Assessment for Better Learning

Teachers are responsible for internal assessment because of their long history of assessing the skills and competencies best assessed in this way. Building closer links between the learning process and assessment allows teachers to engage in assessment for better learning. Sometimes this is called formative assessment. It has been traditional to draw 'final' conclusions about student achievement from what has been called summative assessment. This approach often fails to show students how to close the gap in their learning because it provides no explanation of where they went wrong and how to improve. If the school assessment policy is to report only the results of what is called summative assessment, some existing evidence of achievement may be overlooked.

Assessment expert, Anne Davies, says her research has shown the importance of teachers employing "a process to create and articulate their assessment criteria and to clarify curriculum expectations through the development of (their own) exemplars" in collaboration with their students. It is important that students understand what she calls their 'learning destination' because it is they who have to show evidence of having reached it. "The teacher has to be able to look at the evidence of learning a student provides and say 'this is adequate proof, you have accounted for your learning, and I know this because you have shown me the evidence and I have observed you engaged in this type of work and I have talked with you and you have been able to articulate your understanding over the course of this unit'."

If we think more broadly about assessment it is clear that teachers are free to use any valid evidence of achievement they have recorded. Assessment for qualifications does not have to be by a separate event. In fact a 'one off' assessment is likely to be less reliable than a range of assessments. It is apparent that some terminology may be limiting teachers' thinking about recognising student achievement. For example, for some people there is a perception that the terms resubmission and reassessment are linked with unit standards only. This is not the case. The principles of standards based assessment apply to unit and achievement standards equally.

Assessment over time

Many teachers of performance-based subjects are familiar with building a picture of student achievement over a period of time. They do this by accumulating evidence of achievement in a portfolio of work. The evidence may come from a range of activities (checklists, practice activities, home and classwork) completed by students during the course of the teaching and learning process in the lead up to a final reporting date. Teachers accumulating evidence over time will provide feedback at regular intervals during the preparation of a final version for assessment, thus building their knowledge of student competence.

In some cases students' performances in formal assessments fall short of their previous work. Teachers are encouraged to supplement evidence of achievement from formal assessment activities with standard-specific evidence drawn from authenticated classwork and assignments. Student entries in their workbooks or elsewhere, verified by the teacher, can provide valid evidence.

Work completed outside the classroom

For many standards there will be opportunities for teachers to measure student performance against the standard in a range of activities outside the classroom. Observation of an activity or performance such as kapa haka, sports events, drama production, debating, public speaking or music festivals can be used when making an assessment of student performance. Work completed for one subject may also contribute to evidence of achievement in another.

Assessment when the student is ready

If a student is not making positive progress towards achievement, it is worthwhile refocussing teaching and then providing the opportunity for assessment when the student is ready. This may be at a time when other students are having a further assessment opportunity, or it might be in a subsequent year.

As performances are compared with the criteria of the standard, it is acceptable for students to be assessed under different conditions. Even within the same class, different students could complete different tasks so long as each task is appropriate to the requirements of the standard.

These assessment strategies have the advantage of making closer links between learning and assessment and enabling assessment judgements to be based upon a weight of evidence rather than one-off activities. Learning programmes can therefore be driven more by learner needs and the curriculum and be less constrained by the uses to which assessment can be put. Descriptive feedback can create opportunities to increase the learning dialogue between teachers, learners and parents. In many cases, adopting these strategies can reduce concerns about authenticity and make deadlines less of a burden for teachers and students.

Managing 'further assessment opportunities'

The ideal situation is to deliver assessments when students have fully mastered a learning outcome and the teacher is reasonably confident that students will achieve the standard.

When some students are assessed as not having achieved the standard, a teacher may choose one of the following strategies:

• have the student complete the whole task again
• set a new assessment activity
• continue teaching the skill and offer another assessment activity later.

In certain situations, some of the following may be appropriate:

• talk to the student to elicit evidence that may not have been provided in the activity
• have the student provide further written evidence from the same task, for example, by developing an answer further
• use evidence from work during the teaching programme, where this is valid, authentic and meets the criteria

On occasions, students may miss assessments because they were absent, especially where the assessment took place in class over several periods. The principles are clear: teachers make assessment decisions based on the evidence students produce. This means the assessment conditions and assessment activities may vary. However, the judgements, in relation to the criteria in the standard, will be the same.

Maintaining national consistency

Teachers should be clear about the difference between assessment activities and standards. Assessment activity exemplars are a suggested means of assessment, written by teachers who have recognised expertise in their field. They can be adapted to suit local needs. The standards, on the other hand, are the nationally agreed and registered criteria by which student achievement is measured. They cannot be changed or modified until a formal review process has been completed. The assessment activities do not provide the ?rules', but suggest guidelines for the application of standards in assessment.

As an illustration, an assessment activity exemplar for achievement standard 90058 English 1.7 may state that a speech should last for at least three minutes. This is a guideline only, not the ?rule'. The standard itself makes no mention of three minutes, but states that the length of the prepared speech must be appropriate to the oral task and sufficient to show evidence of meeting the grade criteria. If ?three minutes' was indeed the rule, it would give rise to further questions. How would one assess a mediocre speech that lasted over three minutes because the student spoke very slowly? Would a student who delivered a stunning speech fail, because she was nervous and delivered it in 2 minutes 50 seconds? This is why teacher judgement is important.

Again: achievement standard 90209 History 1.1, ?Carry out an historical investigation'. Students should not be penalised for not adhering to conventions for bibliographies (alphabetical by author, etc). The standard itself does not require such conventions. The standard only expects that students record the 'sources of evidence'.

Consistent national standards have developed in a number of ways. These include sharing assessed work with colleagues in other schools. Local networks or cluster groups have facilitated discussions of assessed work. Some subject professional associations are providing an excellent service by facilitating meetings throughout the country. Many of these groups have prepared valuable resources for their members.

Reducing assessment workload

Teachers and schools need to ensure the assessment workload for both teachers and students is appropriate. Where there are concerns it is too high, three strategies that would help reduce workload should be considered:

1. It is not always necessary to do a complete reassessment when a student has provided most of the evidence required. For some standards, and in certain circumstances, there may be alternative ways that are valid and fair to elicit further evidence at a subsequent time without the entire exercise having to be repeated. In some cases, further evidence required is minimal and shouldn't require a completely new assessment. Many schools are drawing on evidence from a range of assessment procedures to decide whether or not the standard has been met.
2. Many students are being assessed for more than 140 credits. This assessment load could be rationalised differently. Is it necessary to do research in every subject? If so, does it have to be assessed in every instance? Students need to obtain an average of 16 credits in each of five subjects to qualify for their level 1 NCEA. The curriculum must be taught, but not everything needs to be assessed. Too much assessment can get in the way of better learning.
3. Students who are likely to remain at school until year 13 before continuing into tertiary education or career options may have less need for the entire range of standards at levels 1 or 2. Credits at levels 1 and 2 are not prerequisites for level 3. Again, the focus should be on teaching and learning, while seeking ways to reduce the assessment load.

Many schools use ?practice' or ?mock' assessments. Some of these are justifiable as preparation for end-of-year examinations, although this preparation sneed not start early in the year. However, there may be less of a need for ?practice' or ?mock' assessment for internal assessments.

Last updated: 11 March 2008