentsAssessment for Learning: A Key to Motivation

and Achievement..........................................................3

Audio Edge.......................................................................4

Balanced Assessment Systems Serve Balanced Purposes...5

About the Author ..............................................................5

Three Critical Foundations ...............................................12

A Revolution in Assessment for Student Motivation .........13

Productive Motivational Dynamics...................................14

Assessment for Learning Illustrated .................................16

Are We Ready for Balanced Assessment?........................17

Assessment at a Tipping Point.........................................19

References .....................................................................19

http://www.pdkintl.org

sessments with formative assessments, and the sec-ond is to balance large-scale assessments withclassroom assessments. Neither of these is a priori-ty for mainstream assessments at this time. But theyare becoming more important because of the re-cent discovery that profound achievement gains canbe realized with effective, formative, classroomassessments.

While these developments are encouraging,there must be more profound changes. Perhaps themost fundamental of these changes must center onthe way we judge the quality of an assessment. His-torically, the challenge issued to the measurementcommunity has been to produce dependable evi-dence of achievement. Thus attention traditionallyhas been lavished on the instruments (tests) that produce the scores. They had to be designed welland be built of high-quality ingredients to leadusers to valid and reliable inferences about studentlearning. Decades of increasingly sophisticated tech-nical advances have resulted in a deep understandingof how to produce, scale, and interpret test scoresthat consistently and accurately reflect our intendedachievement targets. To be sure, this always must remain a foundation of quality assessment. Gooddata can underpin sound instructional decisions; baddata will lead to counterproductive decisions.

This change is driven by the accelerating technicaland ethnic evolution of our culture and the corre-sponding need for all students (not just those at thetop of the achievement distribution) to becomecompetent lifelong learners.

Our assessment practices historically have beendesigned to promote accountability by separatingthe successful from the unsuccessful learners andby highlighting their differences. However, giventhe new mission of ensuring universal competence,assessments now must support the learning of allstudents so that all can succeed at meeting stan-dards. The result must be balanced assessment sys-tems and a fundamental rethinking of the dynamicsof assessment in effective schools.

Some important facets of this evolution in ourpriorities already have occurred. One example isour shift from almost total reliance on norm-refer-enced interpretation of test scores to far more fre-quent application of criterion-referenced interpreta-tion of results. We have emerged from the era ofcomparing students with other students based onachievement to a time when we compare studentperformance to pre-set standards; and now we ask,who has and has not met standards?

Two other important shifts are just beginning toemerge. One is the desire to balance summative as-

EDge: Assessment for Learning 3

Assessmentfor Learning:A Key to Motivationand Achievement

Rick Stiggins

The role of schools has changed. Previously schools sorted studentsfrom the highest to the lowest achievers — that is, some succeeded atlearning while others tumbled into chronic failure. But schools haveevolved into places where all students are expected to meet increas-ingly rigorous academic standards.

4 November/December 2006 • Volume 2 Number 2

However, we must judge the quality of an assess-ment on far more than merely the dependability ofits results. Quality also must be evaluated based onthe effect of those results on the learner. The mostdependable assessment in the world cannot be re-garded as high quality if it has a counterproductiveeffect on learning or on students. For instance, anaccurate score that causes a student to give up inhopelessness cannot be regarded as a quality as-sessment because it does more harm than good.Thus quality must become a function of the instru-ment and its score must be evaluated in terms of (orconsidered simultaneously with) the context andmanner within which it is used. Quality controlframeworks of the past have not taken this kind ofeffect on the learner into account.

Assessments must go beyond providing merelyscores and corresponding judgments about studentlearning. Assessments must provide rich descrip-tions of the current state of student achievement. Inother words, if assessments are to support improve-ments in student learning, their results must informstudents how to do better the next time. This re-quires communicating results that transmit suffi-cient, understandable detail to guide the learner’sactions. In such contexts, single scores or gradeswill not suffice.

In addition, if they are to support learning, as-sessments must evolve from being isolated eventsto becoming events that happen in an ongoing, in-terconnected series so that patterns in student learn-ing will be revealed. In this way, both the learnerand the teacher will be able to discern not only thestudent’s current level of achievement, but also howmuch the student’s capabilities have improved,which is a powerful booster for confidence andmotivation.

Finally, to support learning, assessments mustmove beyond merely informing the instructionaldecisions of school leaders to informing decisionsmade by students and teachers, too. That means thatwe will need to design balanced assessment sys-tems that serve diverse purposes by meeting the in-formation needs of all decision makers. Historical-ly, they have not done this.

This issue of Edge describes a vision of the fu-ture of assessment that accounts for each of theseingredients and advocates for bold movement into anew assessment future, revealing what these newassessments will do for student confidence, motiva-tion, and achievement, as well as school effectiveness.

This issueavailable in audio

Kappans can visit

the PDK website—

www.pdkintl.org

—register, log in, and

download the audio

version of this article.

Use Audio Edge

anytime you are

on the go and want

to fill your ears with

the latest information.

