What is the purpose of assessment?

What is the purpose of assessment? I initially had always thought that assessment was used before or after a learning period to test students’ knowledge; naively thinking that this was all there was to it! However by reading Rethinking Classroom Assessment with Purpose in Mind by the Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Basic Education [WNCP] (2006), I learned more about the three purposes of assessment and how to realistically apply them in the classroom.

 

In assessment for learning, “teachers use assessment as an investigative tool to find out as much as they can about what their students know and can do, and what confusions, preconceptions, or gaps they might have” (WNCP, 2006, p.29). This is also known as “formative assessment” as it involves collecting and analysing information to show what children know, can do, and understand (SCSA, 2013). In conducting some outside reading, I also learned that formative assessment is a crucial part of the cyclical process of documenting, analysing and planning children’s learning to support intentional teaching (Arthur et al., 2015; DEEWR, 2007). Formative assessment can be used at the beginning of a learning period to determine prior knowledge or throughout learning to check understanding (SCSA, 2013).

Assessment of learning, or summative assessment, is usually conducted at the end of a period of time or set of lessons to assess what the child has learned (WNCP, 2006). Tracking this development establishes the effectiveness of instruction, and using this data to compare students’ progress can also help identify children with special needs (Arthur et al., 2015). Like all forms of assessment, summative assessment gives teachers vital information needed to plan future learning (DEEWR, 2009), for example they may plan for extra or different learning activities if gaps in expected knowledge are found.

The only assessment tools that came to mind when I was initially learning about formative and summative assessment were checklists and rubrics, however I soon learned that there are so many more ways of assessment! Narrative types of assessment, such as running records, anecdotes, learning stories and jottings (Arthur et al., 2015, p.276), are particularly suitable for collecting formative and summative assessments. I believe the running record in will become one of my favored forms of assessment, as it allows the teacher can be actively involved in the learning process whilst assessing; it is written as the event or experience of interest happens (Arthur et al., 2015). This video also discusses how ICT can be used in assessment.  

Assessment as learning involves assessment as a means of metacognition. Dann (2014, para.5) states that the core focus of assessment as learning is for children to understand their own progress and goals through a range of cognitive processes, which require them to be active in both learning and assessment. These cognitive processes include self-regulation, self-efficiacy, metacognition and feedback, which are encouraged by self-assessment (Dann, 2014, para.5). This is supported by what I learned in WNCP (2006), that assessment as learning involves students being actively engaged in creating their own understanding, and analyze and synthesize information. The video below assisted me in learning more about implementing assessment as learning.

It was interesting to learn about the different kinds of assessment and how assessment ties into everyday classroom practice. Although I initially viewed assessment as relatively straightforward, throughout my reading and reflection it became evident that assessment must be understood as more than just the principles and practices, as implementing it is much more complex. Unfortunately I believe that due to time and staffing arrangement, certain assessment types, generally the more time-consuming and information-rich types would be almost impossible to conduct with a whole classroom of children. This is as issue I wish to learn about in my future studies. However for now, I feel as though I have learned about just how important it is to ensure that assessment is embedded in daily classroom activities.

Retrieved from https://educ6040fall10.wikispaces.com/file/view/authentic2.jpg/185444617/521x198/authentic2.jpg

References

Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Death, E., Dockett, S. & Farmer, S. (2015). Programming and planning in early childhood settings (6^th ed.). South Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning Australia.

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments [DEEWR](2009). Belonging, being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/belonging_being_and_becoming_the_early_years_learning_framework_for_australia.pdf

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments [DEEWR] (2011). My time, our place: Framework for school aged care in Australia. Retrieved from http://files.acecqa.gov.au/files/National-Quality-Framework-Resources-Kit/my_time_our_place_framework_for_school_age_care_in_australia.pdf

Dann, R. (2014). Assessment "as" learning: Blurring the boundaries of assessment and learning for theory, policy and practice. Assessment in education: Principles, policy & practice, 21(2), pp.149-166. DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2014.898128

School Curriculum and Standards Authority (2013). Curriculum and assessment outline: Guiding principles. Retrieved from http://k10outline.scsa.wa.edu.au/media/documents/outline_downloads/guiding_principles_k-10_outline.pdf

Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Basic Education [WNCP]. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Retrieved from https://www.wncp.ca/media/40539/rethink.pdf

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment and the KDB

In this week’s class, we discussed the relationship between curriculum, instruction, assessment and the Know, Do, Be (KDB) and were asked to draw a diagram. I initially had a very simplistic diagram where all aspects were interrelated, however I found that I could not completely explain the reasoning behind my choices. I have since created a newer version, and have decided to discuss it for this week’s blog post. 

