Experts recommendations about quality assessment practices:
Valid, fair and reliable:
The assessment experts advocate that assessment should be valid, consistent, reliable, explicit, comprehensive, and flexible and fair (Griffin & Nix, 1991), and produces reliable evidence of desired learning. The principal touchstone of quality in assessment is the extent to which it gives students a fair go. It is important that all students are provided with equitable conditions for assessment and that some students won’t be disadvantaged (Hyde et al., 2010). Ewing, Lowrie and Higgs (2010, p. 74) recommends that the teaching and learning should take into account diverse learning styles, interests and needs of students and alternate methods of assessment (see Appendix 1) should be provided when necessary (Ewing et al., 2010, p. 74).
Authentic and reflective:
Recent research suggests that complex thinking and learning involves processes that cannot be reduced to routine, that knowledge is a complex network of information and abilities rather than a series of isolated facts and skills. According to this research, students need to be able to successfully engage in tasks that have multiple solutions and require interpretive nuanced judgments (Office of Technology Assessment, 1992, p. 13). This aligns with the constructivist approach. Also, as young adolescents become more reflective and aware of their own thinking processes, they should be given many opportunities to communicate their ideas through journals and learning logs and develop metacognitive skills (Stowell et al., 1996, p. 61). Students and teachers benefit from students making explicit their thoughts about their learning processes. Reflection through writing also gives students an opportunity to explore those grey areas in which they are discovering what they think, feel, and believe (Stowell et al., 1996, p. 61).
Self-regulation:
As adolescent students are developing at so many different rates, assessment that addresses individual achievement rather than comparison to peers is more appropriate (Stowell et al., 1996, p. 61). Research demonstrates that allowing students to be in charge of their learning both mentally and physically motivating for students, enables them to achieve a higher level of knowledge (Coates, 2008, p. 409). This aligns with the recommendations of Turning Points (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989), “This We Believe” (National Middle School Association, 1985), and other middle level reform documents for designing the authentic assessment tasks to be responsive to the characteristics of young adolescents. Reflective thinking has been found to be a “key ingredient in the commitment to lifelong learning” (Kuiper & Pesut, 2004, p. 382) and is widely recognized in the literature as a concept of interest at the global level. Such findings prompt Bose and Rengel (2009, as cited in Clark, 2012, p. 32) to claim that, “self-reflection is the heart of self-regulation”. It is important to provide evaluation and reflection models to self-assess students learning processes.
Strong emphasis on formative assessment:
An increasing number of administrators at national, state, and district level have discovered the potential of formative assessment to make thinking processes transparent, so that it is “now recognized in the research literature as one of the most powerful ways to enhance student motivation and achievement” (Cauley & McMillan, 2010, p. 1; OECD, 2005). Black and Wiliam “Inside the Black Box” (1989, as cited in Harrison, 2005) extensive review of the literature on assessment identified that “if you concentrate on formative assessment you get improvements in summative tests because students are learning better”.
Rich learning experiences:
According to constructivist theory, the learning needs to be both active and experiential (Fogarty, 1997, as cited in Howard & Fogarty, 2004, p. 149). Both active learning and experiential learning allow the brains to go about its natural task of figuring out meaning and making sense out of what is presented to it (Damasio, 1999). This approach is accurate for young adolescents as scientists have discovered that very complex changes take place in the brain throughout adolescence and that the brain is not fully “installed” until 20 to 25 years of age (Wolfe, 2010). Kail (1984, as cited in Wolfe, 2010) recommends that all middle phase children need exposure to variety of rich experiences that will enable them to fully develop their mental, physical, emotional and social capacities. The phrase “it’s a tunnel leading to very deep places and it’s a ladder leading to some higher-order places” should be embraced in the assessment paradigms.
Intellectually challenging:
The Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study, a major study of classroom teaching practices, found that students need to be challenged intellectually to remain highly engaged and learning activities should promote higher order thinking and deeper understanding (Lingard et al. 2001, as cited in Ministerial Advisory Committee for Educational Renewal, 2003). Research also shows that a deep approach to learning correlates with achieving motive and academic self-concept, which in turn correlate with academic success (Matters, 1998). It is vital to evaluate student’s conceptual, procedural and metacognitive knowledge by engaging intellectually and emotionally while guiding them into deep approach for learning. The strategies for designing intellectually challenging learning experiences are show in Appendix 2.
Stimulating and exciting:
According to neuroscience and brain-based research, all the people should have an optimum education that ensures synaptogenesis (Garric, 2010). It is vital to design assessment tasks encompassing brain-based curiosity inducing strategies for students to develop positive disposition towards learning. Nationally, the underlying philosophy of the middle years of schooling has provided a strong impetus for programs to focus on effective and positive experiences for students that will motivate and support further learning (Carrington, Bland & Brady, 2010). It is important to ensure that all the assessment items ignite student’s interest and spark spontaneous engagement and enable students to build a mastery motivational orientation.