All back issues of

Edge also are avail-

able online.


About the Author

Rick StigginsRick Stiggins is founder and director ofthe ETS Assessment Training Institute in Portland, Oregon. ATI’s flagship pro-gram, Classroom Assessment FORStudent Learning, provides a multi-media, collaborative, and hands-on way for teachers to become competent,confident, classroom assessors.

Stiggins has served on the faculties ofMichigan State University, the Universityof Minnesota, and Lewis and ClarkCollege. In addition, he directed testdevelopment at ACT in Iowa City andserved as a senior researcher at theNorthwest Regional EducationalLaboratory.


Balanced Assessment SystemsServe Balanced Purposes

If schools are to be effective, educators must usethe evidence gathered through assessments for twopurposes: to inform instructional decisions and toencourage students to try to learn. In order to meetthese purposes, assessment systems must yield ac-curate information about student learning for use atseveral levels of decision making, and they must beused in a manner that effectively manages the emo-tional dynamics of the assessment experience fromthe learner’s point of view.

Managing the emotional dynamics of assessmentmeans that educators must strive to create assess-ments that lead to productive reactions from bothstudents and their teachers. For the student, a pro-ductive reaction leaves them confident and willingto keep trying. A counterproductive response hasthe student confused, frustrated, and ready to giveup in hopelessness. For the teacher, the assessmentis helpful if it reveals what comes next in the learn-ing. The assessment is counterproductive when itleaves teachers with no idea of what to do next.

Productive assessment systems must serve manyusers. Decision makers at all levels need access to avariety of different kinds of information in differentforms at different times. If any users’ informationneeds are ignored or if the decision maker is provid-ed with misinformation from inept assessments, in-effective decisions will result that will harm studentconfidence, motivation, and learning, as well asteacher efficacy.

For this reason, the first step in creating a qualityassessment must be a clear sense of the informationneeds of the users. The assessor needs a clear senseof what kind of information is needed in order toknow what kind of assessment must be conducted.

Table 1 analyzes the full range potential assess-ment users and uses within a school district. It be-gins by describing the assessment demands of theclassroom level, where students, teachers, and par-ents make their instructional decisions. At the class-room level, assessment can be used both to supportlearning and to verify it. Next, the table progressesto the program evaluation and support level, whereteacher leaders and teams, as well as principals,curriculum personnel, and others, rely on specificapplications of assessment. In this case, one canidentify students in need of help or evaluate pro-gram effects. And finally, we move to the institu-


tional and policy level of assessment use, where re-source allocation, program, policy, and other deci-sions are made by school, district, and communityleaders. In this case, accountability decisions be-come most important.

To devise a truly useful assessment, one needs toknow:

• What decision is to be made?• By whom?• What information will help them?

The point of table one is that the answers varyprofoundly across the three levels. For instance, atthe classroom level, the answers are as follows:

• Decision: What comes next in the learning?• Made by: Students, teachers, parents.• Needed information: Continuous evidence of

each student’s level of mastery of the stepsleading to each standard.

The answers to the same three driving questionsare different at the level of program support:

• Decision: Which students are meeting whichstandards?

• Made by: Teacher teams, teacher leaders, prin-cipals, curriculum personnel.

• Needed information: Periodic but frequentevidence of each student’s mastery of eachstandard; comparable data permits aggregationacross students.

It is critically important that we understand thatboth classroom and program levels of assessmentand decision making are important, but they are dif-ferent. One seeks to reflect progress toward masteryof standards, the other success in meeting standards.One involves only the adult decision makers, theother weaves students into the mix also. One focusesattention on the individual learner, the other on datasummarized over learners. Productive assessmentsystems seek a synergy between the two by honoringthe information needs of all important users.

And at the institutional and policy level:• Decision: Are enough students meeting re-

quired standards?• Made by: Superintendents, school boards, leg-

islators, taxpayers.• Needed information: Annual summaries of

students’ mastery of standards derived fromaccountability tests.

Thus the measurement community, as well as all

The most dependable

assessment in the world

cannot be regarded

as high quality if it has

a counterproductive

effect on learning or

on students.


Important Question Information Needed to Implications for theTo be Answered Answer the Question Assessment System

What am I supposed to learn? Learning targets described in Accurate assessments must student-friendly language at the reflect the learning targets beginning of learning students are given

What have I learned already, Evidence must allow students Continuous sequence of and what do I still need to to track progress and understand accurate classroom assess- work on? where they are now in relation ments must provide descriptive

to expectations at any point feedback in student- friendly in time terms during learning

Have I met or am I progressing Status regarding mastery of each Assessments must provide evi-toward the important standard in student-friendly dence of standards mastered achievement standards? language periodically throughout the

year

Have I met the state achieve- Status regarding meeting state Annual state assessments ment expectations? standards in student-friendly reporting standards mastered

language and not yet mastered

Table 1: Comprehensive Analysis of Assessment Users and Uses.

