IntroductionTesting is a valuable tool that benefits the school, teachers, students, parents, and the community (Boudett, Murnane, City & Moody, 2005). Assessments provide teachers and the school with information on how to improve instruction and cater to students' needs. Students benefit by learning what they know and what needs improvement
(Stiggins, 2006; Wiggins, 1993). The purpose of this research paper is to discuss issues regarding student assessments in education.
Goals of Student AssessmentStudent assessments may be summative or informative. Summative assessments determine "students' placements and life choices" (Earl, 2006, p. 2). Differentiating between formative and summative assessments became popular in the 70s and 80s as the need arose to assess in order to improve instruction and learning and not just to inform and make decisions on student placements (Earl, 2006). Today, educators place importance on "the role of assessment in the process of learning" (Earl, 2006, p. 3). However, teachers may be confused about the purpose of assessment when it comes to
high stakes testing.
Is assessment for learning, as learning, or of learning (Earl, 2006)? Assessment for learning provides teachers with data to modify and improve instruction, while assessment as learning focuses on metacognition and students "as critical thinkers [who] make sense of information, relate to prior knowledge, and use it for new learning" (p. 7). Assessment of learning evaluates students' knowledge and skills in order to make accurate decisions about students' placements (Earl, 2006). The explicit goals of student assessments is to learn about "students' knowledge, skills, and affective status" in order to inform the school, other teachers, parents, and students (Popham, 2006, p. 5). The implicit goals of assessments are to monitor before and after instruction in order to learn how to effectively prepare and improve student instruction (Popham, 2006). Having a clear picture of "students' entry knowledge, skills, and affect" will facilitate the teacher's instructional planning and the students' learning process (Popham, 2006, p. 5). However, both the teacher and the student would be at a disadvantage if the information about the student's prior knowledge, skills, and affective status were not available (Popham, 2006).
Potential Directions in Refining and Meeting GoalsIn order to facilitate the process of testing, educational leaders must have clear, measurable expected outcomes of student learning and an evaluation system that gathers, analyzes, and interprets data (Soulsby, 2007). Teachers must have knowledge on what to test, how to interpret the data, and an understanding of how to align assessment and curriculum content (Hall & Adams, 2007). Classroom assessments are indeed the core of learning (Earl, 2006; Emberger, 2007; Swan, Shen & Hiltz, 2006). Quality classroom assessments affect student achievement (Emberger, 2007; Earl, 2006). However, teachers may not have the necessary knowledge on how to apply ongoing classroom assessments to instruction and learning (Emberger, 2007).
Lack Knowledge in Assessment StrategiesStudent assessment should align with the curriculum and provide teachers with information on how to improve instruction and learning (Popham, 2006). Teachers should be able to assess student performance by interpreting the results of the test, comparing the outcome to the curriculum aim, and deciding on instructional improvement (Murnane, Sharkey & Boudett, 2005). The accuracy of the interpretation will determine the validity of the assessment instrument (Murnane et al., 2005). However, teachers lack the knowledge on how to develop and interpret the results of assessments for instructional improvement (Emberger, 2007).
Source of Lack of Knowledge in AssessmentTeachers need to learn how to interpret the results of assessment (Marion, 2006; Popham, 2006). Teachers should be able to assess student performance by interpreting the results of the test, comparing the outcome to the curriculum aim, and deciding on a reference. Does the teacher want to measure the student's learning performance relative to others or norm-referenced inference or assess what the student knows or does not know, namely criterion-referenced inference or absolute interpretations (Popham, 2006)? However, teachers must decide because a criterion-referenced inference will not yield a norm-referenced inference and visa versa (Popham, 2006). If a teacher wants to know what a student can or cannot do, the teacher will not compare the student's test results with the performances of the rest of the students in class.
Ramifications of Lack of Knowledge in AssessmentStiggins (2004) claims, "It is paradoxical that we have invested so heavily in the creation of these tests, yet have invested nothing in ensuring their proper use" (p. 27). Teachers should correlate testing and instruction in order to improve student learning. Teachers can use quantitative data and scores to evaluate student learning as in standardized testing or qualitatively by means of interviews and observations for formative assessments (G. Ledwith, personal communication, September 18, 2008). According to Popham (2006), tests can benefit students if the tests "make an instructional contribution" (p. 61).
