Chapter 13: Assessing Student Learning

 Discussion:

            Chapter thirteen provides an in-depth discussion of assessing student learning. The reasoning behind designing lessons and learning experiences is to help students gain mastery of a topic or skill. Chapter thirteen focuses on how teachers can design and implement assessments to help them determine a student’s level of understanding as well as make instructional adjustments to help support students when they are not mastering skills (Slavin, 2018).

            Also, Slavin details various grading strategies and methods that teachers can employ to communicate grades. Along with is discussion, the author introduces various supports(rubrics, checklists, templates) and suggestions that teachers should use to help boost student understanding of the evaluation expectation and ultimately their grade.

            Regarding assessments, the author provided a detailed discussion of the various types of assessment item types as well as a list of alternative evaluations (performance assessments, portfolios, and authentic learning).

 

Analysis:

            Chapter thirteen beings by introducing and defining instructional objectives. Instructional objectives are statements that describe what students will learn or be able to accomplish by the end of instruction (Slavin, 2018). Slavin explains that effective instruction objects are characterized by “…three distinct parts: performance, conditions, and criteria. (Slavin, 2018, p.340). This criterion is imperative to creating effective instructional objectives. Instructional objectives should reflect the content area and be adjusted to appropriately reflect the intended outcome or standard. Slavin explains that “Some material, of course, does not lend itself to such specific instructional objectives, and it would be a mistake in such cases to adhere to objectives that have numerical criteria.” (Slavin, 2018, p. 341). Slavin suggests that teachers should be conscious of the wording of the object and how it reflects the depth of learning expected from the students (2018). Finally, instructional objectives’ wording and criteria should not be subjective; rather, the expectations and outcomes should be clear and specific (Slavin, 2018).

            Slavin extends the discussion on instructional objectives by explaining that teachers should be aware of not only the component skills (the new skills that are targeted for mastery) but the educators should also identify any prerequisite or subskills that students would need in order to be successful in the lesson or task (Slavin, 2018).  Once both types of skills have been identified, teachers should plan on how to address and combine the skills sets so that the students can learn, practice, and apply the targeted and prerequisite skills (Slavin, 2018). Backwards planning is a planning model that supports this process by requiring teachers to focus first on the objectives and criteria, then designing lessons that will meet those objectives (Slavin, 2018). This process solidifies the fact that instructional objectives are imperative to centering and guiding teacher lessons or  instruction in a way that effectively manages allotted instructional time to ultimately meet the standards or content that being taught.

            The next section extends instructional objectives to assessment. Salvin explains the importance of aligning objectives, instruction, and assessment. The more exposure and practice students have with a topic, the more likely students are to gain mastery of the skill (2018). Here teaching objectives are defined as statements describing what students should learn after instruction is delivered (Slavin, 2018). Also, learning objectives are defined as expected knowledge, skills, or behaviors students will demonstrate after instruction is completed (Slavin, 2018).

            When writing objectives, teachers must consider their students' diverse nature and experiences (Slavin, 2018). Therefore, then writing objectives, educators must include different levels of complexity. Referring to Bloom’s Taxonomy is highly recommended for this task. Bloom’s taxonomy formulated six categories of objectives and sorted them based on their level of cognitive complexity (Slavin, 2018). Overall, teachers need to seek a balance between the cognitive levels (Slavin, 2018).

            Slavin warns forcing every topic studied in a content area is unreasonable and can be inappropriate (2018). Rather, the author suggests that educators employ behavior content matrixes to help determine objectives due to the fact that the matrix compels one considers the various cognitive levels that can be effectively applied to the topic of study (Slavin, 2018).

Chapter thirteen also explains that evaluations also provide information about the students that extends beyond skill mastery. Evaluations inform parents of a student of their student’s performance and reveal patterns or changes in their work (Slavin, 2018). This information helps parents adjust or address various household factors and establish various reinforcers to support their students (Slavin, 2018). Student data is also used to hold educators and schools accountable for their own performance (Slavin, 2018).

