The Philosophy of Classroom Assessment - Essay Example

Angela Antoniello May 24, Curriculum, Evaluation, & Assessment Donna Norman My Philosophy room Assessment One of the primary elements of education emerges in the form of assessment. While assessment elements differ among different instructional domains, it’s clear there are a number of assessments methods that pertain to all levels and forms of education. Still, it’s worth noting that teaching professionals must attend to the varieties of students, cultures, and grade levels when considering assessment strategies. As a high school chemistry and physics teacher, I have developed a number of assessment strategies that have formed my own philosophy to the assessment process. This essay considers my personal philosophy of assessment. One of the primary considerations I recognize in terms of assessment is developing a means of judging student participation and effort throughout the marking periods and course. One of the primary challenges I had when originally considering assessment was the nature of developing assessment strategies that are student specific, or measure objective standards of comprehension. While ideally classrooms are constituted by students of the same level of achievement, in reality this is not always the case. Early in my teaching career I recognized that I would have to make the difficult decision of requiring all students to achieve the same level of achievement. From this foundational level I then began to design assessment strategies that required students to achieve an objective standard of accomplishment. In these regards, I have been greatly influenced by constructivist theory of assessment, specifically a text Understanding by Design. This text contends that assessment should be designed from a top-down structure with the end goal in mind. Working from this theory, each semester I considered the ultimate objective for the course and then worked back from that in developing assessment strategies that would work as standards bearers for the marking period. Still, I recognize that this approach to assessment should only be used to construct a general approach to curriculum development. As is later demonstrated, the most effective instruction and assessment will consider the learner’s background knowledge and phenomenological grasp of the learning material in developing dynamic and multi-varied assessment mechanisms. In addition to these constructivist approaches to assessment, I have become more directly acquainted with direct methods of assessment. It’s indicated that one of the primary such means of demonstrating direct assessment strategies is through the teacher’s active involvement in student learning. In these regards, “the teacher a) presents information, b) develops concepts through lecture, c) requires students to recite or respond to questions, d) provides feedback and reteaching as necessary” (Payne 63). In terms of my own assessment strategies, I implement direct methods in a variety of ways. After determining the end of course objective I would then break down the marking period into manageable units (chapters). Within each of these units (chapters) there would be a final exam and quizzes. The quizzes were implemented in large part as a means of motivating students to remain consistent with scholastic work throughout the chapter. In these regards, oftentimes I approached quiz grades with a more lenient approach than I did the chapter tests. The student quiz scores also functioned to aid me in identifying areas of student progress that are more in need of attention. Indeed, student quiz assessment was a learning process for the students as well, giving them an early idea of elements of the text that they must further study. With the final exam then students had to demonstrate their mastery of the material. Rather than functioning as a learning aid, the final exam existed solely for the purpose of measuring the student’s achievement in relation to the objective progress they made within the specific unit. Through research I have discovered a number of elements related to the implementation of direct assessment strategies. Perhaps the most pervasive such instance is that these direct instruction methods are most effective in relation to lower achieving students. In these regards, I have also discovered that in some instances it may be appropriate to use even more specified direct instruction methods. For instance, rather than weekly reviews through quizzes, it may be necessary to assess students on a daily basis through a process that succinctly reviews the last day’s lessons. In these regards, the assessment can be referred to as measurement driven instruction, as it considers the student’s comprehension of the material in designing and advancing the course curriculum. This is differentiated from approaches that emphasize a more overarching approach to assessment and curriculum development. Rather than considering an end goal in mind, I have come to recognize that learners bring a variety of learning experiences to the instruction situation. As such, it may be necessary for the assessment process to remain in a perpetual state of negotiation with the student’s learning; for instance, as the student demonstrates personal understanding this will reveal both the student’s background knowledge and provide direction for future instructional and assessment paths. Another important consideration I’ve come to recognize must be made in terms of assessment strategies is the consideration of cultural backgrounds and learning styles. While it’s easy to advance with the notion that a universal assessment strategy should function equally well for all