Teachers need to become aware of what to assess in order to uncover students' prior learning experiences (Popham, 2006). Action based on learners' previous knowledge and learning experiences may be helpful in catering to students' needs (Strong & Watts, 2005). However, if students' experiences are unknown during the lessons and student performance is revealed after summative testing, then intervention or reactive measures may be necessary (Strong & Watts, 2005).
Potential Solutions to Lack of Knowledge in AssessmentEducational leaders must help teachers understand the value of assessment for and as learning rather than as assessment of learning (Earl, 2006). The process of changing teachers' mindsets "to think about how to reach each student, talk about assessments for learning, and implement new processes for improving teaching and learning" may be slow, but the outcome will facilitate student achievement (Emberger, 2007, p. 29). Emberger (2007), suggests educational leaders provide professional development "that includes ongoing assessment of the progress staff members are making, continually offering options that are geared to staff members' readiness, and consistently voicing the vision of assessment for learning" (p. 29).
Ineffective Teaching and Learning Educators should assess student knowledge, skills, and affective status before instruction to facilitate the learning process by catering to students' needs. Assessing students after instruction helps teachers evaluate "the effectiveness of instruction [for] instructional improvement" (Boudett et al., 2005, p. 1). Educators need to know students' previous learning experiences; whether effective or not, what worked and what did not, students' learning styles, and multiple intelligences in order to help students perform best (Marion, 2006).
Source of Ineffective Teaching and LearningStudent failure to achieve learning objectives may be due to ineffective instruction, or insufficient teacher guidance or facilitation (Friedman, Harwell & Schnepel, 2006). The purposes of student assessment are "to inform instructional decisions and to encourage students to try to learn" (Stiggins, p. 5). Learners experience learning in different ways (Boettcher, 2007).
Ramifications of Ineffective Teaching and LearningTeachers should relate to the students differentiates learning styles because "teaching is about the learner, not the teacher" (Brendan, 2007, p. 710). Effective learning is the result of effective instruction (Hunt, Touzel, Wiseman, 1999). Teachers should be continuously observing and monitoring students in order to understand the learning process, adjust or change instructional strategies, and facilitate student performance (Popham, 2006). Teachers should evaluate various instructional methods to learn if the methods align with the diverse learning styles, multiple intelligence skills, cultural backgrounds, and prior knowledge of each individual learner (Guskey, 2005).
Potential Solutions to Ineffective Teaching and LearningTeachers should be continuously observing and monitoring students in order to understand the learning process, adjust or change instructional strategies, and facilitate student performance (Guskey, 2005). In order to cater to all students and student performance at all levels, teachers "have to increase variation in teaching" and provide more learning time (Guskey, 2005, p. 2). According to Blankstein (2004), failure is not an option if teachers collaborate to form a learning community that provides learners with effective instruction that leads to "improved academic gain" (Hunt, Touzel & Wiseman, 1999, p. 21). In order to determine the strategy for a specific learning goal, instructors should consider student (a) needs, (b) learning styles, (c) readiness, (d) transfer of learning, (e) motivation, and (f) learning time (Friedman et al., 2006). Planning is necessary to assess student needs, choose suitable learning activities, and teach. Although it may not be easy to adjust "instruction to the learning abilities, learning rates, and learning styles of all students" (Hunt et al., 1999, p. 25), effective teaching means catering to student needs and readiness to perform the required learning tasks (Friedman et al., 2006). Brendan (2007), a veteran clinical teacher, provides a list of recommendations on how to become an effective teacher: (a) think out loud, (b) activate the learner, (c) listen smart, (d) keep it simple, (e) adapt, enthusiastically, (f) link learning to caring, and (g) kindle kindness. According to Brendan (2007), "kindness to learners, especially when assessing them (giving feedback)... makes even the toughest criticism hopeful, empowering the learner by making learning less oppressive" (p. 710). Ultimately, everyone appreciates learning with kindness (Kauffmann & Linley, 2007).
Bias and InequalityTest takers should have equal opportunities to succeed on a test. However, test developers should be aware of assessment bias to ensure "(1) a test, (2) the way in which the test is administered, or (3) the manner in which the test's results are interpreted" do not penalize or give advantage to a learner (Popham, 2006, p. 121). Bias as applied to test construction means that the items on the test do not allow for differentiation among the test takers and an equal opportunity to succeed on the test (Ellis & Raju, 2003). The Ellis and Raju (2003) relate to item bias on a test as "differential item functioning (DIF) and test bias as differential test functioning (DTF) (p. 91). A test that measures the same item in ways that provide testers with an equal chance to answer the questions is free of bias (Ellis & Raju, 2003). However, if one test taker had a higher probability of answering a question correctly, than another, then the test would be biased (Ellis & Raju, 2003). Test developers can avoid bias when developing test items by making sure the test items offer every test taker an equal chance of getting the correct answer (Ellis & Raju, 2003).
