Responding to Assessment for Learning
A pedagogical method, not assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26686/nzaroe.v26.6854Keywords:
assessment for learning, psychometrics, pedagogical practices, error, assessmentAbstract
Assessment for learning (AfL) is a major approach to educational assessment that relies heavily on pedagogical practices, such as involving students in assessment, making transparent objectives and criteria, and asking open-ended questions that provoke higher order thinking. In this perspective piece, I argue that without the possibility of opening classroom activities to systematic and rigorous inspection and evaluation, AfL fails to be assessment. AfL activities happen ephemerally in classrooms, leading to in-the-moment and on-the-fly interpretations and decisions about student learning. In these contexts, determination of the degree of error in those judgements does not happen. Because human performance is so variable and because the samples teachers use to make judgements are not robustly representative, there is considerable error in their judgements about student learning. Nonetheless, despite the difficulties seen in putting AfL into practice, they appear to be good classroom teaching practices. In contrast, assessment proper requires careful inspection of data so that alternative explanations can be evaluated, leading to a preference for the most valid and reliable interpretation of performance evidence. Psychometric methods not only quantify amounts or qualities of performance, but also evaluate the degree to which judges agree with each other, leading to confidence in the validity and reliability of insights. Consequently, because AfL activities lack the essential characteristics of paying attention to error and methods of minimising its impact on interpretations, I recommend we stop thinking of AfL as assessment, and instead position it as good teaching.
Downloads
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Developing a theory of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 81-100). London: Sage.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2012). The reliability of assessments. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (2nd ed., pp. 243-263). London: Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250808.n15
Boud, D., & Associates. (2010). Assessment 2020: Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education. https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/Assessment-2020_propositions_final.pdf
Bourke, R. (2017). Self-assessment to incite learning in higher education: Developing ontological awareness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1411881 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1411881
Brennan, R. L. (1996). Generalizability of performance assessments. In G. W. Phillips (Ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment (NCES 96-802) (pp. 19-58). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Brown, G. T. L. (2009). The reliability of essay scores: The necessity of rubrics and moderation. In L. H. Meyer, S. Davidson, H. Anderson, R. Fletcher, P. M. Johnston, & M. Rees (Eds.), Tertiary assessment and higher education student outcomes: Policy, practice and research (pp. 40-48). Wellington: Ako Aotearoa.
Brown, G. T. L. (2010). The validity of examination essays in higher education: Issues and responses. Higher Education Quarterly, 64(3), 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2010.00460.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2010.00460.x
Brown, G. T. L. (2013). Assessing Assessment for Learning: Reconsidering the policy and practice. In M. East & S. May (Eds.), Making a difference in education and social policy (121-137). Auckland: Pearson.
Brown, G. T. L. (2017). The future of assessment as a human and social endeavor: Addressing the inconvenient truth of error. Frontiers in Education, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00003
Brown, G. T. L. (2018). Assessment of student achievement. New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315162058
Brown, G. T. L. (2019). Is assessment for learning really assessment? Frontiers in Education, 4(64). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00064
Brown, G. T. L. (2021). Student conceptions of assessment: Understandable responses to our practices. ECNU Review of Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211007869 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211007869
Brown, G. T. L. (2022). Assessments cause and contribute to learning: If only we let them. In Z. Yan & L. Yan (Eds.). Assessment as learning: Maximising opportunities for student learning and achievement. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003052081-4
Brown, G. T. L., & Abdulnabi, H. H. A. (2017). Evaluating the quality of higher education instructor-constructed multiple-choice tests: Impact on student grades. Frontiers in Education, 2(24). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00024
Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367-393). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452218649.n21 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452218649.n21
Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2014). The future of self-assessment in classroom practice: Reframing self-assessment as a core competency. Frontline Learning Research, 3, 22-30. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v2i1.24 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v2i1.24
Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2016). Volume conclusion: The future of assessment as a human and social endeavour. In G. T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 506-524). New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749136
Brown, G. T. L., & Hattie, J. A. (2012). The benefits of regular standardized assessment in childhood education: Guiding improved instruction and learning. In S. Suggate & E. Reese (Eds.), Contemporary debates in childhood education and development (pp. 287-292). London: Routledge.
Brown, G. T. L., Irving, S. E., & Keegan, P. J. (2014). An introduction to educational assessment, measurement, and evaluation: Improving the quality of teacher-based assessment (3rd ed.). Auckland: Dunmore Publishing.
