What is the role of assessment in learning? Is assessment a tool for the teacher or student? How can assessment be both?
Assessment is probably more commonly seen as a tool for teachers to gauge how much or how well students are learning, and in it's formal form, as a graded test of some sort. However, unfortunately these sorts of assessments, at least partially, often gauge how well students are at taking assessments, or they test the memorization skills of a student. I think most "good" students (as determined by gpa) have had the experience of excelling on a test only to forget what was "learned" soon after. In Understanding by Design, Wiggins and McTighe point out that often this sort of assessment is done because it is the easiest for teachers to evaluate or grade; and this is not only in terms of time (and how jealous am I of the instructors who can use the scantron machine? Very), but also because of the built in objectivity in evaluating these assessments (and hence justifiability in grade assignment). However, if well thought out, Wiggins and McTighe show how assessment can be a more reliable predictor of learning.
Less considered is how informal assessment can also be a tool for an instructor. This could be informal surveys of students, feedback gotten during discussions, small writing assignments...as more focused and less high pressure than formal assessments, these have the potential to be a very specific tool for teachers to see where students are and then be able to tailor future content accordingly. Also, students assessment can also help teachers assess their own teaching approaches.
Perhaps the least concentrated on is how assessment is also (or at least should be) a tool for students. Quizzes that lead to a larger exam, small writing assignments that build up to a long research paper, a short survey on what the most important thing learned in today's class and asking the student for one question that remains, a pretest - all of these can be tools for students to gauge their own progress, to see their strengths and weaknesses and help them determine how far they've come and what they need to work on. These assessments can also reinforce learning and especially transfer by asking students to reflect.
One problem, I think, is that students don't see assessment as a tool for them; too often assessment seems more a hoop to jump through, with a good grade as the prize. Also, as Wiggins and McTighe rightfully point out, students are often unwilling to work harder than they "have" to. The key seems to be developing assessments that either "force" students to see learning as a tool for them, too (perhaps by having a sequence of assessments that build upon each other or making reflection part of the grade), or assessments that are super engaging to students, hence triggering their internal motivation. The most effective assessments would do both of these, although the former is certainly easier to do on a predictable basis. (Making engaging assessments is even more challenging than creating engaging learning activities, and in either case what seems like it would be engaging can easily not be for a number of reasons.)
As an instructor, I need to work on my use of informal assessment, especially those that increase student reflection. I've known this for a while, so why isn't it a bigger part of my course? I suppose in a way I fall prey to what Understanding by Design calls coverage, although not quite as bad as a course that has to cover certain topics or years of history. However, once I plan in enough writing assignments to both practice the skills in the students learning outcomes (a bit of background design now built in to colleges who want to keep their accreditation) and complete "6,000 words of graded writing" (the course description for the transfer-level comp class) I feel pretty overwhelmed in terms of what needs to be done during class time and what I can do in terms of prep and extra review in the time I am not spent grading or at least commenting on 50-100 essays every week. I do incorporate informal reflection some, though - having students reflect on each paper they submit, for example - and while I find it helpful, I am frankly not sure it is a tool for them, as well. It can serve to show me what we need to work on more or what activity I should do differently the next time I teach the class. (I have mixed feelings about this latter role - while teaching is widely seen as something you are continuously working on, I hate the feeling of "practicing" on any given class. Sometimes I avoid asking for student feedback when I already know it didn't go great just because I hate being reminded that I have failed a particular class. That is not exactly a hallmark of good teaching.)
Assessment is probably more commonly seen as a tool for teachers to gauge how much or how well students are learning, and in it's formal form, as a graded test of some sort. However, unfortunately these sorts of assessments, at least partially, often gauge how well students are at taking assessments, or they test the memorization skills of a student. I think most "good" students (as determined by gpa) have had the experience of excelling on a test only to forget what was "learned" soon after. In Understanding by Design, Wiggins and McTighe point out that often this sort of assessment is done because it is the easiest for teachers to evaluate or grade; and this is not only in terms of time (and how jealous am I of the instructors who can use the scantron machine? Very), but also because of the built in objectivity in evaluating these assessments (and hence justifiability in grade assignment). However, if well thought out, Wiggins and McTighe show how assessment can be a more reliable predictor of learning.
Less considered is how informal assessment can also be a tool for an instructor. This could be informal surveys of students, feedback gotten during discussions, small writing assignments...as more focused and less high pressure than formal assessments, these have the potential to be a very specific tool for teachers to see where students are and then be able to tailor future content accordingly. Also, students assessment can also help teachers assess their own teaching approaches.
Perhaps the least concentrated on is how assessment is also (or at least should be) a tool for students. Quizzes that lead to a larger exam, small writing assignments that build up to a long research paper, a short survey on what the most important thing learned in today's class and asking the student for one question that remains, a pretest - all of these can be tools for students to gauge their own progress, to see their strengths and weaknesses and help them determine how far they've come and what they need to work on. These assessments can also reinforce learning and especially transfer by asking students to reflect.
One problem, I think, is that students don't see assessment as a tool for them; too often assessment seems more a hoop to jump through, with a good grade as the prize. Also, as Wiggins and McTighe rightfully point out, students are often unwilling to work harder than they "have" to. The key seems to be developing assessments that either "force" students to see learning as a tool for them, too (perhaps by having a sequence of assessments that build upon each other or making reflection part of the grade), or assessments that are super engaging to students, hence triggering their internal motivation. The most effective assessments would do both of these, although the former is certainly easier to do on a predictable basis. (Making engaging assessments is even more challenging than creating engaging learning activities, and in either case what seems like it would be engaging can easily not be for a number of reasons.)
As an instructor, I need to work on my use of informal assessment, especially those that increase student reflection. I've known this for a while, so why isn't it a bigger part of my course? I suppose in a way I fall prey to what Understanding by Design calls coverage, although not quite as bad as a course that has to cover certain topics or years of history. However, once I plan in enough writing assignments to both practice the skills in the students learning outcomes (a bit of background design now built in to colleges who want to keep their accreditation) and complete "6,000 words of graded writing" (the course description for the transfer-level comp class) I feel pretty overwhelmed in terms of what needs to be done during class time and what I can do in terms of prep and extra review in the time I am not spent grading or at least commenting on 50-100 essays every week. I do incorporate informal reflection some, though - having students reflect on each paper they submit, for example - and while I find it helpful, I am frankly not sure it is a tool for them, as well. It can serve to show me what we need to work on more or what activity I should do differently the next time I teach the class. (I have mixed feelings about this latter role - while teaching is widely seen as something you are continuously working on, I hate the feeling of "practicing" on any given class. Sometimes I avoid asking for student feedback when I already know it didn't go great just because I hate being reminded that I have failed a particular class. That is not exactly a hallmark of good teaching.)
