Key Principles for Quality Assessment - Assignment Example

Assessment Portfolio Tasks 1-10 Name: Course Instructor: Date: Table of Contents Date: 1 Table of Contents 2 Portfolio Sample 1: The 5 key ideas regarding quality assessment 3 As discussed by Scherer and McMillan 3 Portfolio Sample 2: Foreman Text: Literacy and numeracy skills 6 Portfolio Sample 3: The principle of multiple measures 8 Portfolio Sample 4: Summative assessment: a McMillan summary 10 Portfolio Sample 5: Keeping learning on track 12 Formative assessment and the regulation of learning 12 Portfolio Sample 6: Techniques for formative assessment 15 Portfolio Sample 7: Key Principles for quality assessment 18 Portfolio Sample 8: Assessing Student Affect 20 Portfolio Sample 9: Effective Feedback 23 Portfolio Sample 10: Schools are not assessment factories 26 Appendix 1 28 Portfolio Sample 1: The 5 key ideas regarding quality assessment As discussed by Scherer and McMillan Since the discovery of formal education, testing and instructions have never been divorceable. For centuries, formative and summative assessments have been essential academic components (McMillan, 2008, p. 9). Mr. Black and Mr. Wiliam observed that the development of these assessment models have been used to improve the standards and quality of classroom instructions and achievement. Improving the standards and the quality of instruction in schools has been national concern globally, with more attention drawn to the capabilities of students going through the systems (2008, p 24-25). For this reason, the recent years have seen governments introduce many changes and reforms to the curricula in schools for quest of this goal. Researches and Investigations into these assessments have provoked serious debates concerning the shift in focus from ‘using teaching to serve testing’ to ‘using testing to serve teaching’. According to Marge Scherer, instructors spend unreasonably big proportions of their instructional time administering standardized tests to their students, which hardly achieve the learning objectives of testing. Black and Wiliam (p 6) identified three sources of failures of tests as a quality assessment tools in instruction. First, the assessment methods does not promote learning; second, the grades in assessment have emphasized competition rather than leaner’s own improvement; and finally the assessments have de-motivated some learners specifically, the low-achieving learners. In support of Scherer’s (2008) and McMillans (2011) concerns over what assessment and instruction should achieve, five key ideas to instructional quality assessment have been noted (Dickins, 2008, p. 2394). The first key refers to establishing a clear purpose for the assessment. Whether formative or summative, formal or informal, any assessment administered on learners should have clearly defined purpose. For example, a specific assessment could be purposed to determine learner’s understanding in specific important concept or could be to determine progress in specific skill. In defining an assessment’s purpose, precise reason for assessment and expected result are clearly described. The second fundamental key to quality in assessment is the definition of clear learning objectives or targets. According Garfield (1994), the targets, clearly articulated, must be focussed on a specific instructional goal appropriate to learners. The third key, according to Dickins (p. 2395) towards quality in assessment is ensuring sound assessment in design. This is concerned with the structure of the test, which essentially is guided by its purpose and the learning targets. In practise, there are four broad types of test models: performance testing, personal communication, selected response and extended writing response. The design of an assessment is dependent on the target or the learning objective. A sound design of an assessment implies matching its design to the learning targets. Quality in assessment is enhanced when this matching, results in more student is learning. The fourth key of quality in assessment is concerned with clarity and good communication in assessment. Whilst this is not limited to clarity in assessment questions, the aftermath of an assessment demands good communication of results that does not merely communicate grades only. Consistent to the definition of the assessment purpose, good communications convey decisions made and recommendations after the assessment. Timely and accurate communications of results is important to all stakeholders including parents, teachers and students; and serve to improve the performance of learners. The fifth and the last of the ideas to quality in assessment revolve around student involvement in the assessment exercise. Obviously, the single most important user of assessment results is the student, yet ironically, the only a grade is communicated back to the student. To get the student more involved in the process, Davies (2007, p 160) proposes various strategies. Individual self-assessment and record keeping are a few of the possible strategies where student can be involved in assessment process. Scherer too suggests group work model where student can heavily be involved in self and peer assessment. At these levels, as suggested by Kari Smith (P 26), students make tests for self and others and are involved in the entire process to and after grading. As mentioned in the communication principle, student can improve their performances if the they involved in before, during and after assessment through effective and timely communication. References Black P., & Wiliam D., (September 2008) Developing the theory of formative assessment. Journal of Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability. 