            Slavin discusses the two categories of assessment, summative and formative. Summative assessment must be reliable and aligned to instruction (Slavin, 2018). These assessments usually occur at the end of an instructional period to assess the overall mastery of the skills or content of the unit (Slavin, 2018). Conversely, formative assessment is used to inform and guide instruction based on the students' levels of understanding (Slavin, 2018). These evaluations are frequent and occur in various formats (Slavin, 2018). Their flexibility allows for educators to make rapid decisions about instruction or the lesson activity’s effectiveness (Slavin, 2018).

            Once students have taken an assessment, their scores are then interpreted. Slavin explains that norm-referenced interpretation occurs when students' scores are compared to their peer’s scores (2018). The second category of interpretation is using scores to determine an individual’s level of mastery of a specific topic or skill (Slavin, 2018). In this category, the classmate’s scores are not compared to each other rather to a preset standard or skill (Slavin, 2018). Formative assessments are typically criterion-referenced (Slavin, 2018).

            When administering assessments, it is important for teachers to be intentional about the type and number of assessments (Slavin, 2018). Effective assessments inform, motivate, and provide feedback for students (Slavin, 2018). Slavin explains that grades are often not reasonable motivators and that the assessments/feedback occurs in a way that prevents students from making connections between their performance and the grade (Slavin, 2018). To counteract this issue, the author discusses the use of brief assessments that provide immediate feedback so that teachers and learners may make adjustments to their instruction or learning approach (Slavin, 2018).  If quizzes are graded, then the “…n quiz scores also serve as effective incentives, rewarding effective studying behavior soon after it occurs” (Slavin, 2018, p. 352). It is vital that the criteria and objectives are clear to fully understand the reason behind their score and make more effective changes to their study time (Slavin, 2018).

            Finally, students need to understand how they stand with others both inside and outside their school (Slavin, 2018). This perception helps students make various decisions about their approach to learning and future possibilities (Slavin, 2018). These summative assessments should be in line with instruction and previous formative assessments (Slavin, 2018). In order for these results to be meaningful and, reliable teachers should all for numerous opportunities for students to show their mastery, and the assessment should be planned when instruction and learning had been completed (Slain, 2018).

            . There are various standards that one must consider when using achievement tests. First, achievement tests the objectives that are being measures should be directly related to the instructional objectives, lessons, and formative assessments (Slavin, 2018). Secondly, these assessments should include samples that represent the various content and objectives that were covered during instruction (Slavin, 2018).  The ratio of questions should reflect the time spent on the content as well (Slavin, 2018). These assessments should be designed to reflect and meet a specific purpose and be reliable (Slavin, 2018). Slavin warns that test scores should also be regarded with some caution due to the many variables that cannot be controled such as hunger, anxiety, sleep, etc. (2018). Finally, these achievement assessments should serve to improve learning by providing immediate feedback and information/data to inform and adjust study practices and lesson delivery methods (Slavin, 2018).

            Writing and constructing assessment has numerous facets one should consider. When writing the test questions, one should ensure that the items are transparent and directly related to previous learning experiences (Slavin, 2018). Also, the vernacular of the test item should not provide any student with an advantage or disadvantage based on their various experiences outside of school (Slavin, 2018). The directions should clearly outline what each response is expected to contain. (Slavin, 2018).  Slavin warns that some students will not understand the “hidden” expectation or direct and to grade them on what is not asked is unreasonable (Slavin, 2018). When administering assessments, every student should have as many barriers removed as possible: students should be familiar with the format, have adequate time, and not interruptions (Slavin, 2018). The grading rubrics or scales must be reflective the objects and test items (Slavin, 2018). Finally, overall grades should consist of a collection of assessments that have occurred at different times in different formats (Slavin, 2018).

