Assessment

This note is about approach to assessment of learning.

Objectives for students to consider and engage with (cf. Principles):

the moral import of learning (that is: resist oppressions, including the institutional oppression by professionalisation and 'education' 1)
multiple forms of knowledge, including nonhuman knowledge
innovation and risk taking
deep engagement with multiple forms of knowledge and reliance on evidence
relevant technologies
the real-world change
human-societal, multi-generational, and more-than-human learning

Objectives for teachers:

support student-oriented objectives
resist designing learning around what is assessable
minimise effort in preparation, in marking, in redesign, especially delegated effort
minimise subjectivity in assessment
develop long-term topics and collaborations with colleagues and students
support the growth of the best

Forms

Cf.

Emphasize the quality of relationships and experiences between teachers and students, human and nonhuman.

Formative Assessment

Formative assessment involves ongoing dialogue to support but not judge learning. Formative assessment can be done by teachers or student and involve observation, conversation, self-evaluation, or other methods. Formative assessment can help learners to identify their strengths and areas for improvement, set goals and plans, monitor their progress, and celebrate their achievements. Formative assessment can also foster a culture of learning that is collaborative, reflective, and adaptive.

Formative assessment is likely to have holistic attributes. Holistic assessment considers the whole person and the whole context of learning, rather than focusing on isolated aspects or domains. Can include physical, mental, emotional, social, cultural dimensions of learning, as well as the interconnections between them. Holistic assessment can also acknowledge the diversity and complexity of learners and learning situations, and the multiple ways of knowing and being.

Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessment involves tasks that require students to apply knowledge and skills in real-world or simulated contexts. Authentic assessment can help students develop higher-order thinking, problem-solving, creativity and collaboration skills. Students can participate in campaigns, rallies, petitions, boycotts, or other forms of collective action that address a problem or injustice in their community or society. Alternatively, students can design and implement their own projects or initiatives that aim to raise awareness, educate others, or provide solutions to a challenge they are passionate about. (evidence from the field can serve as a measure of successful learning)

Approaches

These approaches can support both formative and authentic assessment.

Making as assessment. Models, simulations, working prototypes. (a working prototype can serve as a measure of successful learning)
Performance as assessment. Role plays, simulations.
Narrative assessment: scenarios, stories, visual essays, movies and animations, journals, portfolios to reflect on the learning process and outcomes. Can capture the personal, emotional, and creative aspects of learning, as well as the development of skills and knowledge. Narrative assessment can also be shared with others to create a sense of community and dialogue.

Benefits

foster critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, communication, and leadership skills.
increase student motivation, engagement, and ownership of their learning.
enhance student understanding of the relevance and applicability of their knowledge .
promote student awareness of social issues, ethical values, and civic duties.
empower students to make a difference and contribute to society.

Challenges and Risks

difficult to design, implement, and evaluate in a fair way.
raise ethical, legal, and safety issues for students and teachers.
create conflicts or tensions between students, teachers, institutions, and external stakeholders.
expose students to emotional distress or trauma due to the nature of the issues or the outcomes of the actions.

Markless Assessment

Approaches that do not use or deemphasise the use of numerical marks as a form of feedback.

A report on a partial implementation in Singapore. A mixed result in a very grade-oriented culture.

McMorran, Chris, Kiruthika Ragupathi, and Simei Luo. ‘Assessment and Learning Without Grades? Motivations and Concerns with Implementing Gradeless Learning in Higher Education’. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 42, no. 3 (2017): 361–77. https://doi.org/10/gcphr9.

Normann, Dan-Anders, Lise Vikan Sandvik, and Henning Fjørtoft. ‘Reduced Grading in Assessment: A Scoping Review’. Teaching and Teacher Education 135 (2023): 104336. https://doi.org/10/gsqxd4.

McMorran, Chris, and Kiruthika Ragupathi. ‘The Promise and Pitfalls of Gradeless Learning: Responses to an Alternative Approach to Grading’. Journal of Further and Higher Education 44, no. 7 (2020): 925–38. https://doi.org/10/gsqxd5.

1 Illich, Ivan. Deschooling Society. Pelican Books. 1971. Reprint, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1979. Illich, Ivan. Tools for Conviviality. Glasgow: Fontana, 1975.

Slow Assessment

Can assessment be usefully slow? The argument is the slow progress leads to greater depth, quality, and sustainability.

The criticism of these approaches can be that they are indulgent and are based on privilege. From the very origin that invites to cultivate leisurely and gluttonous sophistications of those who find themselves in an rich, old, and stable culture, such as Italy.

Background in Academia

Berg, Maggie, and Barbara Karolina Seeber. The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2016.

Mountz, Alison, Anne Bonds, Becky Mansfield, Jenna Loyd, Jennifer Hyndman, Margaret Walton-Roberts, Ranu Basu, et al. ‘For Slow Scholarship: A Feminist Politics of Resistance through Collective Action in the Neoliberal University’. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 14, no. 4 (2015): 1235–59.

Specific to Assessment

As informed by the slow movement in general, and by the literature on slow academic work and slow pedagogies in particular, here are some examples in application to assessment:

Gervasio, Darcy, Kimberly Detterbeck, and Rebecca Oling. ‘The Slow Assessment Movement: Using Homegrown Rubrics and Capstone Projects for DIY Information Literacy Assessment’. In Association of College & Research Libraries Conference Proceedings, 721–31. Portland: AECL, 2015.

Jukić, Tonća. ‘Slow Pedagogy and Contemporary Teaching Strategies’. In Educational Challenges and Future Prospects: Conference Proceedings. International Scientific Conference “75th Anniversary of the Institute of Pedagogy – Educational Challenges and Future Prospects”, edited by Natasha Angeloska Galevska, Elizabeta Tomevska-Ilievska, Maja Janevska, and Branka Bugariska. Skopje: Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, 2022.

Shaw, Peter A., Bob Cole, and Jennifer L. Russell. ‘Determining Our Own Tempos: Exploring Slow Pedagogy, Curriculum, Assessment, and Professional Development’. To Improve the Academy 32, no. 1 (2013): 319–34. https://doi.org/10/gssgct.

Fast Assessment

As a contrast to the 'slow assessment' above because agile alludes to 'fast. However, the real objectives of agile are flexibility, distributed nature, bottom-up decision making, adaptability, sustainability. These objectives are similar to those claimed by the 'slow' approaches.

Cf.

agile
sprint
scrum
Kanban

In education:

Parsons, David, and Kathryn MacCallum. Agile and Lean Concepts for Teaching and Learning: Bringing Methodologies from Industry to the Classroom. New York: Springer, 2018.

Kek, Megan Yih Chyn A., and Henk Huijser. Problem-Based Learning into the Future: Imagining an Agile PBL Ecology for Learning. Singapore: Springer, 2017.

Sharp, Jason, and Guido Lang. ‘Agile in Teaching and Learning: Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda’. Journal of Information Systems Education 29, no. 2 (2018): 45–52.

Current background:

Rad, Dana, and Gavril Rad. ‘Going Agile, a Post-Pandemic Universal Work Paradigm - A Theoretical Narrative Review’. Postmodern Openings 12, no. 4 (2021): 337–88. https://doi.org/10/gss7t8.

Subnotes

Rubric

Footnotes

Illich, Ivan. Deschooling Society. Pelican Books. 1971. Reprint, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1979. Illich, Ivan. Tools for Conviviality. Glasgow: Fontana, 1975.˄