Assessing Student Learning

Shepard, L., Hammerness, K., Rust, F., Snowden, J. B., Gordon, E., Gutierrez, C., & Pacheco, A. (2005). Assessment. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing Teachers for a Changing World (275-326). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Summary

In Chapter 8, the authors discuss the importance and complexity of assessing students’ learning. As the authors understand that assessment involves teachers’ active engagement in a process that enables and documents (in measurable terms) knowledge, proficiency, attitudes, and belief systems of learners, the uses and recommendations of three assessment practices were presented:

• formative (during the instructional process): ZPD-based model; explicit learning goals/alignment with curriculum; progress mapping; activating schema; transparent criteria/rubric; constructive feedback/critique; flexibility/responsiveness; differentiation

• summative (end of an instructional unit): milestone; audiences (parents, educational/employment institutions, and students); promote higher order thinking; task/mastery orientation over performance orientation; culmination over single measure

• external, large-scale (high-stakes testing): monitor achievement patterns; gauge educational programs and school systems; limited findings on positive achievement influences; compromises instructional focus

The authors advocate for a curriculum that focuses on equitable instructional practices that promote student learning. They believe testing results would be positively influenced if teachers did not “teach to the test”. While results from tests may provide more insight for instructional practices, the authors believe preservice teachers should be able to proficiently analyze and design assessment that permits students to flourish academically and affectively. The authors envision teacher preparation programs to focus on theory-to-practice and practice-to-theory exchanges that allow preservice teachers to become engaged in assessment practices that allow for student-centered learning.

Reflection

Wow! The authors’ perspectives truly resonated with my own experiences and core beliefs!

One of the points that struck a familiar cord was the phrase, “let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may.” I have heard that same attitude among teachers and former peers when either engaging in feedback/criticism towards students or even being evaluated by someone from administration or supervision. I remember one of my collaborating teachers said, “It is what it is; you don’t get it”, if students did not agree with the way she would provide them feedback on their work/work ethic. While some students may be able to handle constructive criticism, it is equally important to ensure that boundaries are not crossed if a teacher becomes too harsh and does not provide reasoning for the student so that they can produce more favorable academic and affective outcomes. As the authors mentioned, teachers have to ensure there is a climate of trust. I comprehend that as meaning that mutual understanding of expectations between the student and teacher should be established to ensure proper development and optimism within the classroom. After I saw how the students reacted to my collaborating teacher’s feedback. I decided to promise myself that I would never treat a student the way I don’t want to be treated. How could I continue to foster that development? How can I further differentiate my practices to ensure that all students are provided constructive feedback?

In relation to my own experiences as a student throughout grade school, I remember my father having a discussion with a close friend about how they believed grades and motivation (as discussed by the authors) play a role in the academic development of their children. My father’s friend exclaimed that for each "A" that his daughter (honor roll student) receives, she would earn $20. Well, my father quickly dismissed that practice saying, it would not motivate me to learn. Although I was also a high achieving student, my father ingrained in me why he made his decisions and I can attest to the fact that I reaped the benefits of not expecting an external stimulus, which resulted in me becoming task-oriented. I enjoy making it my duty to learn, but how can I overcome the battle of my students’ parents favoring extrinsic motivation practices, as it directly affects the nature of student work ethic in my classroom?

Currently, I am facing the dilemma of having to administer the SAT-10 to my second grade students, at a Title I school. It is disappointing to have to ask my students to accomplish a task that does little to show how proficient they are in subjects with performance goals that are heavily disconnected from our curriculum. As the authors stated that these large-scale tests are supposed to capitalize on student learning, students with limited resources and schema struggle and become frustrated when having to overcome such challenges. Right now, I cannot do much to change the situation, so I wonder how could I shed a brighter light on this form of assessment and encourage preservice teachers to think of ways to reach students within the same demographic as my own. As more student-centeredness learning is promoted by the authors, how can one ensure that the students are given an equal opportunity to showcase their knowledge and skills?