“The primary purpose of assessment, regardless of teaching
level, is to guide instruction. Unlike evaluation, the goal of assessment is
not to arrive at a grade for students. Rather,
it is to inform the teacher as to what needs to be addressed in the classroom,
from novel selections to literary skills to instructional practices” (Comer,
2011, p. 239).
In her article relating to young adult literature (YAL)
curriculum, Comer outlines quite clearly from the start her teaching beliefs
and practices. For her, assessments are a means for the teacher to understand
the students better in the hopes of aligning the curriculum to match students’
needs. This would be contrary to the focus on grades especially in a setting of
summative assessment. In a sense, the onus now belongs to the teachers who have
to make sense of the answers as opposed to students making sense of their
grades.
Comer’s teaching practices are in line with her beliefs of “assessment
for learning” (Comer, 2011, p. 240) where she mentions assessing students
through a survey, knowledge rating charts, cyber-hunts and twitter summaries.
The survey and knowledge rating charts acts as a primary diagnostic in
determining the background knowledge of students, hearing about students’
literary interests and also allowing students to gain a better understanding of
themselves by tracking their learning. Based off the newly acquired knowledge
of students, the teacher can then design the curriculum to cater to the aspect
of comprehension. In this article, Comer mentions using cyber-hunts and twitter
summaries. Both the affordances are ICT tools and this would be in line “with
current trends in technology” (Comer, 2011, p. 243).
While I agree strongly with a curriculum based on formative
assessments and how Comer’s article reads like a breath of fresh air, I do find
that challenges present itself quite readily as well. For starters, the notion
of “authentic assessment” (Comer, 2011, p. 240) would be hard-pressed to define
what constitutes as “educational merit” in setting tasks for students. Under the
umbrella of formative assessment presents a measurement of holistic learning.
With that in mind, summative assessments might present a “better measure” with
its testing for answers style in determining educational merit. The predominant
mindset of grades being what counts further justifies this.
If we were to consider the context of the article that caters
to YAL, I cannot help but question how we (as secondary school teachers) could
both design the curriculum and have a system of accountability taking into
account the local context and having formative assessments. Not only are certain
factors beyond our control but there exists also the prevailing mindset in
society that for the most part, grades are what matters. We do not have the
same luxury that Comer possesses in designing her own curriculum and an
education system that already practices formative assessments.
The use of technology (cyber-hunts, twitter summaries) to
support individual learning is indeed laudable in light of current trends both
in terms of technological and educational. Having said that, the fact that
these forms of assessments are labelled “alternative” immediately suggests a
difference from the conventional. One could see how more traditional forms of
assessments (tests, examinations) would still be regarded as the mainstay especially
within the local context where assessment of learning is religiously employed
in the form of high-stakes examinations.
Nonetheless, Comer’s article (written recently) presents a
way forward towards the future of education and the purposes of assessments.
Assessments should be purposeful and not purpose-laden wherein students
mindlessly regurgitate answers from rote.
No comments:
Post a Comment