Assessing Student Learning
Evaluation Strategies for Intermediate / Senior Divisions
"The primary purpose of assessment and evaluation is to improve student learning"
(In Basic Considerations Assessment and Evaluation, secondary context).
Ideally Assessment For Learning should be continuous and individualized: I think we shouldn’t evaluate results without taking into consideration the efforts and the process that led to theses results. As such, classroom observation is the key to successful ASL. During the class, we should continuously be using questions and/or observations to figure out what students understand or can do, be helping students understand the quality of work that was expected of them, understand what they needed to do to improve and encourage self and peer assessment strategies to help students develop self-monitoring skills (Black and Williams, 1998).
Self-assessment and peer-to-peer assessment can easily be implemented in the classroom through Scoring Rubrics for example. Their elaboration is especially interesting in the purpose of assessing a student’s progress; the same rubric can be reused and seen as a benchmark. Furthermore scoring rubrics provide precise feedback to the student about his learning, indicating "the extent to which the specified criteria have been reached" (Barbara M. Boskal, Scoring Rubrics: What, When and How?): the student is able to visualize his strengths and weaknesses and to target the objectives that he must work on.
Grading Policy
One of the first things that made me pause after reading the Chapter on Assessment in the Growing Success document is this: “to ensure equity for all students, assignments for evaluation and tests or exams are to be completed, whenever possible, under the supervision of a teacher.” While I understand completely the reasons for this imperative, it is not always easy to achieve in the classroom, especially when teaching Visual Arts. The students we teach to should always be taken into account. It is true that in some high schools, the disparities are too great between the students and in this case the homework issue is problematic. But creativity takes time and the time offered in class is often not enough for many students to present a production of which they are proud. It is easy, once we know our students, to appreciate if they did the work themselves or if they asked for help at home. In the rare cases I wasn’t sure, I preferred giving the mark I thought the assignment was worth and strongly remind the students that this mark belongs to the author of the work.
In case of proven cheating, I tend to be severe and expose the problem to the class so it does not happen again. I also react according to the seriousness of the cheating and the weight of the assignment. In any case, the assignment will have to be done again but the additional consequences can range from a mark divided into two, points removed or a written letter explaining the gravity of the matter. Indeed “the teacher will consider that some evidence carries greater weight than other evidence” (to assess the student in the most reliable manner, it seems fair to vary the form of assessment, while explaining to students the importance of each one).
“It must be made clear to students that they are responsible for providing evidence of their learning within established timelines, and that there are consequences for cheating, plagiarizing, not completing work, and submitting work late.” In the last paragraph “ late and missed assignment”, two streams of thinking are exposed. Theoretically, I think the second is best for students: “They believe that success is the best way to breed more success, that punitive measures such as deducting marks only serve to discourage students and promote failure, and that it is more appropriate and more productive to focus on preventive measures”. However, I regret that solutions are not further developed in the document. I strongly believe in giving second chances. As I explained in a previous assignment, we establish with students a “contract mark”, equivalent to the provincial standard for achievement: 73%. If the student has not reached that mark, he may work on his assignment some more and present it again. This system virtually eliminates not submitted assignments since even a draft could be presented and reworked on afterwards. If a student doesn’t submit his work, it is often due to particular circumstances and in this case it is necessary to contact the principal to see if it is a recurring problem in other subjects areas also and intervene with the family to resolve the issue.
“The evaluation of student learning is the responsibility of the teacher and must not include the judgement of the student or of the student’s peers.” I absolutely agree with this statement but continue to believe that a transparent assessment helps students know where they are at and drives them to excellence. Therefore the form of “collective assessment”, whatever the criteria, seems like a good way of doing so: the teacher of course has the last word but every student can formulate his or her reserves and expectations. Additionally this practice allows better visibility of all work and staggering on the four categories of achievement.
In conclusion I feel the guidelines given in Growing Success are not only fair and clear but also necessary for the harmonization of assessment in Ontario. But the teacher is still accountable to act according to the students and the classes he is confronted to.
Seconde chance
L’une des stratégies que j’ai pu mettre en place avec mes élèves est le principe de la seconde chance. Les élèves n’apprennent pas les mêmes choses au même rythme. Selon ce principe, je considère que faire le point avec l’ensemble de la classe (cela peut se faire sous la forme d’un évaluation collective de leur travaux, ce qui implique que ceux-ci doivent être concis) permet de remettre les pendules à l’heure et de considérer ce que chacun a acquit et les lacunes s’il y en a. Ces temps d’échange permettent aussi la transmédiation puisque les élèves sont invités à critiquer de façon constructive leur propre travail et celui des autres. Ces dialogues ne peuvent qu’être favorables à l’ambiance générale de la classe. Ainsi, j’avais établi une « note-contrat » avec mes élèves qui correspond aux attentes de réussite de l’Ontario : 73%. Si l’élève n’avait pas atteint ce seuil, il avait la possibilité de reprendre et présenter de nouveau son travail. Certains élèves m’ont parfois demander d’abaisser leurs notes afin d’avoir la possibilité de parfaire leur travail.