21(1), 5-31. Davies A., (2007). Leading Towards Learning and Achievement: The Role of Quality Classroom Assessment. Journal of Intelligent Leadership: Studies in Educational Leadership. 6: 159-182. Dickins P.R., (2008) Classroom Based Language Assessment. Encyclopaedia Of Language And Education, Part 7, Part 25, 2391-2405. Garfield J.B., (1994). Beyond Testing and Grading: Using Assessment to Improve Student Learning. Journal of Statistics Education. 2(1). McMillan J. H. (2008). Assessment essential for standard-based Education. New York, USA: Corwin Press, 2nd Edition. McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. 5th Edition Scherer, M. (2009). The Tests That Won’t Go Away. Educational leadership, 67(3), 5 Portfolio Sample 2: Foreman Text: Literacy and numeracy skills A common teaching experience acknowledges the fact that learners with disabilities or learning challenges have a tendency to be consistently poor performer(s) in class with propagated lack of confidence and poor esteem. These students continuously experiences deteriorated motivation and eventually loose interest in learning. For teachers to help such students or rather to prevent students from heading to these redundant directions, teachers need to know the strategies that enable students develop strong literacy and numeracy skills. These skills lay strong foundation for all students not only to maintain motivation in learning, but also gives a platform for better achievement in learning. Difficulty with literacy among learners is one study experiences that ha received the most attention among the stakeholder in the education community. Obviously, leaning in schools involve information shared with learners through writing and reading. The importance of literacy skills cannot be overemphasized. Ironically, large numbers of students have reading and writing problems. To help students counter the underlying difficulties, expertise, commitment and professionalism among teachers is required. Teachers while identifying the specific needs of each student should identify the activities that engage schools in acquiring these skills in the best way possible. Like literacy, Competency in numeracy skills is central to effective learning among students. Forman elaboration of the need and how to cultivate these skills among student is aimed at making literacy and numeracy meaningful to students. The author proposes several strategies or key issues that need attention in order to help learners overcome challenges associated with acquiring these integral skills of competency. Learners can be empowered with numeracy and literacy skills using every day’s experiences among students. To improve literacy learner need to be directed to learn to speak and read. A social interaction is one of the powerful tools teachers can use to make student not only learn faster to read but also enables them practise the learning (p. 305). There several daily situations in which learners can gain numeracy skills. For example, students can be asked to convert real life experiences into numbers like enumerating family members counting. Numeracy skills can easily be acquired through group works (p. 306). One advantage with group works is that it help student minimize anxiety commonly associated with learning mathematics. A group is also vital learning tool, in that student are capable of learning from each other although they require close motoring to ensure that the share knowledge among the member is valid and consistent to real curriculum. References Foreman, P., (2008), Inclusion in Action. South Melbourne, Vic., Australia: Southern Thomson’s, 2nd Edition. McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson, 5th Edition. Portfolio Sample 3: The principle of multiple measures According to McMillan (2011) and Brookhart (2009), an effective and fair assessment to teachers and learners uses multiple methods in evaluating the skills gained in the learning process. Reasonable assessment leads to accurate conclusions by instructors and any other assessor using a series of measures that would enable the learner demonstrate understanding through the principle of multiple measures. The whole picture of what the student has learnt and is capable of is essentially a build up of knowledge from several pieces and can only be determined by several approaches of assessments (McMillan, 2000). It is important for instructors to beware of the danger of using a single test assessment to decide the capability of the student. It is paramount for instructors to understand the various available and practicable assessment techniques, with a deeper understanding that each of the techniques has its own limitation. Brookhart who is the main crusader behind multiple measures in assessments, in studies observed the need for teachers and the entire educational community to appreciate the need for more inclusivity while assessing student academic achievement and growth. In 2001, the U.S government introduced the famous No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy which endorsed the principle of multiple measures in assessing performance in schools and in students. The legislation required that each state incorporate assessments in schools that test basic skills among students in each grade (Brookhart, 2009). Several objectives are achieved by multiple measures in assessments. Of these objectives, Bernhardt (1998) observed two main reasons as significant: construct and decision validity. While construct validity will give sensible information on the specific skill