            Slavin provides an example of a table of specifications. This is a tool that can help teachers design and organize test questions by using the objectives and bloom’s taxonomy (Slavin, 2018). This table is closely related to the behavior matrix example that is used. Slavin includes a set of seven guidelines to consider when reviewing the exam you have created.

            Slavin follows up with a breakdown of the various test items that can be used, such as selected-response items (multi-choice, matching, true-false, etc.). These can vary in difficulty based on the wording and the use of foils or distractor answers (Slavin, 2018).

            Constructive responses require students to create the response to a given question (Slavin, 2018). One should be careful and develop these items so that there is no uncertainty as to what is expected from the response (Slavin, 2018). These formats can be short answers, short essays, or long essays (Slavin, 2018). Slavin explains that these items “appraise students’ progress in organizing data and applying concepts at the highest levels of instructional objectives (Slavin, 2018, p. 361). Slavin explains that one must be careful when employing essay questions because there is a risk that students with limited writing abilities are unable to fully project what they actually know (2018). Likewise, Slavin also warns one must be tremendously particular when constructing essay questions to avoid any potential obscurity and truly test what they need to know from students (Slavin, 2018). Slavin provides a set of guiding principles for one to consider when constructing and scoring essays. One of the most striking elements is that educators should require that all elements are answered and to not allow student to choose what parts they will respond to  (2018).  

            When evaluating essay questions, it is imperative that teachers construct their own response to help guide and provide feedback on student submissions (Slavin, 2018). It is suggested that generalized rubrics are shared with student prior to the evaluation so that the students have a clear grasp of what is being scored and how it is scored (Slavin, 2018).

            Following this section the author includes a discussion on evaluating problem-solving type questions. Problem solving items are defined as problems that “requires students to organize, select, and apply complex procedures that have at least several important steps or components. It is important to appraise the students’ work in each of these steps or components.” (Slavin, 2018, p. 364). When using problem-solving tasking, Slavin explains that using checklists can be imperative to fair analysis of student responses. This can also be helpful in awarding partial credit and communicating areas of strength and growth (Slavin, 2018). The author equates this with using rubric especially when paired with evaluation descriptors (strengths and weakness of a student’s response) (Slavin, 2018). This, like rubrics, should be introduced to students during class prior to using them for evaluations (Slavin, 2018).

Peer evaluations can also be a helpful tool because they provide “a formative evaluation for the writer, but it also gives the evaluator an invaluable opportunity to take the teacher’s perspective and gain insight into what constitutes good writing.” (Slavin, 2018, p. 364). The author does explain that peer evaluations are more often used in ELA than math (Slavin, 2018).

Moving forward, the author acknowledges the fact that there has been debates on the usage of traditional assessment and evaluations to reflect student learning (2018). This have given rise to alternative evaluations such as performance assessments and portfolios. This evaluation formats are meant to provide students with the opportunity and flexibility to d track, showcase, or demonstrate their learning in a meaningful and authentic way (Slavin,2018).

Portfolios are collections and samples of work that have been completed overtime (Slavin, 2018). Usually, these work samples should showcase higher order skill application and thinking can be used to evaluate student growth (Slavin, 2018). Using technology to create, collect, and display portfolios has become increasing popular (Slavin, 2018).

Another alternative assessment is the performance assessment. A performance assess is where students must apply various skills and content knowledge to solve or create authentic problems and solutions (Slavin, 2018). These can vary wildly depending on what the assessment’s purpose is measuring (Slavin, 2018).

Performance assessments use usually scored using detailed rubrics (Slavin, 2018). Slavin equates performance assessments with essay and suggests that, as with essays, student be presented with  “generic” rubrics which are similar to the ones that will be used to grade prior to the evaluation taking place (2018). As with all in depth and meaningful evaluations this takes careful planning and time to ensure a successful and valid evaluation (Slavin, 2018).

