It is argued that a well-regulated system of formative, interim, and summative assessments is capable of sustaining learner-centred teaching assessment and learning. In a general context, classroom-based or group-based, formative assessments are more easily individualised, specialised in learning and progress, helping to energise learners in self-regulating their learning processes; while interim and summative tests are inclined to being helpful to a wider share of stakeholders (Andrade H. et al, 2012).
8.3.1. Formative Assessment
In a well-functioning, learner-focused, educational environment, the objective of assessment is to offer prompt feedback to teachers and learners regarding where learners are in their learning process, what positive or negative teaching and learning circumstances might have occurred, and most importantly, in what ways teachers can collaborate with their learners to enrich and fortify learning. We will now discuss formative assessment in terms of self- and peer assessment, process portfolios, and formative tests (Andrade H. et al, 2012).
SELF-ASSESSMENT
The purpose of self-assessment is to identify areas of strength and weakness in one’s work in order to make improvements and promote learning, achievement, and self-regulation (Andrade & Valtcheva 2009).
Accepting self-assessment’s essence as formative is crucial. Self-assessment is happening on work in progress, to result to revision and enhancement. We advocate for a formative kind of learner self-assessment—i.e., as feedback for oneself from oneself. Self-assessment done in the right way can play a key part in a well-regulated learner-centred assessment approach. Learners are empowered to analyse their own performance and comment on both strengths and weaknesses, thus making self-assessment personalised.
Learners take charge of reviewing their progress regarding certain targets, by comparing their work to specific criteria, recognizing gaps, and drawing revised plans to make up for those gaps. Learner engagement becomes even more beneficial, if teachers involve them in the process of setting criteria for tasks. In this way, learners produce feedback that they will then utilise to further develop their learning and the learning outcomes. Repetitive self-assessment activities can lead to mastery.
Effective self-assessment involves at least three steps (Andrade H. et al, 2012):
- Clearly formulate performance objectives. The aspirations for the task at hand or the performance must be clearly formulated by the teacher(s), the learner(s), or, even better, by both. Learners get familiarised with the task at hand when they engage in the process of what is important and what are the qualitive criteria. Collaboration of teachers and learners on setting self-assessment expectations can be proven quite effective. A rubric can be helpful, which is usually a one- or two-page document, that contains criteria, and outlines varying levels of quality, from excellent to poor, for a specific task (Andrade H. et al, 2012).
- Reviewing progress toward the objectives. Learners take a first look at their task. They review their progress on tasks by comparing their performances-in-progress to the objectives, paying special attention to strengths and weaknesses, and making plans for refinement.
- Learners employ feedback from their self-assessments to manage revision. This step is critical. Learners will assess their work with consideration. Only if they are informed of this will it lead to advancement in their learning.
| A SAMPLE SELF-ASSESSMENT
An example from self-assessment in writing skills, might look like this: After writing a first draft of a persuasive essay, students underline key phrases in the rubric using a variety of coloured pencils. Next, they use corresponding colours to underline or circle their evidence of having met each criterion in their drafts. For example, students underline “clearly states an opinion” in blue on their rubric, then underline their opinions in blue in their essay drafts. If they cannot find a clearly articulated opinion to underline, they write themselves a reminder to do so in their revision. To assess one aspect of sentence fluency, they underline “sentences begin in different ways” in yellow on their rubric, use the same yellow pencil to circle the first word in every sentence in their essays, and then say the circled words aloud with an ear for repetition. And so on, for each criterion and sub-criterion on their rubric. |
PEER ASSESSMENT
Peer assessment aims to offer learners feedback from one to another regarding the quality of a product or performance (Andrade H. et al, 2012). This means that they help each other recognise and share views on strengths, weaknesses, and target areas for improvement. Peer assessment occurs within the learning environment at various times and within different contexts, and ignites the development of valuable metacognitive, personal, and professional skills. Along the same lines as self-assessment, peer feedback among learners is provided more often and quicker than feedback provided by educators.
Peer feedback can become an important asset of a learner-centred assessment practice. It focuses on the individuality of the learner and energises them to participate in the process of assessment, as they get acquainted with the formulated criteria, investigate a particular task, and spot its weak or strong points, and where it might need improvements – and this sequence of steps are then shared with the peer who created the work assessed. Emphasis lies on progress through feedback, and room to revise, improve, and enhance mastery. Peer assessment feedback is instructive and useful for all learners-members in a peer feedback group or class.
It is argued (Andrade H. et al, 2012) that efficient peer assessment includes the following steps:
- Teachers and learners collaborate on drawing assessment criteria.
- Peers are paired or appointed in small groups considering similar ability levels.
- The teacher instructs learners, using a model showing how to assess a piece of work using specific and clearly expressed criteria.
- Learners are provided with guidelines how to perform peer assessment and a checklist.
- Learners are provided with specific instructions regarding the task to be assessed and the time given for it.