cultures, research has demonstrated that in reality different cultures perform with varying degrees of accuracy on different assessment mechanisms. For instance, Hispanic students have been shown to perform worse on tests than other assessment strategies. In addition to cultural considerations, these considerations also relate to considerations that are tied to learning styles. In both instances, it is necessary for instructors to consider a variety of contrasting assessment strategies. One such example was research that demonstrated, “performance based assessments (as opposed to traditional multiple choice tests) tended to favor those students who had field-independent cognitive style (Payne 87). While it is not possible for one class to implement different assessment strategies for each student, it is possible to vary assessment strategies so each student is given an equitable opportunity to demonstrate their learning and comprehension. In terms of specific instances wherein cultural backgrounds can be incorporated into the nature of learning strategies, there are a number of theoretical recommendations that I have recognized are important for one to incorporate into their own work. I recognize that this is a complex issue, as one risks stereotyping when speaking of speaking learning mechanisms for specific cultural backgrounds; in these regards, in approaching this topic I recognize that these elements are in large part generalized. Still, I recognize that among notable cultural differences, some students respond better to the whole rather than isolated parts, some prefer group settings, and some prefer kinesthetic learning strategies. Rather than attempting to factor in the cultural make-up of a classroom and then conform the teaching and assessment strategies towards these specific groups, I believe that it’s important to incorporate a variety of assessment approaches in all classroom environments. In large degree, different student learning styles can be equated to the differing cultural responses students have to assessment strategies. In these regards, one of the primary means of educational assessment strategies must be a comprehensive investigation of different learning styles. In developing my own assessment strategies, I have come to incorporate a large amount of these approaches to different learning styles in constructing my approach to assessment. In these regards, I first approach my development of assessment tools in terms of three main approaches to learning: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. While researchers disagree on the specific means of articulating these learning approaches within assessment tools, I have come to understand that generally the cognitive assessment approach consider that there are large groups of students who learn through more traditional means of instruction. For these students, I develop traditional tests and quizzes and include access to this information through lecture and presentation instruction, as well as reading and note-taking assignments. In terms of affective learners, I recognize that these learners are more prone to learning strategies that target their propensity towards group interaction. As a high school chemistry and physics teacher, these group interactions often take the form of lab groups, but oftentimes I am able to incorporate creative group measures wherein students collaborate to develop and implement their knowledge of physics or chemistry in ways that deepen their understanding and demonstrate their comprehension of the course material. While I have previously focused on the nature of assessment strategies within my own classroom, I recognize that instructors must also consider assessment as a holistic strategy within the entire school. The reasons behind this assessment strategy is that it allows the school to develop clear paths and means of assessment that can be used to improve the student body as a whole, and in many instances even extend to the school district. For instance, it’s been noted that comprehensive assessment strategies can, “improve the instructional program, b) facilitate curriculum revision, c) assist in educational instructional counseling, d) help the administrative staff appraise the overall impact and effectiveness of the educational program” (Payne 468). This is a challenging notion as the nature of an overarching assessment strategy seems to run-counter to the understanding that students must be given the opportunity to demonstrate their learning and comprehension through a variety of assessment techniques, still the two ideas are not entirely conflicting. In developing a hybrid approach to uniting both cultural and learner specific assessment strategies, with overarching assessment strategies within the specific school system, a number of steps must be taken. In these regards, the school must agree on cultural and learner specific forms of assessment and institute these methods within all classroom environments. In necessitating these assessment strategies, the school is then united in a common approach towards educational assessment that can be implemented in larger scale curriculum development programs. In conclusion, my personal philosophy of assessment combines both direct and constructivist approaches towards instruction. Within this structure, the importance of an overarching assessment mechanism in conjunction with school goals is instituted. Within this overarching assessment strategy then are methods of assessment that consider that culture and learning style play in developing multi-varied assessment techniques. References Wiggins, Grant. (2005) Understanding by Design. New York: Prentice Hall. Read More