measured, decision validity widens the scope of collected information from an assessment thus enabling instructors make decisions that are more informed. Brookhart while defining the measures that need to be combined to constitute the multiple measures that extracts accurate assessment of performance suggested that instructors should first understand and consider what is being measured. Teachers must find out others methods of measuring the same concepts and must identify various opportunities for learners to pass the test. The most important element of the multiple measures is for teachers to identify the best mix of the identified measures. Whether conjunctive, compensatory, or complementary, the process should yield a multiple-measures assessment paradigm that would test more than one skill in multiple ways or test a specific skill in more than one ways. McMillan (2011) asserted that it is apparent that no single test can give complete picture of performances and capability in students. Use of single assessment has given undue advantage of some of the learners over others. Multiple measures is handy in not only in addressing this predicament, but also in giving deeper and broader information of performance, strengths and deficiencies among students. References Bernhardt V. L., (March,1998). Multiple Measures. Invited Monograph No. 4. California Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (CASCD) Brookhart, S. M. (2009). The Many Meanings of "Multiple Measures" Journal of Educational Leadership, 67(3): 6-12. McMillan, J.H (2000). Fundamental assessment principles for teachers and school administrators. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(8).  McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. 5th Edition. Portfolio Sample 4: Summative assessment: a McMillan summary James H. McMillan (2011) categorizes the purposes of academic assessments on students using the terms: formative and summative. Concern in this paper is drawn to summative category of the assessments. Fundamentally, summative assessments are the type of assessments administered to determine the quantity and quality of knowledge student have gained by the close of a given instructional segment defined by time, or syllabi. One of the major differences of summative assessment from other types of assessment is that it results does not in any ways help learners improve their understanding, it does not therefore play any role in improve teaching and learning. By definition, formative assessment specifically refers to activities undertaken by teachers and students in which its results will be used to modify the teaching and learning activities in which these stake holders are involved in. Under normal circumstances, most of the summative assessment is rather procedural or required more specifically the external assessments administered on student at the end of an academic period such as year, term or semesters. The main objective of these assessments is to gauge the competence of the learner as he/she progresses to the next level. Other notable elements of summative assessment include: The summative assessments done between schools, zones, district or any other regional common assessment normally come with strict guidelines in administration and are highly invigilated. Under normal circumstances, learners are assessed using summative assessment after the end of the instructions. Apart from sitting for the tests, this assessment model least engages learners involves the before and after the tests. Since the assessment is performance oriented, the students are intrinsically motivated by the assessment. Unlike other models that place emphasis on deep understanding, application and reasoning, summative assessment stress on knowledge and comprehension. It is formal in design and highly structured. It is too general and group oriented. Typically, summative assessments are used to determine the competency of learners and the effectiveness of teaching at the end of a predetermined time. At the close of an instructional phase, summative assessment is administered to summarise the progress and growth of students during the phase. It is a cumulative evaluation that measure whether the long-term goals set at the beginning of the teaching module were achieved. Garrison and Ehrinhhaus (1995) identified examples of summative assessments such as those assessments internally sets end of unit, end of term tests; regional, district, zones benchmark tests, national or state or inter-states mandated evaluations assessments. Reference Garrison, C. & Ehringhaus, M. (1995). "Formative and Summative Assessments in the Classroom." Retrieved from:  http://www.nmsa.org/Publications/WebExclusive/Assessment/tabid/1120/D efault.aspx McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson, 5th Edition. Portfolio Sample 5: Keeping learning on track Formative assessment and the regulation of learning By Dylan Wiliam An analysis of the key points of Wiliam’s argument, For along time since the establishments of formal education, assessment has been and will always be used as method of identifying what students have learnt in class. A lot of literature has been written to propose or defend various forms of assessments that range from standardized test to portfolios. For mathematics and other sciences, researchers have differed over what is important in mathematics education, though they concur that assessment is a primary tool for monitoring the effects of teaching in the learning process. Yet, before close of the 20th century, academicians in the field of mathematics started to re-evaluate the specific roles assessment