Assessment - unpacking what lies underneath

So far I have been reflecting about assessment from a very pragmatic point of view - e.g. how can I help students connect better to the process of assessment and the standards. In doing so I have seen that the assessment standards are not entirely consistent with student development...

So when we write standards are we thinking in terms of a student's natural development? Are we thinking in terms of development lines or intelligences? (ego, psycho-social, multiple intelligences, moral, perspectival, spiritual... there are over 80 different lines listed in Wilber's Integral Psychology!) Or are we thinking in terms of how a task might get harder? And what is the difference?

But wait, there is more. From a spiral dynamic point of view we can see how approaches to assessment might fit into particular cultural worldviews or perspectives...

Blue meme - authority based culture
The teacher gives a final mark based on a system which is largely invisible to the student. It comes out of a culture where truth and objectivity is valued and there is an expectation that truth can be delivered by an authority.

Although in many ways this assessment culture is the least transparent of the ones I am outlining, within this paradigm there is a false belief that assessment is something that can be known.

Orange meme - enterprise based culture
There are some standards and goals which are transparent to both students and teachers - a student can be rated against these fixed standards by themselves, the teacher or their peers.

However while the standards might seem explicit, within them are implicit values - e.g. valuing autonomy, discernment, initiative... Whose values are these and do we agree with them?
And how subjective are the interpretation of these? E.g. discernment could be seen as intelligence and critical thinking when interpreted from an enterprising worldview, or could be interpreted as wisdom (heart/mind/soul) and insight when interpreted from a spiritual point of view.

So although these standards might seem to enable "objective" measurement, they are actually problematic.

Green meme - postmodern/relativistic/inclusive based culture
In this culture one would question the role of assessment - what and who does it serve? What is the point of setting generic goals and standards in the first place?

Here there is an awareness that each student is a unique evolving and unfolding human being and that trying to fit their learning into subject criteria and standards might be partial, misleading (being subject to interpretation) and detrimental to student self-esteem. In this cultural meme, assessment is likely to be designed with the student to fit their own personal goals and experience, being flexible and reflexive as students reflect on their learning and themselves, past, present and future...being and becoming. It may not involve rating against standards but rather involve personal folios and telling one's story in deeply reflective ways leading to self-realisation and transformation.

The problem with this system is how do employers or further training institutions interpret such highly personal forms of assessment.

Integral meme - including and transcending what has gone before - (yellow)

In an integral assessment system it is recognised that all memes have something of value - they each contribute a partial "truth" - they are appropriate at different times and places, each with limitations. So in an integral assessment system, one would be looking at a multi-layered system that could meet the different needs of students, employers, parents and teachers. An integral system would make the limitations of each cultural assessment mode transparent. It would recognize the problematic and unsolvable nature and keep the tensions alive.

Students would be aware of their own very complex development as a human being, as well as their learning of skills, knowledge and attitudes. They would be able to manipulate various "assessment" processes to help them make sense of this journey.


What do you think? What system do you think you are using or would want to use?

How can you help students self-assess across 5 stages?

We just had the mid-year assessment task for journalism. Students came in to work on a self-assessment. They had to

• put together either a digital folder or a paper one,
• complete a summary page of what they have done (or is in progress - or which was canned) - products and media reflections, with hyperlinks
• answer questions related to each criteria (eg Critieria 1 : Take an example of where you have been involved in communicating with others (team meeting, editing, explaining, interviewing) and discuss what you have done well, not so well and where you could improve for the future.)
• rate themseleves for each criteria based on stage level and award of A, B, C - using the huge book of standards as well as my "Journalism - the video game" as guides.

The purpose was to help them reflect on what they had done and learnt in order to act as a leaping off point for the rest of the year. So rather than providing examples which might have "demonstrated" understanding, I was looking at them taking examples of what they had done and through their reflection demonstrating understanding.

I was extremely pleased with what resulted. I think the summary sheet was an excellent way of student's realising how much they had done. The criteria reflection yielded many insights and greater commitment to what they need to achieve for the rest of the year. I assisted some students to unpack things which I felt were significant learning moments.

Some student reflections:

Working in teams: "I think that Jescador hasn't quite got it together as a team yet. As we know, computers are taking over the world and we are rapidly replacing face to face communication. There is a lot of communication amongst the students but not all is appropriate....
My role in the team is being sub-editor, and I have decided that I need to get off my butt and get more involved with Management of Jescador and helping to organize other students in the class."

Solving Problems: "One of the biggest problems I have faced in journalism this year was the time I took to complete one of my articles and it was long overdue. I solved this problem by sending it home via email so I could work on it at home giving myself a firm deadline. From that experience I learnt that I work a lot harder when I am pressed for time and deadlines are due."

Critically appraising work: "I think that for this criterion I need to be more factual and less opiniated to produce a succesful article."

Although there are 10 criteria in the course I gave students the option of how many to reflect on... if they thought they were Stage 3 they could reflect on only 4 criteria, 7 for Stage 4 and all 10 for Stage 5. I did this because I felt that as one increased in stages we would expect a greater reflectivity and ability to articulate.

Then after reflecting on the criteria students rated themselves for each criteria against the standards. Some just guessed and some tried to do it carefully. Most were in the ball park of what I might determine for them... some I worked with them in helping them to rate themselves.

However, I have one boy whose reflection does not come up to the standard he has given himself. I am thinking that I need to go back to him now and give him an opportunity orally to justify his understanding.... he is in the class as a photojournalist. I gave the students the option of writing their reflections or recording it, and I think in future I will suggest this might be the better option for him. As with another boy, I also imagine that he can reflect well if interviewed. So does self-authoring self-reflection indicate a higher standard, or just a particular skill that I need to help students to build?

Another interesting thing... Rather than saying "I am at this stage and I am assesing myself only at one stage level" when students rated themselves for each criteria they moved across stages - so they might give themselves a stage 3 B for teamwork but stage 4 B in producing products. With the online stuff we are doing - most are operating at Stage 4/5 in the technology criteria. Given the breadth of the criteria and the implicit learning styles or multiple intelligences which underpin each criteria I think it is not unusual that students might be spread out across the stages. I also think that giving them a multiple stage profile is far more productive for them in seeing where exactly they need to go to improve rather than just rating them at one stage.

I also believe that the Journalism as a video game metaphor that I have used to explain the nature of the stages was very useful in helping them to see the stages in a way that makes sense, rather than trying to understand the very confusing standards book. I know that it has helped me in freeing myself to percieve the criteria and standards in a new way.

So in summary I am really pleased with how this went - this really was assessment as learning as well as assessment for learning (diagnosis) and assessment of learning (summative). The bummer now is chasing up those students who didn't turn up and ensuring they too go through the process.