Twenty-first century skills:
The contemporary communication landscape requires students mastering the multimodal information technology competencies (Pantaleo, 2012; O'Rourke, 2005; Henderson, 2012, p. 167). Hence, it is vital to provide opportunities for students to submit assignments in various modes according to their learning preferences. Assessment experts recommend incorporating authentic assessment and reporting processes that focus on students’ achievement rather than comparison with other students and schools (Brady & Kennedy, 2010). Pendergast et al. (2005, p. 68) declared that the integration of process oriented, problem-based, learning-centred and differentiated pedagogical approaches into the assessment plans contribute to a learner’s twenty-first century competence and lifelong learning capability.
References:
Brady, L., & Kennedy, K. (2010). Curriculum construction (4th ed.). Frenches Forest, NSW, Australia: Pearson.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning points: preparing American youth for the 21st century. Retrieved from
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/Turning%20Points%20Preparing%20American%20Youth%20for%20the%2021st%20Century.pdf
Carrington, S., Bland, D., & Brady. K. (2010). Training young people as researchers to investigate engagement and disengagement in the middle years, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(5), 449-462.
Cauley, M. C., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). FA techniques to support student motivation and achievement. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(1), 1-6.
Clark, I. (2012, January). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educ Psychol, Vol. 24, 205-249. Retrieved from Central Queensland University online library.
Coates, H. (2008). Lifelong learning conference 2008: Emerging trends in evidence-based quality assurance. Retrieved from Central Queensland University online library.
Damasio, A.R. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body emotion in the making of consciousness. New York: Avon Books.
Ewing, R., Lowrie, T., & Higgs, J. (2010). Teaching and communicating: Rethinking professional experiences. South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Garrick, B. (2010, June). Smuggling in an anxious question: Brain-based research and the role of the learning support teacher in the middle years of schooling. Australian Journal of Middle Schooling, 10(1), 16-21. Retrieved from Central Queensland University library.
Griffin, P., & Nix, P. (1991). Educational assessment reporting: New approach. Marrickville, NSW, Australia: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Group (Australia) Pty Limited.
Harrison, C. (2005). Kings College London: Formative assessment workshop. Retrieved from Central Queensland University EDVT10020 - Assessment & reporting in Sec-VET week 8 reading material.
Henderson, R. (2012). Teaching literacies in the middle years. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Howard, D.L., & Fogarty, R. (2004). The middle years: The essential teaching repertoire. Victoria, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Hyde, M., Carpenter, L., & Conway, R. (2010). Diversity and inclusion in Australian schools. South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Kuiper, R. A., & Pesut, D. J. (2004). Promoting cognitive and meta-cognitive reflection reasoning skills in nursing practice: Self-regulated learning theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 45(4), 381–391.
Matters, G. (2005). Curriculum corporation conference: Designing assessment tasks for deep thinking. Retrieved from Central Queensland University moodle EDVT10020 - Assessment & reporting in Sec-VET week 3 study material.
Ministerial Advisory Committee for Educational Renewal (MACER). (2003). The middle phase of learning: A report to minister. Retrieved from Central Queensland University moodle EDSE11006 - Middle phase pedagogy week 1 reading material.
National Middle School Association. (1995). This we believe: Developmentally responsive middle level schools. Columbus, OH: Author. Retrieved from
http://ecap.crc.illinois.edu/eecearchive/digests/1996/louns96.html
OECD. (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: CERI/OECD.
Office of Technology Assessment. (1992). Report to congress on the state of technology. Washington, DC: Department of Education. The assessment task offers this learning provision for students.
O'Rourke, M. (2005). The Australian national schools network: Multiliteracies for 21st century schools. Retrieved from
http://edpartnerships.edu.au/image/file/Multiliteracies_for_the_21st_Century_May_05.pdf
Pantaleo, S. (2012, February). Middle years students thinking with and about typography in multimodal texts. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 20(1), 37-50. Retrieved from Central Queensland University library.
Pendergast, D., Flanagan, R., Land, R., Bahr, M., Mitchell, J., Weir, K., et al. (2005). Developing lifelong learners in the middle years of schooling. Carlton South, Victoria: MCEETYA.
Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758-765. Retrieved from http://electronicportfolios.org/afl/Stiggins-AssessmentCrisis.pdf
Stowell, L.P., Rios, F.A., McDaniel, J.E., & Chrisopher, P.A. (1996). Professionals guide: Working with middle school students. CA, USA: Teacher Created Materials Inc.
Wolfe, P. (2010). Brain matters: Translating research into classroom practice (2nd ed). Alexandria: ASCD.