Level 1: Classroom Assessment User: Student


Level 1: Classroom Assessment User: Teacher

Implications for theDecisions to be Made Information Needed Assessment System

What are my students Standards deconstructed into All assessments must reflect supposed to learn? classroom targets leading, these targets; it must be clear

over time, to each standard; which target any assessment district curriculum maps reflectsof learning progression

What have they learned Continuous evidence revealing Continuous sequence of accu-already, and what do they still each student’s current place rate classroom assessments need to learn? in the learning progressions used during the learning to

leading up to each standard provide picture of progress toward mastery of standards

Which students need special Evidence of how students are Assessments must provide evi-services? doing in relation to grade- or dence of students’ relative

age-level expectations status or progress to deter-mine eligibility

Have my students met or are Status of each student’s mastery Periodic, interim benchmark they progressing on the of each standard assessments reflecting studentimportant achievement mastery of standards through-standards? out the year

Did they meet state achieve- Status regarding each student’s Annual assessments of each ment expectations? mastery of each state standard student’s mastery of each

state standard


Level 1: Classroom Assessment User: Parent

Implications for theDecisions to be Made Information Needed Assessment System

What is my child supposed to Learning targets in family-friendly Assessments must accuratelylearn? language provided from the reflect these targets

beginning of learning

What has my child learned Assessments providing Continuous sequence of accu-already, and what does she or information on current place in rate classroom assessments he still need to learn? the progression to each learning used during the learning need

target at any point in time to provide picture of progress

Is my child progressing satis- Information gained from my Periodic summative classroomfactorily in meeting the child’s self-assessment, indica- assessments must feed into teacher’s classroom learning tions from the teacher or from grade or summary of class-expectations? my child room standards met

Does my child need the Student’s learning in relation Assessment evidence needs services of a specialized to grade- or age-level interpretation in terms of program? expectations expected achievement levels

Has my child met the state Status regarding meeting each Evidence of mastery of each achievement expectations? state standard standard gathered annually

with accurate assessments


Level 2: Instructional Support Users:Principal, Curriculum Leaders,Teacher Teams

Decisions to be Made Information Needed Assessment Implications

What standards are students Learning targets in the form of Assessments must accurately expected to master by subject achievement standards organized reflect these standards and across our range of grade levels by grade and subjects as they their associated classroom-and classrooms? unfold within and across grade level learning targets

levels

Which of these standards are Information revealing patterns Comparable evidence of students mastering or progress- over time within the school year student learning status ing appropriately toward? Are of achievement within and across collected periodically during there problem areas? teachers, grades, and subjects the year

What standards are students to Standards mastered by grade and Assessments must accuratelymaster across our classrooms, subject mapped within and across reflect these standardsgrades, and schools? grade levels across schools

Did enough of our students Proportion of students meeting Annual assessments reveal meet standards this year? each standard how each student does on

each standard


Level 3: Policy-Level Users: Superintendent,Various PolicyMakers (School Boards, Legislators, Departments of Education,

Business and Community Leaders)

Implications for theDecisions Information Needed Assessment System

What standards are to be met? Learning targets in the form Assessments must accurately of achievement standards reflect these standardsorganized by grade and subject

Which of these standards are Information revealing patterns of Comparable evidence of stu-students mastering or making achievement within and across dent learning status collectedappropriate progress toward in schools periodically during the yearwhat schools?

What standards are students Learning targets in the form of Assessments must accurately expected to master in our achievement standards organized reflect these standardsschools? by grade and subject

How many of our students are Scores reflecting patterns of Comparable evidence of stu-meeting standards? achievement within and across dent learning status collected

schools and districts periodically

Did enough of our students Proportion of students meeting Annual assessments show how meet standards this year? each standard each student scored on each

standard

in school leadership and teaching positions, mustsee and understand the fundamental differences inthe kinds of information needed across these levelsof assessment use. No single assessment is capableof meeting the information needs of all of these var-ious users. A productive, multi-level assessmentsystem is needed to be sure that all instructional de-cisions are informed and made well. Table 1 breaksthose needs into more specific person-by-person detail. Fail to meet the information needs of anyoneon this list or fail to implement quality assessmentsat any level, and we place students directly inharm’s way.

In other words, all parts of the system must maketheir unique contribution for schools to be effective.If assessment isn’t working effectively in the class-room, program or policy levels of assessment cannot pick up the slack. If bad decisions are beingmade during the learning, then there isn’t an interimor annual assessment yet invented that can over-come the dire consequences for the learner. At thesame time, equally important decisions are made atinstructional support and policy levels that class-room assessment cannot replace.

The balanced assessment systems of the future— unlike the unbalanced systems of the past thatwere driven by standardized tests — can meet theinformation needs of all users.

We have available today all of the ingredientsneeded to use assessment productively. These ingre-dients include a large-scale assessment legacy,banks of high-quality test items for formative as-sessments, information management technologies,and the capacity to provide teachers with muchneeded professional development in classroom as-sessment. Now the challenge is to bring all of theparts to bear on behalf of student well-being.