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment and The Know, Do and Be
 (created by Lisa Karaki, 2015)

The diagram begins with curriculum. Curriculum is a widely contested term in education that can be defined in a variety of ways, all of which have implications for learning experiences (Brady & Kennedy, 2007). Blaise and Nuttall (2011) explain how the term “curriculum” has many components:

·    The intended curriculum (the official curriculum students are intended to experience);

·    The enacted curriculum (the curriculum they actually experience);

·    The hidden curriculum (what students learn unintentionally);

·    The null curriculum (what educators avoid teaching) and;

·    The lived curriculum (everything the learner experiences in an educational setting)

For the purpose of this diagram, the “curriculum” component is a curriculum document. Curriculum documents are the product of dominant groups (Ewing, 2013), and can be viewed as representing the knowledge valued in that culture (Bourdieu, as cited in Thompson, 2002). This means that many stakeholders, such as the government, society, teachers, school, parents and students, influence the KDB presented in curriculum documents.

The next part of the diagram is instruction. Blaise & Nuttall (2011) highlight the difference between the enacted curriculum (teacher instruction) and the intended curriculum, as educators must interpret curriculum documents in order to bring them to life in the classroom. Curriculum informs instruction, but instruction is affected by many factors other than curriculum. I believe educators’ beliefs about the KDB of their classroom, which are again informed by societal, governmental and school values, influence the way that they enact the intended curriculum.

The final component of the diagram is assessment. There is a double arrow between assessment and instruction, as formative assessment can be used to monitor student learning and inform instruction, and summative assessment to assess the success of the instruction (SCSA, 2013). Assessment can also be used as a method of instruction in the ‘assessment as learning’ approach (SCSA, 2013). I believe assessment methods are also influenced by the KDB of educational stakeholders, particularly of the school and educators; I believe it is inevitable that their values and beliefs about how, when and why learning should be assessed would influence their assessment methods.

As explained, the Know, Do and Be are influenced by stakeholders in education, and influence all components in the diagram. I believe it is essential that educators are conscious of this so they are able to make their own informed decisions about whether or not these are appropriate for their classrooms. I believe creating and explaining this diagram was really beneficial in understanding how I perceive curriculum, assessment and instruction, and I hope that this assists me in deciding what kind of teacher I become.

References

Blaise, M & Nuttall, J. (2011). Learning to teach in the early years classroom. Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press

Brady, L. & Kennedy, K. (2007). Curriculum construction. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Australia

Ewing, R. (2013). Inequity of educational opportunity: Never ending story. Curriculum and assessment. Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press

Thompson, P. (2002). Schooling the rustbelt kids: Making the difference in changing times. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Being in an Integrated Curriculum

“When the pendulum swung from a more holistic, integrated approach to a standards-based approach in the mid-1990s the Be component disappeared from curriculum outcomes – at least explicitly” (Drake, Reid, & Kolohon, 2014, p. 38). I came across this quote this week and it drew me into a discussion for two reasons. The first was that I do not believe that this is entirely true; as an Australian education student, I am familiar with Australia’s curriculum documents and believe that their Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (EYLF) addresses the Be that Drake et al. (2014) discuss. The second reason was that I was interested in the swing from a holistic to standards-based approach, given that (in Australia at least) there is a transition back to holistic learning (DEEWR, 2009).

Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (2009) focuses on three main aspects of development in the early years; belonging, being and becoming (DEEWR, 2009). This Framework is the first Australian national Early Years Learning Framework for early childhood educators, designed to “enrich and extend children’s learning from birth to five years and through the transition to school” (DEEWR, 2009, p. 5) by focusing on allowing children to belong, be and become. The term “being” in the EYLF refers to recognising “the significance of the here and now in children’s lives” (DEEWR, 2009, p.7). This involves encouraging children to know themselves, creating relationships and “engaging with life’s joys and complexities,” by essentially allowing children to be children (DEEWR, 2009, p.7). The image below, taken directly from the EYLF, demonstrates that Being has certainly not disappeared from being explicit in curriculum outcomes.

The EYLF also encourages a holistic and integrated approach to teaching and learning (DEEWR, 2009). It views children’s learning as “dynamic, complex and holistic,” integrating physical, social, emotional, personal, spiritual, creative, cognitive and linguistic aspects of learning (DEEWR, 2009, p.14). There is a strong shift towards integrated and holistic learning in the EYLF, as although educators may plan with focus on learning outcomes, they are encouraged to “see children’s learning as integrated and interconnected” (DEEWR, 2009, p.14). I believe this is particularly relevant for early childhood education, as integrated learning has been shown to allow children to relate their knowledge of different aspects into a meaningful “holistic entity” (Arthur, Beecher, Death, Dockett & Farmer, 2015, p.239). The Early Years Learning Framework displays that not all curriculum documents have made the shift to standardised testing and away from Being and holistic and integrated learning, and I believe this to be a step in the right direction.

Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Death, E., Dockett, S. & Farmer, S. (2015). Programming and planning in early childhood settings (6^th ed.). South Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning Australia.

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments (DEEWR). (2009). Belonging, being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/belonging_being_and_becoming_the_early_years_learning_framework_for_australia.pdf

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments (DEEWR). (2009). Elements of the Early Years Learning Framework [image]. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/belonging_being_and_becoming_the_early_years_learning_framework_for_australia.pdf

Drake, S. M., Reid, J. L., & Kolohon, W. (2014). Interweaving curriculum and classroom assessment: Engaging the 21st century learner.