- The teacher monitors the progress of the peer assessment groups.
- Teachers review the quality of the feedback.
- Teacher- and peer-generated feedback is cross-referenced to check dependability.
The teacher provides feedback to learners concerning how effectively they performed.
| THE LADDER OF FEEDBACK
When delivering peer feedback, it can be helpful for students to follow a constructive process or protocol. For example, the “Ladder of Feedback” (Perkins 2003) guides users through four steps: clarification; value; concerns; and suggestions.Ladder of Feedback [Suggest] [ Concerns ] [ Value ] [ Clarity ] Because it is difficult, if not impossible, to give useful feedback on a piece of work the student reviewer does not understand, the first step on the ladder gives the assessor a chance to ask clarifying questions about the student’s work. For example, a peer assessor may ask, “What is your research question?” when giving feedback on a suggested essay topic in French class. As the example indicates, questions of clarification are intended to seek information, not praise, or criticise. In the next step, the assessors identify something they value in their peer’s work to help them build on strengths. As at every rung on the ladder, the feedback is phrased in terms of what the assessor values, not in absolute terms that deny the assessor’s perspective. For example, “I really like how you propose a visit to the City’s museums and galleries Lake because it focuses on our interest in art and culture” is preferable to “It’s good that you will visit the city’s museums.” The third rung on the ladder is when the reviewer raises concerns. Again, the assessor should own the feedback by using language carefully. For example, “I’m concerned that you have several uncontrolled variables” is more constructive than “You have too many variables that you’re not controlling for.” Finally, during the fourth step, the reviewer makes suggestions for improvement—for example, “You might consider revising your research questions to focus on only those variables you can control, such as….” These suggestions should be stated as feedback, not mandates. |
It is suggested (Andrade H. et al, 2012) that peer assessment can enhance quality and efficiency of teaching and learning outcomes, particularly in writing.
SUMMATIVE TESTS FOR FORMATIVE PURPOSES
While, most commonly, tests are taken when a teaching course or topic is completed to cumulatively define the learners’ performance; summative tests for formative purposes comprise two testing sessions that contain analytical evidence of learning outcomes by both learners and teachers. Conclusions from the first testing session have formative purpose, and conclusions from the second testing session have summative use (Andrade H. et al, 2012).
To give an example, let us suppose you assign a formative test of learners’ comprehension of the grammatical phenomenon of passive voice. After the test but prior to going over the correct answers, you divide the group or class of learners, in smaller groups and have them discuss answers and /or any disagreements using their notes and teaching material. You then share the correct answers, after having given them the chance to investigate and correct mistakes. Learners, on the other hand, have been given the opportunity to consider errors and their tendency to what kind of errors, and acquired sufficient information regarding what they should focus on studying for the next testing session. Then, after a couple of days you give learners the second test, the summative test, comprising different questions or tasks, but about the same content.
Summative tests, as described above, carry the value of formative assessment and developmental corrective processes that enable re-teaching content to learners trying hard to cope, in new ways. Efficient teaching and learning correlates with learning outcomes, especially for the learners that struggle to keep up, and influences positively their intake of the courses’ taught content (Andrade H. et al, 2012).
Summative tests are developed in terms of learning and progress. Their formative purposes are individualised because they provide evidence and conclusions about each learner’s performance or failure to perform regarding, at the very least, the taught material. The first testing session aims specifically at activating learning about the teaching material of the second testing session. Notwithstanding teachers and educators could review the results of the first testing and trace what needs to be taught further, this approach energises and empowers learners to take control of their learning, and actively arrange their own plans of studying. Furthermore, learners acquire a clearer picture of their learning objectives (first testing session) and the opportunity to learn more, and perform better could be highly motivating, particularly for learners who may need additional resources to cope (Andrade H. et al, 2012). Summative tests could also be helpful for educators in terms of instructional and curricular requirements of a class or a course.
8.3.2. Assessment practices with use of assessment technology
The advancements of today’s technology are put in the service of assessment teaching and learning practices as well. ICT tools and applications offer feedback to learners and offer teachers the ability to manage and focus on individual teaching requirements of each learner quickly and directly. The main aspects of assessment technologies that focus on the learners comprise:
- systematic overview of learners’ performance and development so as to make teaching decisions.
- diagnosis of misinterpretations that may disrupt learning.
- prompt evidence and feedback to learners, teachers, other stakeholders.
- information about learning and teaching needs during educational process.
Computer-based assessment programs have included the management of teaching (e.g., organising learner assignments, assessments, and performance), curricular resources, embedded assessments, and explicit learner-level and complete recording and reporting of strong and weak points. These new innovative digital programs encompass the versatile, adaptive capabilities of artificial intelligence to address learners’ production thoroughly and immediately. The feedback they provide could energise learners and assist teachers in their teaching methods and summative conclusions about their learners’ accomplishments (Andrade H. et al, 2012).