Three Critical FoundationsOne structural foundation of any assessment sys-

tem is the framework of achievement expectationsto be reflected in the exercises and scoring schemesof its various component assessments. Whetherthose guiding achievement expectations are framedas state standards, local standards, a teacher’s class-room standards, or the local curriculum designed totake students over time to those standards, certainkeys to quality must be met. For example, the as-sessments must be:

• Centered on the truly important learnings ofthe field of study.


... the starting place for

developing a balanced

assessment system is

verifying the quality of

the learning expectations

on which it will rest.


• Clearly and completely integrated into learn-ing progressions within and across grades.

• Within developmental reach of the studentswho are to master them.

• Reflective of the best current thinking in thefield.

• Manageable in number for mastery within theinstructional context.

• Thoroughly mastered by those teacherscharged with helping students master them.

If these criteria for sound standards are not met,then both high-quality assessment and effective in-struction will remain beyond reach. Thus the start-ing place for developing a balanced assessment sys-tem is verifying the quality of the learningexpectations on which it will rest. Until each localset of standards is in order, further consideration ofassessment quality and use will be pointless.

The second foundation of an effective, balancedassessment is a commitment to developing and im-plementing standards-based schools. Faculty mustunderstand what it means to design and offer stan-dards-based instruction, and they must be commit-ted to maximizing the success of each student inmastering the standards. Without these, focus willbe missing, as will the willingness to invest insuccess.

The third foundation of a productive assessmentsystem is accurate assessment. To yield accurateresults, assessments must meet four standards ofquality. They must 1) be designed to serve a specific,predetermined purpose (user and use); 2) arise froma specific, predetermined definition of achievementsuccess; 3) be designed specifically to fit into eachparticular purpose and target context; and 4) com-municate their results effectively (Stiggins et al.2004). When an assessment is of high quality, it issensitive enough to detect and accurately reflectchanges in student achievement over time. Whenclassroom, interim benchmark, or state assessmentsare not accurate or sensitive enough to track suchchanges, they will not contribute to productive as-sessment systems.

A Revolution in Assessment for Student Motivation

When the mission of schools was merely to rankstudents (instead of also ensuring the competence ofall students), the amount of time available to learn

was fixed: one year per grade. The amount learnedby the end of that time was free to vary: some of uslearned a great deal, some very little. Able learnersbuilt on past success to grow rapidly. However, stu-dents who failed to master the early prerequisiteswithin the allotted time failed to learn that whichfollowed. After 13 years of cumulative treatment inthis manner, we were spread along an achievementcontinuum that literally labeled each student’s rankin class upon graduation.

The motivational dynamics of this process wereclear. From the very earliest grades, some studentsrode winning streaks to the top. Right from the start,they scored high on assessments. The emotional ef-fect of this was to help them come to believe them-selves to be capable learners — they became in-creasingly confident in school. That gave them theemotional strength to risk striving for more successbecause, in their minds, success was within reach ifthey tried. Notice, by the way, that the trigger fortheir learning success was their interpretation oftheir own success on assessments.

But other students scored very low on tests rightfrom the beginning. This caused them to doubt theirown capabilities as learners. They began to loseconfidence, which, in turn, deprived them of theemotional reserves to continue to risk trying. Chron-ic failure was hard to hide and became embarrass-ing. It was better not to try. As their motivationwaned, of course, achievement followed. Noticeagain how the learners’ own interpretation of assess-ment results influenced their confidence and will-ingness to strive.

In these schools, if some students worked hardand learned a great deal, that was a positive result,as they would finish high in the rank order. And ifsome students gave up in the face of what they be-lieved to be inevitable failure, that also was a neces-sary result, because they would occupy places verylow in the rank order. The greater the spread ofachievement from top to bottom, the more depend-able would be the rank order. This is why, if astudent gave up and stopped trying (even droppedout of school), it was regarded as that student’sproblem, not the teacher’s or school’s. The school’sresponsibility was to provide the opportunity tolearn. If students didn’t take advantage of the oppor-tunity, that was not the system’s responsibility.

The important lesson is that the student’s emo-tional reactions to assessment results will determinewhat the student thinks, feels, and is motivated to do


wrong side of these crucial decisions and thus stoptrying, it does not matter what the adults aroundthem decide. In effect, students can render theirteachers’ instructional decisions null and void. Theyhave it within their power to make the adults inef-fective and to prevent them from doing anythingabout it. If a student decides that the learning isbeyond reach for her or him or that the risk of pub-lic failure is too great and too embarrassing, then re-gardless of what adults do, there will be no learning.

So the essential issue for adults is, What can wedo to help students answer the above questions inways that keep them trying? We know how to dothis, and it is not by intensifying the intimidation!Furthermore, we know what will happen to studentachievement when we put effective classroom as-sessment practices in place. This leads to a keyfeature of the vision of excellence in assessment ofthe future.

