Understanding Assessment

Purposes, Perceptions, Practice

David Lambert, David Lines

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781135699246
• Topic: Bildung
• Subtopic: Bildung Allgemein

This is the first title in this new series, which is aimed principally at secondary PGCE and BAEd students and school- and HEI-based tutors. Each book provides a digest of the central issues around a particular topic or issues, grounded in or supported by examples of good practice, with suggestions for further reading, study and investigation. The books are not intended as 'how to' books, but rather as books which will help students and teachers to explore and understand critical theoretical issues in ways that are challenging, that invite critical reappraisals of taken-for-granted practices and perceptions, and that provide appropriate links between theory and practice. Issues related to equal opportunities and special needs are included in each separate volume . There are boxes of questions, 'think abouts' , further reading, and bulleted summary lists for the reader. This book is written specifically for teachers-in-training which will clarify the 'big picture' of monitoring and assessment and makes the crucial distinctions in this large (and still taken-for-granted) field. The authors have written widely on assessment matters and have also worked in various capacities for the QCA (and its former manifestations). They are also engagerd in initial teacher education and so know the level and market extremely well.

1 Assessment in Education: Making Connections

INTRODUCTION: AN OVERVIEW OF ASSESSMENT

The first two chapters together form an introduction to the book as a whole. Although we lay down a number of definitions of key terms that underpin the book, just as important, in our view, is our theme ‘making connections’. By this we want to promote from the start an understanding that the field of assessment in education is large, complex and, most importantly, interconnected. This is an ambitious aim for an introduction. Some readers may wish to return to it after delving into the main text in order to ‘cherry-pick’ its contents to meet their immediate questions or concerns – be they about marking, teacher assessment, GNVQs, GCSE or another specific topic within the large field we wish to consider. Whether the first two chapters are read now, or left until later, we hope that they serve as a useful guide to the territory we refer to as assessment in education.

WHAT IS ASSESSMENT?

It is important to realise that this book is not designed solely to be a practical manual. For one thing this would be a hopeless task for a single book, for in the secondary phase of education (the focus of this book), all practice, including assessment practice, is heavily contextualised by the subject discipline: practical advice needs to be subject-specific. Except when providing particular examples, or as in the case of Chapter 10 where we present a case study, this book approaches assessment generically – and therefore mainly on the level of principle. It is written primarily for teachers in training and with the training standards in mind (DfEE Circular 4/98), though we hope it will be of interest to all teachers engaged in continuing professional development (CPD). We believe that making sense of the standards and developing professionally depends on the capacity among trainees to think clearly about assessment and to make connections between this and their wider function as teachers.

Just a cursory glance at the DEE standards shows that statements made under ‘C’ (monitoring and assessment) connect with others under ‘A’ (subject knowledge) and ‘B’ (planning, preparation and classroom operations). We cannot discuss assessment sensibly without making connections with other aspects of teaching and learning. Thus, we find in Chapters 7–9, for example, reference made to theories of learning: any discussion of learning needs to include consideration of the role of assessment in its promotion (or otherwise), and any discussion of assessment needs to take account of the kind of learning we wish to promote.

Making connections such as this, between assessment and learning, encourages a holistic approach to the analysis of assessment in education and its impact. Thus, on a number of occasions in this book you will read phrases like:

• assessment is a fact of life for teachers, part of what teachers do;

• it is an organic part of teaching and learning; and

• using assessment evidence is part of the planning process.

There is nothing ‘difficult’ about such viewpoints on assessment; indeed they may have the ring of self-evident truth about them. However, it is our experience that assessment often appears to be taken as an issue separate from the creative processes of teaching and learning. After all, examinations are taken at the end of courses or modules, and marking is often taken home, to be done in the evening or weekend. Of course, these examples of assessment are ‘part of education, but they sometimes appear to be a separate part – epitomised perhaps by the ‘dark suits’ of the awarding bodies and the apparently inert and dry appearance of the mark book. It is not often we find a teacher who claims to like marking. It is more common to find marking, and assessment in general, treated as a kind of necessary evil, or chore to be undertaken as quickly and as efficiently (and painlessly) as possible.

We hope that this book will make a contribution to changing such a state of affairs. It sets out to do this by engaging the reader in a critical analysis of assessment in education. In undertaking this we have provided a great deal of information on assessment procedures and processes, so that the critique you may carry away with you is both informed and, we hope, sophisticated. We do not think that everything in the assessment garden is rosy, nor that all the recent reforms of assessment are in the interests of pupils and their teachers. But what we hope to avoid in this book is arriving too quickly at a clear cut position in relation to assessment debates.

