As discussed previously, summative assessment provides evidence of pupil achievement of making a judgment about pupil’s competence or effectiveness of PoS usually in the form of standardised tests. At classroom level, summative assessment determines how much pupils have learned at a particular time, for the purpose of communicating achievement status to others. Kirton et al (2007) think formative and summative assessments as two separate and hardly reconcilable approaches of assessment whereas Black et al (2004, 2010) feel they can be complementary to each other. An assessment intended to be formative can be used summatively in the classroom when evidence indicates pupils’ attainment. Similarly, a summative assessment can be used formatively, such as when end of the topic test reveals problems with pupils learning that can be addressed by teaching the topic again.
Summative assessments such as standardised test is a key tool for obtaining information about pupil's strengths and needs that can guide instruction to consider the improved quality of the data collected. On the contrary, ARG (2012) believes that such high-stakes tests can build a barrier to use of AfL as a main approach to promote learning. There have been concerns raised by several education experts of ‘unintended outcomes’ which are derived from these changes to assessment system in the country. They point out that huge amount of time spent on testing (and preparing) pupils, taking time away from teaching and learning. This leads to situation where teachers would be more tempted to ‘teach to the test’ and would mainly focus on teaching what is to be tested and what is easy to test rather than teaching the wider curriculum. In my opinion, teacher should concentrate on...
... middle of paper ...
...learner is put at the heart of the assessment process and learning objectives are refocused so that learner becomes primary benefactor. The distinction between the two assessment approaches in reference to curriculum and teaching methods evaluation suggests that information can be gathered early in the process of implementation to identify areas for improvement, and adjusting teaching, at successive stage of development. Therefore, to establish effective learning teachers should use the assessment results to provide feedback to students on gaps between their performance and the ‘mastery level’ and to adjust their own teaching to better meet identified learning needs .
The evidences gained from research and inspections show the positive impact of AfL on pupil’s achievement, though further rigorous quantitative research is required to arrive at stronger conclusions.
The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], describe the content and the achievement standard that each Year level is required to achieve for the purpose of monitoring student progress (ACARA, 2012). This is underpinned by the standard “5.1 Demonstrate understanding of assessment strategies, including informal and formal, diagnostic, formative and summative approaches to assess student learning”. As a pre service teacher, I have been involved in delivering many diagnostic and formative assessments throughout my practicum such as observations, explicit feedback, peer feedback, questioning, written and oral activities. Therefore my assessment practice will continue to include assessment for learning known as formative assessment and assessment of learning known as summative
This article, initiated by the Assessment Group of the British Educational Research Association, focuses on how improving formative assessment raises standards and how there is still room for improvement. It discusses the importance of self and peer assessments and effective teaching. They also identified four ways to implement classroom policies to improve formative assessment.
Assessment has been the greatest challenge in my development as a professional. My coursework as supported my growth in this area, especially in understanding the broad range of assessments used to support students’ growth and development. My courses have also supported my understanding of how ongoing observational assessment and standards-based measures can be used to inform instruction and support the cycle of observation, reflection and planning. Coursework
The main argument put forth in this article is that Nolen believes that “we need to better understand the connections between teachers’ assessment practices and students’ motivation and engagement in terms of the social systems in which they exist.” (Nolen, 320). She goes on to discuss the significance of formative assessments providing feedback and how this feedback can be used to measure the gap between current and desired performance. This article took into account the “balance of multiple purposes for assessing and providing feedback”. (Nolen, 321). Nolen goes on to state how teachers provide useful information to students in regards to self-assessment but are often just as concerned with student’s emotional issues such as motivation to learn. This article illustrated the connection and significance of student motivation and feedback in regards to formative assessments. It was also helpful to read that even when the feedback on formative assessments is clear, the assessment may still not produce the desired effect on student engagement and learning. This is the central focus question I have and will find out regarding using formative assessments with my students. This article reaffirmed the validity of my action research topic and gave me a realistic outlook on
Assessment for learning helps in contribution to future planning for all who are involved in the learning process. The
Referred to as “assessment of learning,” (Chappuis, J., Stiggins, Chappuis, S., & Arter, 2012, pg. 5) components of summative learning include evaluating, measuring, and making judgements about student knowledge, both on individual levels and group levels. Rather than supporting learning by way of formative assessment, summative assessment verifies learning, (Chappuis, J., Stiggins, Chappuis, S., Arter, 2012). Naturally, this is what interests educational stakeholders: administrators, parents, teachers, and those who create educational policies. (Chappuis, J., Stiggins, Chappuis, S., & Arter, 2012, pg. 5). Summative assessment historically and presently presents itself in the form of graded quizzes, tests, graded papers and presentations, district benchmark tests, state standardized tests, and college entrance
Multiple means of assessment requires more planning and long-term, ongoing measurement. When conducted properly, measuring student learning is essential in order to gain a true understanding of student ability. The use of multiple means of formative and summative assessments provides appropriate evidence of student learning that can be used to help modify instructional practice to better meet students’ individual learning needs. Some of the multiple means of assessment include student portfolios made up of work examples, letters from educators, pre-tests and post-tests, wri...