Productive Motivational DynamicsClassroom assessment for student learning turns

the classroom assessment process and its resultsinto an instructional intervention designed to in-crease, not merely monitor, student learning, confi-dence, and motivation. Research evidence gatheredin hundreds of studies conducted around the worldover the past decade shows that the consistent appli-cation of principles of “assessment for learning” cangive rise to unprecedented gains in student achieve-ment, especially for perennial low achievers. Theimplications of such gains for raising test scores andclosing achievement score gaps are profound.

One unique feature of the formative assessmentfor learning process is that it acknowledges the crit-ical importance of the instructional decisions madeby students and their teachers working as a team —it provides the information they need when theyneed it. In that context, students also become con-sumers of assessment information, using evidenceof their own progress to understand what comesnext for them.

Another important feature is its reliance on re-peated self-assessments, each of which instructs thelearner on how to improve performance on the nextone. This kind of continuous descriptive feedback isprovided strategically in amounts that students can ad-dress effectively, that is, in amounts that do not over-whelm students. This feedback builds progressivelyover time and thus helps students continue to believethat success is within reach if they keep trying.


in response to those results. They can respond ineither of two motivational ways to any set of assess-ment results, one productive and the other not. Theproductive reaction has students saying, “I under-stand these results. I know what to do next to learnmore. I can handle this. I choose to keep trying.”The counterproductive response leaves studentssaying, “I don’t know what these results mean forme. I have no idea what to do next. I can’t handlethis. I quit.”

If society wants all students to meet standards, asspecified above, then all students must believe theycan meet those standards. They all must be confi-dent enough about their chances of success to bemotivated to take the risk of trying. Any other emo-tional state (such as the state of perpetual fear per-petrated in the schools of our youth) for any studentis unacceptable. We can’t have students who haveyet to meet standards losing faith in themselves andgiving up in futility.

As a result, assessment practices that permit,even encourage, some students to give up on learn-ing must be replaced by those that engender hopeand sustained effort for all students. In short, the en-tire emotional environment surrounding the experi-ence of being evaluated must change for all, but es-pecially for perennial low achievers. The drivingemotional force of fear triggered by the prospect ofan upcoming test now must be replaced by the emo-tions of optimism and persistence triggered by thebelief that, “I can succeed at learning if I try.” Inother words, students must have continuous accessto credible evidence of their own academic success.

I believe that school improvement experts havemade the mistake of believing that the adults in thesystem are the most important assessment users andinstructional decision makers. That is, they believedthat schools become more effective as the adultsmake better instructional decisions. Certainly par-ents, teachers, school leaders, and policy makersmake crucial decisions that can influence the quali-ty of schools; and the more those decisions arebased on data, the better. But, in fact, students maybe even more important data-based instructional de-cision makers than are the adults.

Consider, for example, that students constantlyare deciding if they can do the learning or not. Theyask, can I get this, or is it just too hard for me? Is thelearning worth the energy I must expend to attain it?Is the learning worth the risk of public failure? Wemust understand that, if students come down on the


Still another unique feature is its reliance oncarefully drawn learning progressions or curriculummaps written in teacher-, student-, and family-friendly versions so that the trajectory (that is, whathas been learned and what comes next) is clear to allthroughout the learning. This, like the descriptivefeedback described above, leads directly to our sec-ond reason for assessing: If we assess to motivatestudents to try, assessment for learning enables stu-dents by helping them watch themselves grow — bycausing them to believe that success is within reachif they keep trying.

Thus the student’s role in an assessment forlearning environment is to strive to understand whatsuccess looks like and to use each assessment todetermine how to do better the next time. Assess-ments become far more than merely one-time eventsattached to the end of the teaching. They becomepart of the learning process by keeping studentsposted on their progress and confident enough tocontinue striving. Students become partners in theself-assessment process by, for example, collaborat-ing with their teachers in creating and using assess-ments like those they will be held accountable forlater. This reveals to them the secrets to their ownlearning success while they are still learning. Stu-dents become partners in the accumulation ofgrowth portfolios that reveal to them, their teachers,and their families the changes in their own achieve-ment as it is happening. This builds confidence thatultimate success is within reach. Finally, studentsbecome partners in communicating about their ownlearning success as they rely on concrete evidencefrom their portfolios presented in student-led con-ferences to inform their families of their learning.

Evidence gathered around the world consistentlyreveals that, when such practices as these play outroutinely in classrooms, effect sizes (test scoregains) of as much as a full standard deviation can berealized, attributable to the application of formativeclassroom assessment for student learning.

In his original mastery learning research, Bloomand his students (1984) made extensive use ofclassroom assessment in support of learning in justthe same terms as does the assessment for learningconcept described here. Bloom reported subsequentgains in student test performance of one to two stan-dard deviations. Black and Wiliam, in their 1998watershed research review of more than 250 studiesfrom around the world on the effect of classroomassessment, report gains of a half to a full standard

... all parts of the system

must make their

unique contribution

for schools to be

effective.


The important lesson is

that the student’s

emotional reactions to

assessment results will

determine what the stu-

dent thinks, feels, and

is motivated to do in

response to those results.

deviation, with the largest gains being realized bylow achievers. Meisels and colleagues (2003) in-volved students in performance assessments andreport gains of more than 1.5 standard deviations on subsequent tests. And finally, Rodriguez (2004)reports effects of similar size.