Source of Bias and InequalityTest assessments should be fair. Assessment bias needs attention at every level to ensure that "(1) a test, 2) the way in which the test is administered, or (3) the manner in which the test's results are interpreted" do not penalize or give advantage to a learner for reasons of gender, religion, geography, language, ethnicity, race, economic status, or any other grouping or stereotyping (Popham, 2006, p. 121). Malouff (2008) concludes, "It may be impossible to eliminate all types of grading bias" because of our unconscious implicit attitudes (p. 192).
Ramifications of Bias and InequalityBias may be unintentional (Stanley, Phelps & Banaji, 2008). An example of implicit bias is differentiating among students and not expecting the students to perform like others (G. Ledwith, personal communications, September 18, 2008). However, it is the school's responsibility to protect students' rights and make sure the faculty learns to identify implicit bias (Banaji, Bazerman & Chugh, 2003).
According to research studies conducted in social psychology (Stanley et al., 2008), people carry attitudes and preferences that are explicit or known consciously, or implicit or unknown consciously. Bias occurs when "implicit attitudes can automatically and unconsciously influence behavior" (Stanley et al., 2008, p. 169) and run counter to people's explicit attitudes. In other words, educators may be unable to identify their biases because biases are conscious and therefore unintentional. Social psychologists and neuroscientist are conducting studies to detect the areas in the brain that show attitudes in order to help people identify unconscious attitudes and bias (Stanley et al., 2008). Attitudes determine behavior when it comes to testing and interpreting the results of the tests (Popham, 2006).
Potential Solutions to Bias and InequalityLearning how to "reduce assessment bias" and eliminate test items that offend or unfairly penalize students because of personal characteristics" may be difficult (Wiggins, 1993, p. 125, 126). Professional development can help teach about cultural differences and how to detect bias. The question is how to go about reducing bias when biases are unconscious (Banaji et al., 2008). Banaji, Bazerman, and Chugh (2003) categorize the unconscious or hidden biases people have into: "implicit prejudice, in-group favoritism, and overclaiming credit" (p. 56). The only way to avoid unconscious or hidden biases is to become aware of them. Psychologist from Harvard and University of Virginia developed an online program for people to learn about their hidden bias (Teaching Tolerance, n. d.). Many test developers may not be aware of biases regarding gender, religious, geographic, linguistic, ethnic, and racial (Popham, 2006). Becoming aware of biases may be the first step to avoiding them when developing tests.
Furthermore, for equality to prevail, teachers need to learn about each student's background, previous learning experiences, life style, learning styles, multiple intelligences, and success and failures as learners in content areas, but also their attitudes to school and learning (Treagust, 2006). In addition, classroom teachers need to learn what students know and whether the information will interfere with subsequent learning (Treagust, 2006). Teachers can apply diagnostic instruments and formative assessment "to diagnose students' conceptions in particular areas [and provide] remediation prior to any summative assessment" (Treagust, 2006, p. 7). The process of learning about students' needs and knowledge prior to summative tests may lower student, teacher, and parental stress (Treagust, 2006).
Ethical and Legal IssuesStandardized testing may be beneficial to all students if the students understand the purpose of the standardized tests and the tests help improve instruction and learning (Wiggins, 1993). Teachers should relate testing to instruction in order to improve student learning. One way of assuring that the tests and instruction align is for teachers to clarify the curricular aim or the "skill, knowledge, or affect" they want to measure (Popham, 2006, p. 65). Teachers should be accountable for student learning and not for student testing. Preparing students for the test is unethical and may cause students undue stress (Wiggins, 1993). Test assessments should be fair in assessing students' mastery of curriculum objectives (Popham, 2006).
Source of Ethical and Legal IssuesLearners experience learning in different ways due to previous experiences with learning at school, home, or among peers (Boettcher, 2007). Every learner brings "their own personalized knowledge skills and attitudes to the learning experience" (p. 3). Students should have equal rights to learn, perform, and succeed on a test regardless of prior learning experiences. Testing for the sake of testing is unethical (Wiggins, 1993). However, international summative assessments or high-stakes testing provide the school with norm-referenced standardized tests (G. Ledwith, personal communication, September 18, 2008). The test scores provide information about individual children's learning performance when compared to the learning performance of other children of the same age or same grade, whether in the class, school, district or nation. The information is important to parents if they wish to know where their child stands relative to others of the same age or grade (Popham, 2006). However, the information should not only inform but also facilitate the learning process (Wiggins, 1993). Teachers and school counselors should use the information from the summative tests to decide how to help students who are underachieving (G. Ledwith, personal communication, September 18, 2008).