Brown, G. T. L., Irving, S. E., Peterson, E. R., & Hirschfeld, G. H. F. (2009). Use of interactive-informal assessment practices: New Zealand secondary students' conceptions of assessment. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 97-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.02.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.02.003
Brown, G. T. L., Peterson, E. R., & Irving, S. E. (2009). Beliefs that make a difference: Adaptive and maladaptive self-regulation in students’ conceptions of assessment. In D. M. McInerney, G. T. L. Brown, & G. A. D. Liem (Eds.), Student perspectives on assessment: What students can tell us about assessment for learning. (pp. 159-186). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Cresswell, M. J. (1996, September). What are examination standards? The role of values in large scale assessment. Paper presented at 22nd Annual IAEA Conference, Beijing, China.
Crooks, T. J. (2010). Classroom assessment in policy context (New Zealand). In B. McGraw, P. Peterson, & E. L. Baker (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 443-448). Oxford: Elsevier. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00343-2
Gipps, C., Brown, M., McCallum, B., & McAlister, S. (1995). Intuition or evidence? Teachers and national assessment of seven-year-olds. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Harper, A., & Brown, G. T. L. (2017). Students’ use of online feedback in a first year tertiary biology course. Assessment Matters, 11, 99-121. https://doi.org/10.18296/am.0026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18296/am.0026
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers' implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.008
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2018). Using self-assessment to improve student learning. New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351036979
Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Dargusch, J. (2018). Not playing the game: Student assessment resistance as a form of agency. The Australian Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0264-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0264-0
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of meta-analyses in education. London: Routledge.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hill, M. (2000). Dot, slash, cross: How assessment can drive teachers to ticking instead of teaching. set: research information for teachers (1), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0779 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0779
Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom assessment minute by minute, day by day. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 18-24.
Meissel, K., Meyer, F., Yao, E. S., & Rubie-Davies, C. M. (2017). Subjectivity of teacher judgments: Exploring student characteristics that influence teacher judgments of student ability. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65, 48-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.021
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Old Tappan, NJ: MacMillan.
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum for English-Medium Teaching and Learning in Years 1-13. Wellington: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education. (2010). e-asTTle norms and curriculum expectations by quarter: Reading and mathematics. Retrieved 2 March 2021 from Wellington: https://e-asttle.tki.org.nz/content/download/1229/4816/version/4/file/e-asTTle+norm+tables+Sept+2010.doc
Novick, M. R. (1966). The axioms and principal results of classical test theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 3(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(66)90002-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(66)90002-2
'Otunuku, M., & Brown, G. T. L. (2007). Tongan students' attitudes towards their subjects in New Zealand relative to their academic achievement. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(1), 117-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03025838 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03025838
Peterson, E. R., & Irving, S. E. (2008). Secondary school students’ conceptions of assessment and feedback. Learning and Instruction, 18(3), 238-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.05.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.05.001
Popper, K. (1945). The open society and its enemies: The high tide of prophecy: Hegel, Marx, and the aftermath (Vol. II). London: George Routledge & Sons.
Remesal, A. (2009). Accessing primary pupils' conceptions of daily classroom assessment practices. In D. M. McInerney, G. T. L. Brown, & G. A. D. Liem (Eds.), Student perspectives on assessment: What students can tell us about assessment for learning (pp. 25-51). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagne, & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (Vol. 1, pp. 39-83). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Shah, R., Brown, G. T. L., Keegan, P. J., Burakevych, N., Harding, J. E., & McKinlay, C. (2020). Teacher rating versus measured academic achievement: Implications for paediatric research. Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health, 56(7), 1090-1096. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.14824 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.14824
Stanovich, K. E. (2009). How to think straight about psychology (9th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.
Stemler, S. E. (2004). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.7275/96jp-xz07
Stobart, G. (2006). The validity of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 133-146). London: Sage.
Swaffield, S. (2011). Getting to the heart of authentic assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 433-449. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.582838 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.582838
Traub, R. E. (1997). Classical test theory in historical perspective. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(4), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1997.tb00603.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1997.tb00603.x
Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The Author(s) retain ownership of the copyright in the Article but hereby grant the Publisher an exclusive license to publish the article.
NZAROE gives authors full permission to deposit their articles in publicly accessible institutional repositories, providing that:
- Articles are placed in repositories after publication.
- Metadata about articles include the DOI and journal issue information.