played in promoting learning rather than just measuring it. This difference has stirred up another debate over the most discussed discrepancy between “assessment for learning” and “assessment of learning” (Gipps & Stobart,1997, p.64). Citing Black and others (2004, p 10), Wiliam draws the difference between the paradigms by defining an assessment for learning as an assessment whose priority in its structure and practice is geared towards promoting student’s learning. It is therefore distinct from an assessment of learning which whose objective is too limited to accountability and ranking of learners’ competency. An assessment activity adds value to learning if its feedback from teachers, peer learners in assessing themselves enables teachers makes appropriate modification to teaching and learning activities in which the teacher and students are engaged. One of the key of the elements Wiliam in his paper sought to address was how core ingredients of formative assessments can support learning in mathematics. These ingredients include effective questioning feedback, ensuring that students are familiar with success criteria, and peer-and self assessments. These tools, have defined the key components and guidelines for an effective formative assessment strategy. Although earlier researchers focussed on feedback, the interplay with these other ingredients would enhance learning to a better level. Black and Wiliam (2005, p. 89) suggested that learning being a collaborative activity and effective use of formative assessment incorporates much more than just collecting information from and giving feedback to students. Finally, regulating of learning is an important process that makes the ingredients of formative assessment coherent for raising achievement among learners. The regulations enable learners and teachers identify where they are in the process, where they are going, and how tho progress to achieve. The regulation defines the roles of the learner and the peer and the teacher in the learning process. In regulated learning set up, the classroom roles of the teacher and the student are assessed parametrically with respect to the overall intended goal. References Black P., & Wiliam D., (2005). Developing a Theory of Formative Assessment. In Assessment and Learning, edited by John Gardner, pp. 81–100. London: Sage Publications. Black P., Harrison C., Lee C., Marshall B., & Wiliam D., (2004)Teachers Developing Assessment for Learning: Impact on Student Achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice 11(1): 49–65. Gipps C.V., & Stobart G., (1997). Assessment: A Teacher’s Guide to the Issues. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 3rd edition. Portfolio Sample 6: Techniques for formative assessment By definition, formative assessment techniques are those models that enable teachers monitor the growth of the students through out the learning process. They can be formal or informal depending on the teacher’s own discretion of usability. Teaching experts have recommended these models as handy for teachers for diagnosing students’ needs and making necessary plans to re-teach the any specific information where learners have been identified to have weaknesses. There are several techniques of formative assessment, which include oral assessments, homework, quizzes, class work/assignments, exit slips and so on. Transformative assessment is combination of two or more of these techniques together with other assessment models to give an institution wide evaluation strategy consistent with an institution’s goals. The strategy is implemented in san integrated was across all levels of learning to systematically transform learning and instruction. The form of assessment is centred on quality and effectiveness of assessment instruments in learning and teaching. The other integral focus of transformative assessment is the promotion of intrinsic motivation among students. McMillan (2011, p. 146) acknowledges that rewards, praises and recognition are some the instruments teachers can constructively use to motivate achievement among students. According to Popham (2008, p. 103), teachers much appreciate the need to model and reinforce an apt conduct among students. As one of the formative assessment strategy, Popham recommends teachers to while creating a culture of learning classroom carefully use praise and recognition judiciously to reinforce and model learning focussed behaviour among students. By publicly acknowledging effort, teachers can ignite intrinsic learning attitude in individual students. Wiliam (2005, p. 26) recorded in research findings that complements in feedback after a formative assessment test or task incentivises and stimulates a student’s interests in learning and increases the chances of achievement. Marzano and others (2001a, p. 14) while warning that tangible rewards and praises are instruments which if not carefully administered on learners may to some extent diminish intrinsic motivation, reiterated that they are only effective when they are tied an attainment of an exemplary standard of performances. Although completing task may deserve similar treatment, it eventually leads to diminished motivation. However, Popham (2008, p. 60), claim studies have shown that abstract rewards such as praise remain the most effective than tangible rewards appropriate almost in all circumstances. Although praise is powerful and a versatile instrument to motivate learning and achievement, it may gain the desired objective if not used effectively or appropriately (Marzano et al, 2001b, p. 6). An effective praise is centred on effort and not necessarily, achievements. It should clearly and creatively be communicated to the recipient. References Gary R. Brown, Stephen C. Ehrmann , Joan K. Lippincott & Vicki Suter., (2003) A Rubric for Transformative Assessment Systems. Academic Journal of Assessment and Evaluation Number: NLI0307) Marzano, R. J., Norford, J. S., Paynter, D. E., Pickering, D. J., & Gaddy, B. B. (2001a). A handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marzano, R. J., Robert J. Marzano (Author) › Visit Amazon's Robert J. Marzano PagFind all the books, read about the author, and more.See search results for this author Are you an author? Learn about Author Central Pickering D., & Pollock J. E. (2001b). Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Alexandria, USA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development Press McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. Popham, W.J., (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandira. VA, USA: ASCD, pp 57-63, 102-105. Wiliam, D. (2005). Keeping learning on track: Formative assessment and the regulation of learning. Proceedings of the twentieth biennial conference of the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (pp. 26-40) Jane E. Pollock (Author) › Visit Amazon's Jane E. Pollock Page Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author Are you an author? Learn about Author Central Portfolio Sample 7: Key Principles for quality assessment Whether formative or summative, the objective of any assessment is to assemble valuable information useful to teachers in making informed decisions on their teaching strategies and the students’ growth (McMillan, 2011, p. 38). Quality in these assessments must be ensured in order to make them appropriate and defectives so that an accurate picture of learners is depicted by the gathered information. To deliver this important quality element in assessments, teachers and the education community must ensure the principles discussed below are incorporated in to the assessment severally administered on learners Winger, 2009, p. 74). Teachers must ensure that assessments are educative. The main rationale of assessment is to enable students improve performances. Instructors there must assert relevance in assessments to what has been learnt. According to the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (2008), assessments must consider the teaching and learning processes of the program. The design of the assessment must be in such a way that it reinforces what is learnt. It should be fair and equable to all learners. Good assessments if administered to multiple learners should be fair to all with none having undue advantages over others (Killen, 2005, p. 98). An assessment should me administered to Students at the same level in a program. The assessment content should also be relevant to this level. Assessment should be a fundamental component of the program and not a later addition. A quality assessment is explicit. Teachers should ensure the structure of the assessment satisfy the needs of clearly defined purposes, goals and criteria. The standards and criterion must be set and clearly elaborated. Sharp and others (1996, p. 28) suggested that an effective assessment is communicates standards with which the learners are expected to achieve and the criterion for determining success. It provides useful information fore credibly reporting student performances to all the stakeholders (AAMT. 2008). Any effective assessment is comprehensive. Handal and colleagues (2006) observed that teachers ought to appreciate the fact that a single assessment instrument may not communicate an accurate development of the student. An effective assessment offers a variety of methods of measuring achievement. Teacher need to be familiar with multiple tools for assessment that closely match a specific type of skill or competency being assessed. According to McMillan (2011, p. 204), Good assessment is valid, reliable and consistent to what is to be measured. Teachers must select assessments tools and procedures that directly measure the intended skill or competency in students. It should be modifiable or can be moderated and appropriate to ensure common interpretation where the results are to be decided by more than judges or assessors. Chappuis and others (2009, p. 16) asserted that teachers also need to ensure that the assessment allows for student to received timely feedback on their performances. References Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. (2008). Position paper on the practice of assessing mathematical learning. Adelaide: AAMT. Chappuis, S., Chappuis, J., & Stiggins, R. (2009). The Quest for Quality . Educational Leadership Journal, 67(3) 14-19. Handal, B., Parvin H., & Herrington, T., (2006) Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom   11 (2). Killen R., (2005). Programming and assessment for quality teaching and learning. Southbank, Vic. Australia: Thomson Learning. p.98.doc McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. Ch 3, 9 Sharp, V. F., Levine M.G., Sharp, R.M., (1996) The best web sites for teachers. International Society for Technology in Education. Eugene, Oregon. Winger, T. (2009). Grading what matters. Educational leadership Journal, 67(3), 73-75 Portfolio Sample 8: Assessing Student Affect According to James Popham (2008, p. 144), student affect t in learning include attitudes, interests and values acquire and exhibit in the learning processes. These attribute lays an integral roles in student motivation to learn and significantly affects chances to achieve competency. It also affects teaching processes for instructors. For this crucial element of student