Ramifications of Ethical and Legal IssuesThere are many undesirable learning experiences brought on by mental, "physical or sexual abuse" that cannot be unlearned (Filipas & Ullman, 2006, p. 652). Learners may be unwilling to learn due to previous traumas (Filipas & Ullman, 2006). Teachers would not use negative or ineffective learning experiences intentionally in the classroom. However, some learners may interpret certain learning experiences as negative due to previous unpleasant experiences. The learner may bring negative attitudes from previous learning experiences into the new learning situations. Teachers should be aware of the possibility that some of the students have had negative learning experiences (Marshal, 2005).
Potential Solutions to Ethical and Legal IssuesOne solution to ethical and legal issues regarding standardized testing and resorting to cheating and manipulating tests is for the schoolteachers develop and provide most of the summative and informative student assessments throughout the year (G. Ledwith, personal communications, September 18, 2008). According to Wiggins (1993), as long as private schools are doing well without standardized tests, there is not need for high-stakes testing. Another solution is to encourage honest assessment for learning rather than of learning for instructional improvement (Earl, 2006; Emberger, 2007).
Finally, it may be wise to deal with equal rights for all learners by guiding students on how to experience or view educational experiences via self-assessments and self-reflections (Raider-Roth, 2004). Student engagement in self-reflection of the learning process may "improve student learning, augment cognitive understandings, and bolster student achievement (Raider-Roth, 2004). By self-reflecting, learners learn to connect and form a trusting relationship with the school system, their peers, and teachers (Raider-Roth, 2005). The relationship with teachers and peers helps build trust in the learner's developing knowledge (Raider-Roth, 2005). Trusting the learning process, school environment, teachers, and peers enhance student satisfaction and lead to an increase in student performance (Raider-Roth, 2004; Strong & Watts, 2005). Students become confident and focus on trying to succeed if teachers provide supportive feedback (Stiggins, 2006).
ConclusionInstructional improvement should be an integral part of student assessments. Teachers can align tests and instruction by clarifying the curricular aim or the "skill, knowledge, or affect" they want to measure (p. 65). Next, teachers can involve students "in day-to-day classroom assessment, record keeping, and communication" (Stiggins, 2004, p. 27). Finally, teachers can learn about students' previous experiences by conducting ongoing needs assessments surveys, student reflections, and formative tests. The process may be long, but the results may produce better learning outcomes on high-stakes tests (Marshal, 2005). Ultimately, teachers should engage and empower students (Stiggins, 2004) by offering ongoing constructive feedback so that students may feel valued and respected (Wiggins, 1993).
ReferencesBanaji, M. R.; Bazerman, M. H, & Chugh, Dolly. (2003, December). How (un)ethical are you? Harvard Business Review, 81(12), 56-64. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from
EBSCOhost database.
Blankstein, A. M. (2004). Failure is not an option: Six principles that guide student achievement in high-performance schools. Thousands Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Boettcher, J. V. (2007). Ten core principles for designing effective learning environments: Insights from brain research and pedagogical theory. Innovate Journal of Online Education, 3(3). Retrieved September 26, 2008, from
http://www.unbf.caBoudett, K. P., Murnane, R. J., City, E., & Moody, L. (2005, May). Teaching educators how to use student assessment data to improve instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(9), Retrieved August 20, 2008, from ProQuest database.
Brendan M Reilly (2007). Inconvenient truths about effective clinical teaching. The Lancet, 370(9588), 705-711. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from PROQuest database.
Earl, L. (2006). Assessment: A powerful lever for learning. Brock Education, 16(1), 1-15. Retrieved
http://www3.ed.brocku.ca
Ellis, B. B., & Raju, N. S. (2003, August). Test and item bias: What they are, what they aren't, and how to detect them. Retrieved August 29, 2008, from
http://eric.ed.govEmberger, M. (2007, May). Helping teachers improve classroom assessments. Principal Leadership (High School ed.), 7(9), 24-30. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from ProQuest database.
Filipas H. H, & Ullman S. E. (2006, May). Child sexual abuse, coping responses, self-blame, posttraumatic stress disorder, and adult sexual revictimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21(5), 652-672.