For instance, although we advocate a better balance between external tests or examinations and internal classroom assessment, we do not fall into the trap of polarising our discussion. Whilst our analysis emphasises claims made by researchers that too much ‘high-stakes’ (i.e. the outcomes really matter, deciding for example the future educational or job opportunities) external assessment can distort teaching and learning in school, we never conclude that testing children is therefore necessarily ‘bad’. Many years ago the ‘11+’ examination was done away with (though this policy was successfully resisted in several locations) as part of the drive to introduce comprehensive schooling in the 1960s and early 1970s. This examination, designed to aid the selection of children for grammar schools, was simply abolished: no more selection, no more tests. With the advantage of retrospect, we can now see that this simple equation was not sensible. A generation later, we now have national tests at 7, 11 and 14 years – we think there may be too many, and with the publication of results since the mid-1990s, they carry a high stake – born partly out of genuine, widespread and urgent concern about educational standards. The absence of a national framework even to discuss educational standards probably allowed teaching and learning to ‘drift’ in a fog of inconclusive claims and counterclaims about its effectiveness. We now have a situation in which the government of the day can establish national targets for the proportion of children attaining ‘level four’ at age 11 years: that is, we now have a national framework which can focus national debate on educational expectations.

The establishment of ‘level four’ is a convenient point at which to note another of our broad goals in writing this book: to identify significant trends in the ‘technology’ of assessment. By this we do not mean computers! We use the term to conjure up a picture of teachers and examiners enabled in their task by drawing from a range of instruments and approaches found in their professional tool-bag. Long gone are the days when assessment was seen as unproblematic, and essentially just a matter of dreaming up a few questions to ask the pupils. The language of ‘level four’ is understood by many to be a real advance, certainly on the days of the 11+. To see why, we need to refer to a couple of fundamental ideas in the world of assessment:

• the difference between ranking and grading. The former is relatively easy and was the main function of the 11+. Collect in the pupils’ responses to a few questions and rank order them in terms of quality: the top 20 per cent could go to grammar school. Grading is harder, because it requires the marker (or rater) to judge each piece of work according to its value – which is more than merely saying whether it is ‘better’ or ‘worse’ than somebody else’s;

• the difference between norm referencing and criteria referencing. One of the limitations of the 11+ was that, no matter how reliable (see page 11) it was, it could not say much about the achievements of the children who sat it. It was good for ranking purposes, but less useful for grading; it was essentially norm referenced. Modern testing design pays far more attention to the criteria which are believed to best describe various levels of attainment.

Key distinctions such as these are woven into the book, and they underpin much of the ‘technology’ of assessment.

Having briefly described, with some examples, what we believe to be the purpose of this book and our goals in writing it, we are still in need of an initial definition. What is assessment in education? The summary below, when read in conjunction with the previous paragraphs, should make sense. It amply suggests the scale of the discussion ahead! The following section of this chapter goes on to outline how we set out to tackle this.

SUMMARY

Assessment is:

‘the processs of gathering, interpreting, recording and using information about pupils’ responses to educational tasks.’

Assessment involves:

• more formal contexts and procedures including written, timed tests marked under strict conditions; and

• less formal settings including reading pupils’ work and listening to what they have to say.

‘Thus assessment encompasses responses to regular work as well as to specially devised tasks.’

Assessment requires:

• teachers to make judgements about pupils’ responses measured against some standard of expectation. This is either (or a combination of):

– norm referenced (set by the average performance of the group); or

– criterion referenced (set by predetermined and explicit knowledge, understanding or skills).

The purposes of assessment are:

• to provide feedback to teachers and pupils about progress in order to support future learning: the formative role;

• to provide information about the level of pupils’ achievements at points during and at the end of school: the summative role;

• to provide the means for selecting by qualification: the certification role;

• to contribute to the information on which judgements are made concerning the effectiveness or quality of individuals and institutions in the system as a whole: the evaluation role.