Assessment for Learning IllustratedConsider the following assessment experience

from a high school English class. The assignmentwas to read three novels by the same author, devel-op a thesis statement, and write a term paper de-fending it, citing references from the literature.

To set students up for success, the teacher beganby providing the students with a sample of an out-standing paper to read and analyze in order to deter-mine what features made it outstanding. The nextday in class they brainstormed and discussed whatmade it good, creating a written record of key fea-tures. Then the teacher gave them a sample of a verypoor quality paper. Again they analyzed and evalu-ated its features in some detail. Comparing the two,they identified essential differences, ultimately col-laborating in the development of a set of keys toquality that they transformed into a set of ratingscales, each depicting the continuum of qualityalong a key dimension. Since students were partnersin the process, the resulting scoring guide was writ-ten in student-friendly language and could be ac-companied by examples of student work to illustrateeach key.

Now the teacher was able to formulate instruc-tional processes that dealt with each of the keys tosuccess, one at a time and in sufficient depth to meetthe learning needs of all students.

Furthermore, with the specific keys to qualityclearly in mind, students were prepared to write thefirst drafts of their papers. They exchanged drafts,analyzing and evaluating each other’s work andproviding descriptive feedback on how to improveeach. If students wanted feedback from their teacheron any particular dimension of quality, they couldrequest and would receive it. Each revision yieldeda paper of better quality. The paper was finishedwhen the student knew it had reached an appropriatelevel of quality.

In the end, not every paper was outstanding. Butmost were of very high quality, and each studentwas confident of that fact before submitting theirwork for final evaluation and grading. If a student’s


confidence as a writer had not been established bythis time, this experience probably solidified it formany.

This teacher followed a proven set of principlesof assessment for learning (Stiggins et al. 2004) thatshows students what success looks like, how closethey are coming to that target as they work, and how to continue to close the gap between their work and the agreed vision of excellence. Thoseprinciples are:

1. Start instruction by sharing a student-friendlyversion of the learning target(s) with the learners.

2. Accompany that with samples of student workthat reveal the full range of quality.

3. Provide students with continuous access todescriptive feedback; help them see how to dobetter the next time.

4 Help them learn how to generate their owndescriptive feedback.

5. Teach one facet of quality at a time.6. Teach students the practice of focused revision

— how to improve their work one facet at a time.7. Teach students to understand, keep track of, and

reflect on changes in their own proficiencies asthey evolve over time.

When this kind of classroom assessment practiceis used to inform and motivate students day to dayin the classroom and is balanced with periodic stan-dardized tests, the amount and quality of informa-tion brought to bear in the service of student successcan be profound. Its effect on learning success isimmediate and long lasting.

Are We Ready for Balanced Assessment?We know how to transform our assessment sys-

tems for use in standards-based schools. We under-stand what policy makers need to do in order to bal-ance our assessment systems. We can continue torefine accountability oriented, large-scale assess-ments through sound research and developmentcapacities, as we have for decades. In addition, withour banks of readily available assessment items andscoring capacities, along with instructional manage-ment technologies, we can help local districtsdevelop interim, benchmark, or short-cycle assess-ments for use at the level of instructional programsupport. Finally, because there now are professionaldevelopment programs in day-to-day classroom as-sessment, for the first time in the evolving history of

assessment in America, we can help local educatorsdevelop and use high-quality, day-to-day classroomassessments to support learning. So a totally bal-anced and integrated assessment system, with allparts working together in the service of student suc-cess, is within reach.

Not only can we help educators devise high-qual-ity assessments, but we also know far more thanever before about how to use them effectively. Thesevere and chronic problem we can address now isthe fact that very few teachers and almost no schooladministrators have been given the opportunity tolearn about principles of sound assessment practiceof any sort, let alone assessment for learning. Whilevirtually all licensing standards require competencein assessment, typically neither preservice nor in-service teacher or administrator training programsinclude this kind of training (Crooks 1989; Stiggins1999; Shepard et al. 2005). As a result of this lackof preparation:

• Educators are unable to differentiate amongthe various information needs of differentassessment users, including students.

• Achievement targets remain written only at thelevel of state or district standards, rather thanbeing translated into classroom-level learningprogressions that lead up to each standard.

• The risk of inaccurate classroom assessmentsremains high.

• Feedback provided to students remains evalu-ative (such as grades), rather than helpfullydescriptive.

• Students rarely are involved in self-assess-ment, tracking their own progress, or commu-nicating their learning to others, all of whichcan give rise to profound learning gains.

Comprehensive, professional learning programson sound assessment practice represent the only so-lution to this long-standing gap in the professionalcompetence of our nation’s teachers. These pro-grams are needed for both preservice and inserviceteachers. We must give new professionals the infor-mation needed to fulfill their increasingly complexassessment responsibilities, and we must provideolder professionals who were not offered the oppor-tunity to learn previously with those opportunitiesnow. The essential competencies to be mastered aredetailed in Table 2.