Once evaluations take place it is common to assign grades. No matter what method is done grades should communicate student’s work and areas of strength and weaknesses (Slavin, 2018). Letter grades are often coupled with a percentage ranges that denote the criteria for that particular grade (Slavin, 2018). The author cautions educators that student scores could possibly depend on the type of assessments given (Slavin, 2018). To help with this possible issue Slavin suggests that, “absolute percentage criteria should be tempered with criterion-referenced standards… higher standards for tests that students are likely to find easy and lower standards for more difficult tests.” (Slavin, 2018). Slavin also explains that using only letter grades could cause controversy due to the criteria ranges and F can be a 69 % or a 28% both communicate wildly different information (Slavin, 2018).

Grading on a curve of using relative grading avoids the issue of the testing format affecting the overall grade because grades and points are awarded based on a student’s position or grade in the class (Slavin, 2018). This practice has questionable drawbacks because the number of higher grades is kept at a constant and it creates a competitive environment where students are less likely to engage in constructive and help collaboration (Slavin, 2018).

Because grades cannot account a student’s motivation and do not communicate the strengths or weaknesses of a student schools have begun using performance grading (Slavin, 2018). This type of grade is assigned when teachers, “…determine what children know and can do and then report this in a way that is easy for parents and students to understand” (Slavin, 2018). This allows teachers to communicate information regarding a student performance in a way that is digestible for parents and follow guidelines that are deemed essential by the school (Slavin, 2018).

Slavin does discuss the advantages of allowing students to retake exams, especially if they have failed (2018). However, he warns that the exam should not be the same test and teachers should be careful not to allow students to assume there is always a second opportunity because there is the possibility that students will not put forth their best effort on the first exam, but will study the test on the second (Slavin, 2018).

Nearing the end of the chapter Slavin breaks down the various grades used to report mastery for a report card. According to Slavin tests, quizzes, projects, performances are the best to report in a report card because these occur when learning is complete and summarize student learning (Slavin, 2018).  However, when learning is still growing and progressing using homework or any seat work is not as reasonable and even still effort and classroom behavior do not communicate any information about student’s knowledge of mastery level; therefore they are the least appropriate to include in a report card (Slavin, 2018). This is why weighting grades is helpful in communicating the most to the least important classroom action.

Slavin moves to discuss various grading practices such as how to handle missing work and using a policy where the lowest grades are dropped (2018). Various schools have various policies, but considering all data student reports should be expected by parents (Slavin, 2018). Teachers who explicitly discuss the different grading guidelines and expectations will experience less poor achievement that is a result of misunderstanding or lack of preparedness (Slavin, 2018).

Reflection:

Chapter 13 was brilliant chapter and I truly am curious about learning even more regarding student assessment. Assessment is tremendously important because they help teachers determine or gauge student learning, but educators may use these assessments as “windows” through which they can “see” what particular area a student or a set of students struggle. This information helps teachers be responsive to students and helps them tailor their lessons based on what their particular group of students need. While reading this chapter I also came to the conclusion that assessments are synonymous to communication. Teachers communicate their expectations of students should be able to do. Students communicate their understanding, strengths, and weaknesses. They also communicate student’s work to parents.

            Assessment is, honestly, one of the things I hate the most about my job because of how subjective it can be.  To me, assessment should be fluid and flexible because if we want to create a community of life- long learners, then learning is never actually complete. Therefore, quizzes and tests should not be the “end all” as a summative assessment. However, in the way that my district is structured this mindset is not welcomed. This past year with COVID and remote learning left me beyond disheartened and confused about what assessment is actually for.

            I learned that assessments can be abused to fit a narrative or a desire that is not appropriate nor does it align with our goals as educators. “Teach-ers vary considerably in their estimates of what these right numbers should be, but schools often have unspoken norms about how many students should be given A’s and how many should fail.” (Slavin, 2018, p. 375) I learned that schools must have clear and reasonable assessment and evaluation guidelines that are appropriate for the different stages of development and content area. “Blanket” policies only restrict teachers from being responsive or providing fair, valid, and reliable assessments. The entire idea of assessments makes me anxious now for various reasons, most of which are stemmed from the fact administrators override research and create policies that does not reflect what assessments are actually for.