Valid, fair and reliable:
The assessment experts advocate that assessment should be valid, consistent, reliable, explicit, comprehensive, and flexible and fair (Griffin & Nix, 1991), and produces reliable evidence of desired learning. The principal touchstone of quality in assessment is the extent to which it gives students a fair go. It is important that all students are provided with equitable conditions for assessment and that some students won’t be disadvantaged (Hyde et al., 2010). Ewing, Lowrie and Higgs (2010, p. 74) recommends that the teaching and learning should take into account diverse learning styles, interests and needs of students and alternate methods of assessment (see Appendix 1) should be provided when necessary (Ewing et al., 2010, p. 74).
Authentic and reflective:
Recent research suggests that complex thinking and learning involves processes that cannot be reduced to routine, that knowledge is a complex network of information and abilities rather than a series of isolated facts and skills. According to this research, students need to be able to successfully engage in tasks that have multiple solutions and require interpretive nuanced judgments (Office of Technology Assessment, 1992, p. 13). This aligns with the constructivist approach. Also, as young adolescents become more reflective and aware of their own thinking processes, they should be given many opportunities to communicate their ideas through journals and learning logs and develop metacognitive skills (Stowell et al., 1996, p. 61). Students and teachers benefit from students making explicit their thoughts about their learning processes. Reflection through writing also gives students an opportunity to explore those grey areas in which they are discovering what they think, feel, and believe (Stowell et al., 1996, p. 61).
Self-regulation:
As adolescent students are developing at so many different rates, assessment that addresses individual achievement rather than comparison to peers is more appropriate (Stowell et al., 1996, p. 61). Research demonstrates that allowing students to be in charge of their learning both mentally and physically motivating for students, enables them to achieve a higher level of knowledge (Coates, 2008, p. 409). This aligns with the recommendations of Turning Points (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989), “This We Believe” (National Middle School Association, 1985), and other middle level reform documents for designing the authentic assessment tasks to be responsive to the characteristics of young adolescents. Reflective thinking has been found to be a “key ingredient in the commitment to lifelong learning” (Kuiper & Pesut, 2004, p. 382) and is widely recognized in the literature as a concept of interest at the global level. Such findings prompt Bose and Rengel (2009, as cited in Clark, 2012, p. 32) to claim that, “self-reflection is the heart of self-regulation”. It is important to provide evaluation and reflection models to self-assess students learning processes.
Strong emphasis on formative assessment:
An increasing number of administrators at national, state, and district level have discovered the potential of formative assessment to make thinking processes transparent, so that it is “now recognized in the research literature as one of the most powerful ways to enhance student motivation and achievement” (Cauley & McMillan, 2010, p. 1; OECD, 2005). Black and Wiliam “Inside the Black Box” (1989, as cited in Harrison, 2005) extensive review of the literature on assessment identified that “if you concentrate on formative assessment you get improvements in summative tests because students are learning better”.
Rich learning experiences:
According to constructivist theory, the learning needs to be both active and experiential (Fogarty, 1997, as cited in Howard & Fogarty, 2004, p. 149). Both active learning and experiential learning allow the brains to go about its natural task of figuring out meaning and making sense out of what is presented to it (Damasio, 1999). This approach is accurate for young adolescents as scientists have discovered that very complex changes take place in the brain throughout adolescence and that the brain is not fully “installed” until 20 to 25 years of age (Wolfe, 2010). Kail (1984, as cited in Wolfe, 2010) recommends that all middle phase children need exposure to variety of rich experiences that will enable them to fully develop their mental, physical, emotional and social capacities. The phrase “it’s a tunnel leading to very deep places and it’s a ladder leading to some higher-order places” should be embraced in the assessment paradigms.
Intellectually challenging:
The Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study, a major study of classroom teaching practices, found that students need to be challenged intellectually to remain highly engaged and learning activities should promote higher order thinking and deeper understanding (Lingard et al. 2001, as cited in Ministerial Advisory Committee for Educational Renewal, 2003). Research also shows that a deep approach to learning correlates with achieving motive and academic self-concept, which in turn correlate with academic success (Matters, 1998). It is vital to evaluate student’s conceptual, procedural and metacognitive knowledge by engaging intellectually and emotionally while guiding them into deep approach for learning. The strategies for designing intellectually challenging learning experiences are show in Appendix 2.
Stimulating and exciting:
According to neuroscience and brain-based research, all the people should have an optimum education that ensures synaptogenesis (Garric, 2010). It is vital to design assessment tasks encompassing brain-based curiosity inducing strategies for students to develop positive disposition towards learning. Nationally, the underlying philosophy of the middle years of schooling has provided a strong impetus for programs to focus on effective and positive experiences for students that will motivate and support further learning (Carrington, Bland & Brady, 2010). It is important to ensure that all the assessment items ignite student’s interest and spark spontaneous engagement and enable students to build a mastery motivational orientation.