Preservice teacher preparation programs mustprovide foundational training in sound assessment


Table 2: Indicators of Sound Classroom Assessment Practice*

* Reproduced by permission from R. Stiggins, J.Arter, J. Chappuis, and S. Chappuis, Classroom Assessment FOR Student Learning:Doing It Right — Using It Well (Portland, Ore.: ETS Assessment Training Institute, 2004), p. 27.

1. Why Assess?Assessment Procedures andResults Serve Clear andAppropriate Purposes

2. Assess What?Assessments Reflect Clear andValued Learning Targets

3. Assess How?Learning Targets AreTranslated into Assessmentsthat Yield Accurate Results

4. Communicate How?Assessment Results AreManaged Well andCommunicated Effectively

5. Involve Students How?Students Are Involved inTheir Own Assessment

a. Teachers understand who the users and uses of classroom assessment information are and know their information needs.

b. Teachers understand the relationship between assessment and student motivation and craft assessment experiences to maximizemotivation.

c. Teachers use classroom assessment processes and results forma-tively (assessment for learning).

d. Teachers use classroom assessment results summatively (assessmentof learning) to inform someone beyond the classroom about students’ achievement as of a particular point in time.

e. Teachers have a comprehensive plan over time for integrating assessment for and of learning in the classroom.

a. Teachers have clear learning targets for students; they know how toturn broad statements of content standards into classroom-level targets.

b. Teachers understand the various types of learning targets they holdfor students.

c. Teachers select learning targets focused on the most importantthings students need to know and be able to do.

d. Teachers have a comprehensive plan over time for assessing learningtargets.

a. Teachers understand what the various assessment methods are.b. Teachers choose assessment methods that match intended learning

targets.c. Teachers design assessments that serve intended purposes.d. Teachers sample learning appropriately in their assessments.e. Teachers write assessment questions of all types well.f. Teachers avoid sources of bias that distort results.

a. Teachers record assessment of information accurately, keep it confi-dential, and appropriately combine and summarize it for reporting(including grades). Such summary accurately reflects current level ofstudent learning.

b. Teachers select the best reporting option (grades, narratives, portfo-lios, conferences) for each context (learning targets and users).

c. Teachers interpret and use standardized test results correctly.d. Teachers effectively communicate assessment results to students.e. Teachers effectively communicate assessment results to a variety of

audiences outside the classroom, including parents, colleagues, andother stakeholders.

a. Teachers make learning targets clear to students.b. Teachers involve students in assessing, tracking, and setting goals for

their own learning.c. Teachers involve students in communicating about their own learning.


practice. As preservice teachers come to understandthe nature of the achievement targets their studentsneed to master, so too must they learn how to useclassroom assessment to track progress. This can beaccomplished with sound coursework, but it wouldbe even better if professors in teacher educationcourses would model sound assessment for learningpractices in their own teaching.

Inservice programs for teachers must model theprinciples of sound professional development synthe-sized by the National Staff Development Council.Such learning experiences do the following:

• Focus on strategies proven to improve studentlearning (as effective, balanced assessmentclearly has).

• Enable teachers to reflect on and improve theirpractice.

• Be an ongoing program, promoting continu-ous development over time.

• Rely on collaborative interaction and exten-sive hands-on practice.

• Merge into the normal work of teachers, help-ing them learn by working in their own, real,classroom context.

• Accommodate differences in teachers’ startingplaces and rates of learning.

In our work at the ETS Assessment Training In-stitute, we have invested a decade and a half increating and refining a learning team-based profes-sional development program that lays this solidfoundation of assessment literacy (Stiggins et al.2004).

Assessment at a Tipping PointThe current state of affairs is clear: We know

what teachers need to know and understand to as-sess effectively day to day or year to year. We canprovide them with the assessment tools and tech-nologies needed to assess effectively.

It is clear what will happen to student learningwhen educators effectively use a balanced assess-ment program that motivates students. The achieve-ment gains will be profound, especially for lowachievers. And we know how to deliver the properassessment competencies into the hands of all keyusers with efficient and effective professionaldevelopment.

The only unanswered question is: Will practition-ers be given the opportunity to learn to assess effec-tively? Historically, the answer has been a resound-

ing “No.” As a result, the immense potential of as-sessment to support student learning has gone un-tapped. It need not be so. We have in hand a new vi-sion of excellence in assessment that will tap theconfidence, motivation, and learning potential thatresides within every student.

ReferencesBlack, P., and Wiliam, D. “Assessment and Classroom Learn-

ing.” Educational Assessment: Principles, Policy and Prac-tice 5, no. 1 (1998): 7-74.

Bloom, B. “The Search for Methods of Group Instruction asEffective as One-to-One Tutoring.” Educational Leadership41, no. 8 (1984): 4-17.

Chappuis, S.; Stiggins, R.; Arter, J.; and Chappuis, J. Assess-ment FOR Learning: An Action Guide for School Leaders.2nd ed. Portland, Ore.: ETS Assessment Training Institute,2005.