affect, researchers in teaching and assessment have recommended that these affective traits need to be measured and appropriate approach used in teaching. Common assessment tools for student affect involve letting student respond anonymously to self-report questionnaires. These questionnaires, commonly called affective inventories are aimed at collecting in formation from student that would enable teachers assess effectiveness of teaching approaches (Popham, 2008, p. 132). At the appendices is such an inventory designed to assess student overall affect in learning for grades 4 to 6. Design process and the targets student The inventory contains 8 statements which asks student to agree or disagree to them. Two of the statements (items 2 and 7) in the inventory aims on student’s affect to academics and learning. Another pair of statement (items 4 and 6) is designed such that they attempt to determine the student eagerness and drive to learn. Although the design do not directly focus on the student’s affect, the inventory aims at assessing student perceptions of activities carried out by the teacher. The questions are designed to such that some are negatively phrased, while others are positively framed. This will yield to more accurate and honesty responses from the student. The statements are designed using as simple language understood by students between Grades 4 and 6. It is a short questionnaire and student will be familiarised with it from time t time so that it is frequently and repeatedly administered. Why the particular affective trait Understanding student academic efficacy is one most challenging activities that all teachers hardly avoids. It is almost impossible to assess affect productively while collecting honesty responses form students. McMillan (2011, p. 211) noted that while teachers want to understand what the student feel about learning, student on their sides want to give the ‘right; answers to the teachers. If questions are not carefully designed therefore, students will provide answers which according to their imaginations are desirable to the teacher. The results will be used to support student learning The results from this inventory will help in supporting student learning. At first, the teacher will be in a position to know the motivation, interest and other strengths in the student. Likewise, the weaknesses will be identifies and the teacher will review the approach used in teaching. By calculating the average per student responses, accurate inference the responses, the information will guide the teacher better handling of the class (Popham, & Stiggins, 2008). References McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. 5th Edition. Popham, W.J., & Stiggins R., (2008). Assessing student affect realted to assessment for learning: an introduction for teachers. Popham, W.J., (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandira. VA, USA: ASCD. Portfolio Sample 9: Effective Feedback Importance of providing quality feedback to students and Students as assessment partners According to Smith (2009, p. 29), various surveys have found that students engage more effectively in learning process when their teachers provide timely and consistent quality feedback on their assessments. Timeliness, clarity and personalisation are the most important elements of quality feedback. According to Marzano (2009, p. 86), there exist significance differences between students receiving mere grades or assessment scores and receiving thoughtful feedback. While the former quantifies progress and achievement, the latter goes beyond this level and additionally reports areas of improvement, where the student went right and what the student need to do to achieve better in future. Teachers must acknowledge the important roles quality feedback plays in learning among students and quality teaching. Feedback is one of the equipment teachers can use to actively engage the students in the program. Transformative assessments should emphasize on teachers using quality feedback to motivate students to perform better and achieve the desired growth, development and competency. Wilson Maja (2009) reports that though she acknowledges rubric as a feedback avenue that improves performances, grades are not however to be overlooked (p. 60). One of engaging the students through constructive feedback on assessment equipments is facilitating students giving feedback on one another’s work. Reynolds (2009) calls for a better way to give meaningful feedback where assessment involves large piles creative works. She proposes an assessment strategy where students become partners with the teacher. In the strategy, students present their creative works before the class and obtain feedback from the peers. The students as partners in assessment, give critique of the works and offers suggestions for improvement. The teacher eventually gives a formal feedback. Through their methods of assessment where students become partners inn giving feedback, the student who work is being assessed learn to appreciate diversity in feedback, and the others appreciate the richness in each other’s creativity and thus enriching own works. Primary schools are better placed to employ the strategies. Using peer critiques to asses and improve student performance in learning and teaching a natural development towards more authentic assessments. The inclusion of performances assessments in primary schools provides an opportunity for improving students’ achievements by engaging them in critiques each and learning from each other works. Not only does the assessment technique mirror the real world, but also enable the students acquire and transfer skills learnt in schools to the outside worlds and future careers (McMillan, 2011, p. 106).. If the technique is properly applied in primary schools, the peer critiques will cultivate the culture of consulting with colleagues to get honest and objective assessment of their efforts in their current learning processes in even in future workplaces. References Brookhart, S. