Different Ways to Assess Student Learning

In my last post, I outlined three types of assessment outlined by Dr. Smirnova.  They were diagnostic, formative, and summative assessment.  In addition to these, the textbook also offers descriptions of other traditional methods to evaluate a student’s understanding and comprehension skills.  In this post, I will analyze a few of these different methods. 

First, the textbook talks about End of Chapter Assignments.  This type of assignment forces a student to read their textbook in order to find answers to questions assigned by the teacher.  This type of assignment is beneficial because it provides the teacher with a small indication of how serious a student is about their schooling.  If this type of assignment is given for homework, the appearance of a textbook at home also gives parents an indication that their child is doing something in science class.  Assignments that are incomplete gives the teacher an opportunity to talk to a student and their parents about the effort they put in.  On the other hand, this type of assignment can be ineffective in a few ways.  Firstly, this assignment does not tell a teacher how much a student knows, and it also does not indicate how much a student likes or dislikes the subject (the textbook directly related these assignments to science, but this type of assessment, as well as many others, can be used for almost any subject).  Completed assignments of this nature only indicate what information the student was able to recall on a short-term memory basis, which is what Dr. Smirnova said to avoid when assessing student knowledge.  For this reason, I think this type of assignment could be just as ineffective as it would be effective.  

The next type of assessment is quizzes.  Quizzes tell teachers whether students can think fast and have a sufficient command of information and writing to get accurate information written down before time is up.  Quizzes are easy to grade, and provide a small snapshot of the students’ recall of information.  The downside to giving quizzes is that they do not tell teachers much about a student’s in-depth understanding.  Lack of success on quizzes may not be an indicator of a lack of knowledge or understanding, but rather a deficit in being able to express their knowledge quickly.  Every teacher has heard of test anxiety, and this can show when administering a quiz, especially with little to no warning for the students.

On the same idea as quizzes, there is the topic of end-of-unit tests.  These tests tell students, parents, and teachers how well the children were able to answer questions that were asked.  Test results give children a way to assess their own progress and compare themselves to others (personally, I think having students compare their grades to others has the potential to be very damaging).  If a teacher creates a test with more comprehensive questions rather than recall questions, it might result in more useful information.  The test results can then reveal whether children understood concepts, were able to apply what was learned, and were able to analyze the concepts studied.   As effective as tests can be to assess student knowledge, they can also be pretty ineffective, because they only tell you what the students know about specific topics covered on the test.  Very few tests assess how well students can express their thoughts.  

The textbook then discusses research reports.  A true research report is the outcome of a research investigation, so this type of assessment fits in perfectly with a science class.  Research reports provide students with information and ideas that can round out what they have learned through hands-on activities, demonstrations, and class discussions.  They can also lead students to think about topics and questions that weren’t discussed during class.  Lastly, they can help a student improve their grade by making up for a low quiz grade.  However, when used traditionally, research reports do little to extend the basic knowledge, skills, and attitudes emphasized in a discovery-based classroom.  They don’t typically give children the opportunity to use science materials or to move through the full learning cycle.  Under good circumstances, research reports all teachers to see how well students can look up information online or in a textbook and summarize what they find.  

The next type of assessment is activity write ups.  This is a brief description written by the students of what they read, did, and discovered.  This type of self-assessment can accomplish having children synthesize and share what they have learned.  Being able to read their observations and thoughts gives the teacher valuable information on the learning going on in the classroom.  However, every form of assessment is imperfect in its own way.  Activity write ups can cause a variety of issues to arise.  Children can complete these tasks, but if they are not good writers, that can pose a problem.  A poorly written report may tell a teacher less about a student’s science abilities and more about their language arts abilities.  

The last form of assessment I would like to discuss is standardized tests.  These types of tests get mixed reviews from teachers all the time.  Standardized tests can determine how much the students in one class or school know compared to other schools across the state, or even the country.  Standardized tests are not effective for a few reasons.  They are typically limited to assessing childrens’ knowledge of science concepts and principles.  It’s a lot more difficult and rare for a standardized test to assess childrens’ scientific achievements.  Standardized tests tend not to test children on creativity, innovation, and sense-making strategies.  

Clearly, there are many different ways to test childrens’ knowledge in the classroom.  Some are more effective than others, and some effectiveness depends on the individual.  I think these testing methods each have positives and negatives associated with them.