Twenty-first century skills:
The contemporary communication landscape requires students mastering the multimodal information technology competencies (Pantaleo, 2012; O'Rourke, 2005; Henderson, 2012, p. 167). Hence, it is vital to provide opportunities for students to submit assignments in various modes according to their learning preferences. Assessment experts recommend incorporating authentic assessment and reporting processes that focus on students’ achievement rather than comparison with other students and schools (Brady & Kennedy, 2010). Pendergast et al. (2005, p. 68) declared that the integration of process oriented, problem-based, learning-centred and differentiated pedagogical approaches into the assessment plans contribute to a learner’s twenty-first century competence and lifelong learning capability.
References:
Brady, L., & Kennedy, K. (2010). Curriculum construction (4th ed.). Frenches Forest, NSW, Australia: Pearson.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning points: preparing American youth for the 21st century. Retrieved from
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/Turning%20Points%20Preparing%20American%20Youth%20for%20the%2021st%20Century.pdf
Carrington, S., Bland, D., & Brady. K. (2010). Training young people as researchers to investigate engagement and disengagement in the middle years, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(5), 449-462.
Cauley, M. C., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). FA techniques to support student motivation and achievement. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(1), 1-6.
Clark, I. (2012, January). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educ Psychol, Vol. 24, 205-249. Retrieved from Central Queensland University online library.
Coates, H. (2008). Lifelong learning conference 2008: Emerging trends in evidence-based quality assurance. Retrieved from Central Queensland University online library.
Damasio, A.R. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body emotion in the making of consciousness. New York: Avon Books.
Ewing, R., Lowrie, T., & Higgs, J. (2010). Teaching and communicating: Rethinking professional experiences. South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Garrick, B. (2010, June). Smuggling in an anxious question: Brain-based research and the role of the learning support teacher in the middle years of schooling. Australian Journal of Middle Schooling, 10(1), 16-21. Retrieved from Central Queensland University library.
Griffin, P., & Nix, P. (1991). Educational assessment reporting: New approach. Marrickville, NSW, Australia: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Group (Australia) Pty Limited.
Harrison, C. (2005). Kings College London: Formative assessment workshop. Retrieved from Central Queensland University EDVT10020 - Assessment & reporting in Sec-VET week 8 reading material.
Henderson, R. (2012). Teaching literacies in the middle years. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Howard, D.L., & Fogarty, R. (2004). The middle years: The essential teaching repertoire. Victoria, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Hyde, M., Carpenter, L., & Conway, R. (2010). Diversity and inclusion in Australian schools. South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Kuiper, R. A., & Pesut, D. J. (2004). Promoting cognitive and meta-cognitive reflection reasoning skills in nursing practice: Self-regulated learning theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 45(4), 381–391.
Matters, G. (2005). Curriculum corporation conference: Designing assessment tasks for deep thinking. Retrieved from Central Queensland University moodle EDVT10020 - Assessment & reporting in Sec-VET week 3 study material.
Ministerial Advisory Committee for Educational Renewal (MACER). (2003). The middle phase of learning: A report to minister. Retrieved from Central Queensland University moodle EDSE11006 - Middle phase pedagogy week 1 reading material.
National Middle School Association. (1995). This we believe: Developmentally responsive middle level schools. Columbus, OH: Author. Retrieved from
http://ecap.crc.illinois.edu/eecearchive/digests/1996/louns96.html
OECD. (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: CERI/OECD.
Office of Technology Assessment. (1992). Report to congress on the state of technology. Washington, DC: Department of Education. The assessment task offers this learning provision for students.
O'Rourke, M. (2005). The Australian national schools network: Multiliteracies for 21st century schools. Retrieved from
http://edpartnerships.edu.au/image/file/Multiliteracies_for_the_21st_Century_May_05.pdf
Pantaleo, S. (2012, February). Middle years students thinking with and about typography in multimodal texts. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 20(1), 37-50. Retrieved from Central Queensland University library.
Pendergast, D., Flanagan, R., Land, R., Bahr, M., Mitchell, J., Weir, K., et al. (2005). Developing lifelong learners in the middle years of schooling. Carlton South, Victoria: MCEETYA.
Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758-765. Retrieved from http://electronicportfolios.org/afl/Stiggins-AssessmentCrisis.pdf
Stowell, L.P., Rios, F.A., McDaniel, J.E., & Chrisopher, P.A. (1996). Professionals guide: Working with middle school students. CA, USA: Teacher Created Materials Inc.
Wolfe, P. (2010). Brain matters: Translating research into classroom practice (2nd ed). Alexandria: ASCD.