Crooks, T.J. “The Impact of Classroom Evaluation on Stu-dents.” Review of Educational Research 58, no. 4 (1988):438-481.

Meisels, S.; Atkins-Burnett, S.; Xue, Y.; and Bickel, D.D. “Cre-ating a System of Accountability: The Impact of Instruction-al Assessment on Elementary Children’s Achievement TestScores.” Educational Policy Analysis Archives 11, no. 9(2003). http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n9/. Retrieved 21 April2003.

Rodriguez, M.C. “The Role of Classroom Assessment in Stu-dent Performance on TIMSS.” Applied Measurement in Ed-ucation 17, no. 1 (2004): 1-24.

Shepard, L.; Hammerness, K.; Darling-Hammond, L.; Rust, F.;Snowden, J.B.; Gordon, E.; Gutierrez, C.; and Pacheco, J. InPreparing Teachers for a Changing World: What TeachersShould Know and Be Able to Do, edited by L. Darling-Hammond and J. Bransford. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,2005.

Stiggins, R.J. “Evaluating Classroom Assessment Training inTeacher Education.” Educational Measurement: Issues andPractice 18, no. 1 (1999): 23-27.

Stiggins, R.; Arter, J.; Chappuis, J.; and Chappuis, S. ClassroomAssessment FOR Student Learning: Doing It Right — UsingIt Well. Portland, Ore.: ETS Assessment Training Institute,2004.

http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n9

Send institutional purchase order to Phi Delta Kappa International, P.O. Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402-0789. Include $4.95 shipping and handlingon orders up to $25; from $25.01 to $75, add $9.95; more than $75, add $9.95 plus 8% of merchandise total. Indiana residents add 6% sales tax.Purchase orders and credit card orders also are accepted by fax at 812/339-5556. E-mail orders to [email protected] and include all pertinentinformation. Website: www.pdkintl.org

TO ORDER, PHONE 1-800-766-1156

American Education in the 21st Century, by Dan H. WishnietskyWhat are the issues that face education in the 21stcentury? Wishnietsky’s examines globalism, technol-ogy, diversity, equity, ideology and politics, econom-ics, student health, and lifelong learning.

159 pp. product code: AETFCList price: $19.95 (members 14.95)

Now only $10 (members $7.50)

Assessing School ClimateReproducible assessment form from the Handbookfor Conducting School Improvement Projects. A usefultool for administrators interested in improving theirschool’s climate for students and teachers.

81⁄2 x 11, 8 pp. product code: ASCList Price: $10.00 (members $7.50)

Now only $5 (members $3.75)

Quest for Truth: Scientific Progress and Religious Beliefs, by Mano SinghamPhysicist Mano Singham sorts out the battles in thescience/religion wars and helps make sense of ques-tions of truth, objective reality, and knowledge.

198 pp. product code: QTList Price: $22. Now only $2

Whose Values? Reflections of a New EnglandPrep School Teacher, by Barbara Bernache-BakerDebunking the myths that surround the teaching ofvalues in American college preparatory schools,Bernache-Baker’s historical study and reflective com-mentary also raise pertinent questions about charac-ter education in general.

239 pp., clothbound product code: WVCList price: $34.95 (members $26.95) Now only $17.50 (members $13.50)

paperback product code: WVPList price: $22.95 (members $17.95)

Now only $11.50 (members $9)

A Cry for Character, by DaryMateraMatera tells the true story of thefirst-ever character educationprogram that was pushed for andcreated by students themselvesagainst the most unlikely oppo-nents: the teachers. Published byPrentice Hall.

232 pp. product code: CFCList price $24. Now only $12

Pathways toIndependence: Reading,Writing, and Learning inGrades 3-8,by Jo Worthy, Karen Broaddus,and Gay IveyThis comprehensive text pres-ents a core of research-basedapproaches to engaging, effec-tive literacy instruction in themiddle grades. Published byGuilford.

345 pp. product code: PTIList price: $19.95. Now only $10

Leadership: The CharacterEducation Imperative Video,featuring Mary C. AranhaA compelling argument for therole of leadership in characterdevelopment. Published byNational Professional Resources.

VHS 32 min. product code: LCEIVList price $49.95. Now only $25

Reading Comprehension: Strategies forIndependent Learners, by Camille Blachowicz and Donna OglePractical, research-based guidelines for reading com-prehension instruction in grades K-9. Published byGuilford.

274 pp. product code: RCSILList Price: $19.95. Now only $10

Our warehouse is stuffed with books, and our accountantsays we’ll get stuck with a hefty inventory charge if we don’t getrid of them soon. So, to clear those shelves, we are offering thefollowing selected books for half price. Order quickly, becausewhen these books are gone, they’re gone for good.

mailto:[email protected]


Documents

The Latest Information for the Education Practitionerdownloads.pearsonassessments.com/ati/downloads/edgev2n2_0.pdf · The Latest Information for the Education Practitioner ... cent