Friedman, M., Harwell, D.H., & Schnepel, K. C. (2006). Effective instruction: A handbook of evidence-based strategies. Columbia, SC: The Institute for Evidence-Based Decision-Making in Education.
Guskey, T. R. (2005, April). Formative classroom assessment and Benjamin S. Bloom: Theory, research, and implications. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada. Retrieved August 29, 2008, from
http://eric.ed.govHall, S. S., & Adams, R. A. (2007).A process for assessing standards-based curriculum: Lessons learned from a high school interpersonal relationships curriculum assessment. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 35, 253-259. Retrieved September 19, 2008, from Sage Journals Online.
Hunt, G. H., Touzel, T. J., & Wiseman, D. (1999). Effective teaching: Preparation and implementation. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Ltd.
Kauffmann, C., & Linley, P. A. (2007, March). A pragmatic perspective: Putting positive coaching psychology into action. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(1), 97-102. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from
http://www.groups.psychology.org.auMalouff, J. (2008, Summer). Bias in grading. College Teaching, 56(3), 191-192. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Marion, S. F., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2006, Winter). A validity framework for evaluating the technical quality of alternate assessments. Educational Measurement, Issues and Practice, 25(4), 47. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Marshal, J. M. (2005, July). Formative assessment: Mapping the road to success. A White Paper Prepared for the Princeton Review. Retrieved September 24, 2008, from
http://www.dcsclients.com
Murnane, R. J., Sharkey, N. S., & Boudett, K. P. (2005). Using student-assessment results to improve instruction: Lessons from a workshop. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(3), 269-280. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from EBSCOhost dabase.
Popham, W. J. (2006). Assessment for educational leaders. Boston: Pearson.
Raider-Roth, M. B. (2004, Summer). Taking the time to think: A portrait of reflection. Teaching & Learning, 18(3), 79–97. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Raider-Roth, M. B. (2005, April). Trusting what you know: Negotiating the relational context of classroom life. Teachers College Record, 107(4), 587-628. Retrieved September 28, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Soulsby, E. P. (2007, January 4). Assessment notes. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from
http://assessment.uconn.eduStanley, D., Phelps, E., & Banaji, M. (2008). The neural basis of implicit attitudes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(2), 164-170. Retrieved August 29, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Stiggins, R. (2006, November/December). Edge: Assessment for Learning, 2(2), 1-19. Retrieved September 26, 2008, from
www.pdkintl.orgStiggins, R (2004, September). New assessment beliefs for a new school mission. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 22-27. Retrieved August 10, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Strong, T., & Watts, T. (2005). Improving teaching performance outcomes by improving student satisfaction: A case study of a small accounting program. Retrieved September 26, 2008, from
http://www.afaanz.org
Swan, K., Shen, J. & Hiltz, S. R. (2006). Assessment and collaboration in online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 10(1), 45-62. Retrieved September 27, 2008, from
http://www.aln.orgTeaching Tolerance. (n.d.). Dig deeper: Test yourself for hidden bias. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from
http://www.tolerance.orgTreagust, D. F. (2006). Diagnostic assessment in science as a means to improving teaching, learning and retention. Presented at the UniServe Assessment Symposium Proceedings. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from
http://www.usyd.edu.au Wiggins, G.P. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing. CA: Jossey-Bass.
My name is Nellie (Muller) Deutsch. I have been integrating technology into the ESL/EFL classroom since the 1990s. I have been involved in collaborative projects and WebQuests via Moodle for the past 5 years. My first website, Nellie's English Projects was an experiment that evolved from a WebQuest and started me off as a webmistress in the days of html before web 2.0 tools. I love learning and collaborating with teachers. I am currently taking courses for my doctoral studies in educational leadership specializing in curriculum,and instruction online at the University of Phoenix and writing my dissertation. I am researching instructor use of web 2.0 tools in blended learning environments in higher education. In my free time, I facilitate free online courses on how to collaborate and use Wikieducator and mentor teachers for free on how to integrate web 2.0 tools in the EFL/ESL courses and in spreading the word about international collaborative projects such as Ruth Vilmi's International Writing Exchange and other professional and personal learning inititiatives on Moodle and on WiZiQ because I would like to see quality learning and specifically e-learning available and free worldwide. I am currently moderating EVO09 Digifolios and Personal Learning Spaces on how to build a professional ID in the 21st century with 3 other educators. 
Posts