            I am in a difficult situation regarding one of my content areas due to our scripted curriculum. My math curriculum has all the quizzes, assessments, and work pace and dated; so there is little room for me to do my actual job. I recall numerous conversations I have had with selected personnel about needing to go back and adjust an approach based on the data from an evaluation. I was told that the curriculum “spiraled,” so there was no need to through off pacing to reteach. I cried a lot that afternoon.

            No matter, I do my absolute best to ensure that my students have every opportunity to succeed in that class. Based on the information from the chapter, I am pleased to know that I have already employed that important practice of communicating expectations and teaching them various strategies (around the curriculum) that they can use to think more critically about the material.

            In science, however, I have limited time but more freedom. So, here I can be creative and uses various items for formative assessments. I can go back and reteach based on summative information, and this year I am excited to see how I can use our new curriculum to set up more structured performance assessments. Science is tricky because it is one of the first subjects that are sacrificed to make more time for other “tested” subjects or school functions. So, many of my students have never designed anything or used critical thinking skills to combine various knowledges to participate in a performance assessment or authentic learning. I hope to take some information I have learned here and combine it with my experience and curriculum to at least give my students a chance to apply their learning.

            As I moved through the chapter, I was surprised about the various types of grading. I have always graded using mastery. I was stunned when I read about contract grading.

            In thinking about assessments, feedback is a vital component. My biggest issue is figuring out how to encourage students to actually use their feedback from assessments such as quizzes, exit tickets, or projects to alter their study habits or approaches to the skill. I have not quite worked out how to teach 5th grades to internalize constructive feedback and make independent changes to their study habits and maintain them. I write developmentally appropriate but detailed feedback on everything a student turns in, but I feel that I write it for my self and the students do not seem to acknowledge it. I use feedback from class discussions and guided practices to engage students in creating a "RED FLAG" list. A "RED FLAG" list is a list of common errors or "sticky spots" we can use as a checklist to guide our thinking or give our attention to these spots when working apart from the teacher. I also use the feedback to guide student-teacher meetings and parent-teacher meetings, but that isn’t how I envision feedback and formative assessments being used. Over the last few years, I have determined that my expectations are a little too high for my students’ maturity/age or missing a step in supporting them.

            I think I would like to investigate feedback more and work on using technologies like Mentimeter or Quizziz for students to receive immediate feedback. I also am curious about how to have discussions about students studying with parents. I try to be responsive to my low-income demographic. I realize these homes and family dynamics can be challenging, so I would like to learn how to better support students and families in this area.

            Also, the rubrics for performance assessments were brilliant. I cannot fathom how much work I have put into make rubrics for constructive response questions or perform tasks for math and science over the years. I even have gone to see various colleagues to help me write or script them truly enjoyed this section. I am still not very confident in writing rubrics, but I want to learn to excel here. Although, I have always worried about rubrics being limiting. Students and parents seeing rubrics as more of a “checklist” and not a guide. I have seen some students which I knew could perform the task physically, create his response using the rubric and physically check off the ones he knew he included (which is perfect), but they all in the 3rd row resulting in a lower C grade. After my conference and I asked him about his response, he shrugged and responded that he just felt like finishing early.

            Also, regarding rubrics, as a 5th-grade teacher, I never thought to “teach” them how to use rubrics. However, after reading this chapter, makes sense and is equitable to teaching students the classroom expectations. I know that moving forward, I am in dire need of slowing down and ensuring my students have these basic skills so that they can show me what they truly know and use these tools to support their learning experience.

 Referecnes:

Slavin, R. E. (2018). Educational Psychology. [VitalSource Bookshelf]. Retrieved from https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780134524177/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Chapter 8: Student-Centered and Constructivist approaches to Instrution

Chapter 9: Grouping, Differentiation, and Technology

Chapter 2 Cognitive, Language, and Literacy Development.