TWO CULTURES OF ASSESSMENT

We have divided the book into two main parts, Chapters 3–6 (External assessment) and 7–9 (Classroom assessment). We do so because we perceive such a distinction is a crucial one to understand. Indeed we go as far as to claim in Chapters 10 and 11 that so profoundly different are the two that we can usefully think in terms of two ‘cultures’ of assessment. In broad terms these are characterised by the evocative phrases ‘assessment of education’ and ‘assessment for education’, which capture the vital difference in function. The former is often described as primarily summative assessment, taking place at the end of a course of study and being concerned with ‘summing up’ what has been learned – facts, principles and generalisations, applications and skills. The latter is often termed formative assessment, taking place during the course of study and concerned more with spelling out what has been learned, what is being learned and what the next learning steps may be: mistakes are valued because they can give clues to where there may be learning blocks.

External summative assessment has secured a prominent role in the education system in England and Wales, some of the reasons for which we explore in Chapter 3. Its main functions are to contribute to accountability systems on a number of levels (including measuring the effectiveness of individual teachers), and to enable selection (for example, of 16 year olds for the most appropriate pathway of post-16 study or 18 year olds for employment, further education or higher education). It therefore needs to be sure of its own fairness and reliability. As we shall see, much of the contents of Chapters 3–6 address in various ways the processes and procedures that allow awarding bodies (the former examination ‘boards’) to claim that they can ensure fairness and reliability. At the same time, we shall note that people and agencies that consume the products of external summative assessment need simple, readily comparable aggregate scores of candidates’ performances. This system depends on our accepting a basic assumption that the assessment of learning can be measured, or at least adequately approximated, by way of an examination or test instrument. Even if we can agree to accept this assumption we need to face further complexities: for example, the assessment of learning may be accurate as well as fair and reliable, but none of this says anything about the value of what has been learned. In an article concerning schooling for the future, one journalist wrote recently:

we will certainly have completely to reconsider the notion of ‘qualifications’. When I worked as an executive at the BBC, interviewing hundreds of job applicants every year, I stopped looking at the formal qualifications on their CVs. They told me virtually nothing that I needed to know about the person sitting in front of me, and they certainly didn’t argue anything useful about the quality of their ideas. That I could discover only by asking the right questions.

(Aaronovitch 1999)

Interestingly, Aaronovitch was not arguing against tests per se. Indeed, his headline nicely captures the tension in the case he was attempting to make: ‘We need old Gradgrind back in our schools – at least for now’. In his own words:

So here we have a paradox. In the short term we must put up with a bit of command education, so as to put the basics in place … but over the longer period any residue of Gradgrindism, of a longing to go back to regmentation in education, must … be expunged.

(ibid.)

Thus, he describes a tension between ‘machine-fed learning versus creativity’, two contrasting approaches to education (and assessment) quite closely related to that which describes the basic structure of this book: external assessment, predominantly summative, versus classroom assessment, which is predominantly formative. Unlike many commentators he resists the temptation to come down, simplistically, on one side or the other: both have a role and a part to play in producing talented individuals who are capable and confident about learning. In a similar vein we argue that preparing for external summative assessment is an essential part of the work teachers do (in Chapters 7–9 of this book), even though we are aware and critical of the impact the examinations industry can have on teachers and pupils if allowed to dominate. But we also argue (in Chapters 10 and 11) that formative assessment, which taps into individual progress and achievement in a manner that encourages creativity in the classroom, should occupy a central place in the classroom.

In many ways the two cultures of assessment are determined by their different purposes. As we shall see, writers on such matters have concluded often that a single assessment system cannot possibly serve purposes as divergent as summative and formative assessment at the same time. We broadly agree (which is why we have organised this book into two distinctive areas). On the other hand, we also agree that teachers have no choice but to grapple with and be part of these two cultures: they need to be part of both. To manage this, we believe a good grounding in the principles that underpin assessment in education is essential. To provide such a thing is one of the goals of this book. We will be asking you to examine your perceptions of assessment, particularly with regard to its purposes, and encourage you to adopt practices that are principled.

The next chapter outlines in more detail three of the basic concepts referred to throughout our discussio...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures
• Series Editor’s Preface
• 1 Assessment in education: making connections
• 2 Key concepts in assessment
• 3 The examinations industry: foundations and controversies
• 4 Examination technologies
• 5 Exams, exams, exams
• 6 Can we trust examinations?
• 7 Classroom assessment: making a case for formative assessment
• 8 Implementing effective classroom assessment: theory and practice
• 9 Formative assessment: implications for teaching and learning
• 10 Teacher assessment: a case study
• 11 Issues in assessment: summary discussion
• References
• Index