Assessments are important when teachers want to deliver high quality lessons and ensure the students understand the concepts before moving on. The assessment chosen for this assignment is a Letter to a Friend. This self-assessment strategy helps the teacher understand how clearly the students grasped the concepts within a unit (Sunal & Haas, 2011). For teachers who teach all subjects, this activity covers a few ELA standards as well.
Research carried out by Ofsted (2011) shows that, assessment improved a practitioner’s awareness of a child’s strengths and weaknesses. Subsequently, this had a positive influence on their planning, as they were able to differentiate and offer adequate support for children. Ofsted believes it to be the best way to improve pupil’s attainment (Ofsted, 2011).
Some teachers only think of summative assessments that are used for reporting grades. When used this way, assessments do not lead to learning. If teachers will effectively use formative assessments to provide students with timely feedback and individualize instruction based on assessment feedback, it will result in enhanced learning (Brink & Bartz, 2017). In order for this to happen schools need to develop a culture of formative assessment. Teachers need to be trained in the use of formative assessments and administration will need to cultivate this change in culture (Brink & Bartz,
Many have come to the conclusion that these forms of testing are promoting what is called “teaching to the test”, which has brought up a few concerns for parents and students. A. Limits the time used on subjects not related to the standardized test B. Undermines the necessity of critical thinking and innovation III. Just as standardized tests are linked to “teaching to the test”, they are
The goal of education is to provide children with the opportunity to amass a wealth of knowledge, love for learning, and academic strength. Children go to school to read, write, and learn a variety of subjects. While education is meant to be exciting for children, there have to be standards in order to make sure that progress is being and those children are where they need to be in order to move onto the next phase of their education. Education builds as it grows, and students need a strong foundation in order to succeed and continue. Without those strong building blocks, students will continue to fall back and repeat the same material again and again. And so, testing and assessment come into play to make sure children are where they need to be. However, in early childhood settings testing is almost non-existent because of the stigma around testing. The current debate in our education system argues that testing is not a good measure of a child’s actual knowledge. Rather, assessment gives teachers a better picture of a student’s abilities and capabilities in the classroom. Thus, currently the debate continues over assessment versus testing in the classroom due to the demand for knowledge on whether or not testing is a good way of measuring a student’s progress in school.
Assessments have always been a tool for teachers to assess mastery and for a long time it was just to provide a grade and enter it into the grade book or report card. Through resources in and out of the course, there has been a breath of new life into the research on how to use assessments. They take many forms and fall within the summative or formative assessment category. Sloan (2016) addresses how formative assessments has traditionally been used by teachers to modify instruction, but when we focus on a classroom that is learner-centered “it becomes assessment for learning as opposed to assessment of learning” (slide 4). The fact is, the students are the ones that should be and are the ones using the data we collect through assessments, since it is our way of providing feedback in order
Assessment plays an integral part of the teaching and learning process by providing teachers with information on students’ developing mathematical capabilities (Booker, Bond, Sparrow, & Swan, 2010; Reys et al., 2012). Assessment is a daily requirement within the primary school context and when properly developed and interpreted can be used to encourage students, provide information to direct and modify teaching and learning activities, provide feedback to students about progress and contribute to reporting (Department of Education and Early Childhood Development [DEECD], 2009; Junpeng, 2012; New South Wales Department of Education and Communities, 2011). This essay will examine formative and summative assessment strategies teachers draw on to assess students’ mathematical understanding. Teachers use a range of formative assessment tools and teaching approaches to gather evidence for the purposes of: monitoring and measuring student learning; providing students with feedback; and providing feedback to inform teaching and modifying instructional strategies to enhance students’ knowledge and performance in mathematics (ACARA, 2015; DEECD, 2009; McMillan, 2011; Taylor-Cox, & Oberdorf, 2013).
Through assessment students and teachers are able to determine the level of mastery a student has achieved with standards taught. Both formative and summative assessment should be purposeful and targeted to gain the most accurate data to drive further instruction (Ainsworth, 2010). While this syllabus does a good job of identifying the need for both formal and informal assessments, the way in which this is communicated does not provide enough detail for understanding. Simply listing assessment types does not give any insight into how these assessments fit in the learning process of this course. While some of the assessments mentioned could be common assessments chosen by the school or district to gain insight into the effectiveness of instruction, the inclusion of authentic assessments is most beneficial to students and demonstrates learning in a context closer to that of a work environment (Rovai, 2004). Unfortunately, this particular course, according to this syllabus, relies heavily on quizzes and traditional tests and essays to form the bulk of assessment opportunities. While other activities, such as formative assessments, journaling and discussions are mentioned as possible avenues for scoring, they are given a very low percentage of the overall grade. This shows that they are not valued for their ability to show progression and mastery. If this is indeed the case, this puts the students as a