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA, USA: ASCD. Marzano, R. J. (2009). When students track their progress. Educational Leadership (67) 4, 86-87. McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. 5th Edition. Reynolds, A. (2009). Why every student needs critical friends. Educational Leadership 67(3) 54-57. Smith, K. (2009). From test takers to test makers. Educational Leadership 67(3) 26-30. Wilson, M. (2009).  Responsive writing assessment. Educational Leadership 67(3) 58-62. Portfolio Sample 10: Schools are not assessment factories Schools as assessment factories replica has been a controversial debate that started in the United States in the 1990s. The origin of the analogy while arguments for it were not derogatory of assessment or its quality, have met sharp criticism from some other corners of stakeholders in the education community. In this analogy of schools as assessment factories, proponents, as argued by Lakoff and Johnson (1999, p 532) saw ‘students as consumers, education as a product, and teachers as labour resources’. From this metaphor, knowledge became a commodity transferable from the teacher to the student (Wall, 2006). The assessment grades became a measure of quality of the product and productivity as measure of assessment performances per spent dollar. Another section of proponents of the metaphor considered students as raw materials to be shaped, polished and graded. Through standardized testing (assessments), the raw materials would come as products with the same basic skill and facts, and are able to prove their identical knowledge by passing these tests. Teacher became factory workers. However, what are the repercussions of this kind of thought? Whether derogatory or not, by simply converting the perception of schools to factories is paradigm shift that results in more problems than it solves. While the management of schools indeed have been made factory-like businesses, with students taught in literally huge warehouse classrooms and substantially focussed on performances in grades and behaviour rather than learning and development of community; it altogether misses the purpose of formal education system. Although the factory-model of schools, might have worked for the purposes it was asked to serve half a century ago, where less than half the students were expected to make through to University, and a hand taught to think, the models does not meet the needs of the Australian society today. When schools became assessment factories, children as products standardized testing as quality control; the transformational element of schools became eroded. Standardized assessments as a measure of the quality, has impacts that are still felt up to today as millions of Dollars are spent by the exchequer every year on nationally standardized assessments (Wall, 2006). According to Kasten and Lolli (1998, p. 294) standardized testing is the primary factor that support school as factory model. To avert this perception and learning more effective in our schools, NAPLAN should consider assessment as reflective inquiry as suggested by Serafini (2002). In this model, rather than knowledge children being commoditised as purported by schools-factories proponents, assessments will help students learn and enable teachers teach more effectively. Teachers also will be able to articulate the academic growth of students and their learning processes to other stakeholders especially the parents. (McMillan, 2008, 2011). References Frank W. Serafini (2002) Dismantling the Factory Model of Assessment. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 18 (1), 67-85. Kasten, W.C., & Lolli, E.M. (1998).  Implementing multi-age classrooms: A practical guide to a promising future.  Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books. McMillan, J.H. (2008). Assessment Essentials for Standards-Based Education. California , USA: Cowan Press. McMillan, J.H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction. Boston: Pearson. 5th Edition Wall D. (December 10, 2006). Schools like factories? Then why not factories like schools? The Curmudgeon Manifesto. Arizona, United States. Retrieved from: http://curmudgeonmanifesto.blogspot.com/2006/12/schools-like-factories-then-why- not.html Appendix 1 MY FEEL ABOUT LEARNING? Inventory for Grade/Class:……… Instructions: Please mark using to show how you feel about each statement as follows: Strongly Agree=SA Agree=A Not Sure=NT Disagree=D Strongly Disagree=SD For example, This is how you would respond you disagree with this statement: I like Playing football. SA A NT SD After complete this form, please drop it in the provided collection-box. 1.    I usually understand what I am supposed to learn. SA A NT D SD 2.    It is difficult to learn new things SA A NT D SD 3.    I do not know if I am getting more knowledge as fast as I should. SA A NT D SD 4.    I’m eager about learning new things in school. SA A NT D SD 5.    All the time, i don’t know what I supposed to be reading or learning. SA A NT D SD 6.    Learning new things is boring SA A NT D SD 7.    Even if I have enough time and obtained lots of help, learning is difficult for me. SA A NT D SD 8.    I always know when I learn a new thing. SA A NT D SD Thank you Read More