Jump to content

User:Reemaa1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Introduction

[edit]

Using assessments in the education system has been improved through time. Assessments is defined as “the wide variety of methods or tools that educators use to evaluate, measure, and document the academic readiness, learning progress, skill acquisition, or educational needs of students” (Concepts, 2015). English language has been the first language of communication around the world, so people use it to learn most of the topics. However, the professors face a challenge to be certain that students had absorbed all the knowledge in English language. The assessment is considered an agreement or disagreement with contract between the teacher and the learners which its purpose is the improvement of the education environment, school accountability and student accountability. According to (Desforges, 1989) there is the diagnostic, formative and summative assessments. (Eriesd, 2015) stated the diagnostic is an assortment of appraisal undertakings that are utilized to decide understudies' level of learning, abilities, understandings toward the start of a course, review level, unit and additionally lesson. While the formative is formal and informal evaluations that are utilized all through a unit or course of concentrate to monitor understudy advancement with the goal that instructors can change their instructional practices to address the issues of their student. Last the summative assessment is formal assessments used to measure what students have learned at the end of a defined period.


Assessment Vs Evaluation

[edit]

Assessment is the process of objectively understanding the state or condition of a thing, by observation and measurement. Assessment of teaching means taking a measure of its effectiveness.

Evaluation is the process of observing and measuring a thing for the purpose of judging it and of determining its “value,” either by comparison to similar things, or to a standard. Evaluation of teaching means passing judgment on it as part of an administrative process

[edit]

1- Summative Assessment

[edit]

Definition of summative assessment

Taras(2005) defined summative assessment as "a judgment which encapsulates all the evidence up to a given point." (p, 468). The uses of summative assessment can be classified as ‘internal' and ‘external' to the school community. Teacher-made tests and examinations, teacher`s judgments and regular grading s are considered internal uses. While external uses include high-stakes tests, selection for employment or for further or higher education (Harlen,2005:208). The impact of summative assessment on motivation Motivation is a complex concept, embracing several aspects that relate to learning, such as self-esteem, self-regulation, interest, effort, self-efficacy, and a person's sense of themselves as a learner. (Harlen ,2005:210) Howe (1987) pointed out that motivational aspects can have great positive or negative influence on achievement in learning. (p, 142) Direct and indirect impact of summative assessment can occur on students motivation for learning, the effect of low grads on self-esteem and learner`s perception of himself as well as induced test anxiety are direct impact. An indirect impact is through the influences on the curriculum and their teachers .when it is regarding lifelong learning the negative impact on motivation is unwanted (Harlen,2005).


2- Formative Assessment

[edit]

Definition formative assessment

Formative assessment was defined by Black and William (1998: 10) as all of the various activities that are used by teachers and students to help adjust the learning process. Furthermore, these activities provide pieces of information which are used in feedback sessions and are extremely important in modifying the teaching and learning process. Additionally, Sadler (1998: 77) sees formative assessment as the assessment that aims to improve the learning process and students' competence in general by precisely focusing on giving feedback on students' current performance or work.

Shute (2008: 154) supports the previous definitions by stating that formative assessment is the pieces of information passed to students in order to change their behavior or thinking that is proposed to pave the way to the main aim which is learning improvement. Likewise, Yorke (2003) sees that “...Formative assessment is critically important for student learning. Without informative feedback on what they do, students will have relatively little by which to chart their development” (p. 477). From the above definitions we can come to a conclusion that formative assessment is a task/s that helps in improving the learning process for both teachers and students; yet, it relies heavily on the feedback sessions given afterwards for it to be successful.Formative assessment was defined by Black and William (1998: 10) as all of the various activities that are used by teachers and students to help adjust the learning process. Furthermore, these activities provide pieces of information which are used in feedback sessions and are extremely important in modifying the teaching and learning process. Additionally, Sadler (1998: 77) sees formative assessment as the assessment that aims to improve the learning process and students' competence in general by precisely focusing on giving feedback on students' current performance or work.

Shute (2008: 154) supports the previous definitions by stating that formative assessment is the pieces of information passed to students in order to change their behavior or thinking that is proposed to pave the way to the main aim which is learning improvement. Likewise, Yorke (2003) sees that “...Formative assessment is critically important for student learning. Without informative feedback on what they do, students will have relatively little by which to chart their development” (p. 477). From the above definitions we can come to a conclusion that formative assessment is a task/s that helps in improving the learning process for both teachers and students; yet, it relies heavily on the feedback sessions given afterwards for it to be successful.


The relationship between formative assessment and self-regulated learning

Before considering the effect of formative assessment on student’s self-regulated learning, it might be efficient to define formative assessment, Clark defines formative assessment as “a process with the potential to support learning beyond school years by developing learning strategies which individuals may rely on across their entire life span” (Clark, 2012: 217). Research shows that formative assessment has a positive impact on students’ learning and accomplishments (Black & Wiliam, 2003: 623-637). Again, Clark pointed out that There is a general agreement of the positive effect of the formative assessment on students’ performance and self-learning, also there are rising claims that students self-regulated learning is one of the outcomes of formative assessment (Clark, I, 2012: 205-249). That’s why Irving expressed that formative assessment might be helpful to enhance self-regulated learning (Irving, 2007: 13). While Topping stated that formative assessment, which is also known as assessment for learning, is a part of the educational process, that enables the students to plan their learning, identify strengths and weaknesses, and improve metacognitive, personal, and professional skills (Topping, 2009: 20). Zimmerman claimed that ongoing participation is one of the primary components of self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2000: 82). According to Hwang and Chang (2011) who initiated a study of mobile learning which students were involved by using mobile devices. In this study students had no time and place restrictions, they also were living some real-life situations, and they were provided with learning material (Hwang, Chang, 2011: 1023). In this study, students were given wrong answers, and they were given some clues to lead them to the right answers. The findings of this study were that by using formative approach of mobile learning, it triggered the student's self-regulated learning, it also resulted to enhance student’s motivation, and a better learning accomplishment. The study concluded that by using formative approach students were stimulated to solve problems on their own (Hwang and Chang, 2011: 1031).

Another study which was conducted by (Sly, L, 1999) in Curtin University in Perth, Australia. This study aimed to concentrate on whether formative assessment may contribute in improving student’s performance or not. In this study, students had the choice to undertake a formative practice test, which was computer managed before the unit assessment. This formative practice test is designed to enhance students learning. 417 students chose to take the formative practice test (PT), and their unit assessment marks were compared to other students who chose not to take the practice test (non-PT). There was a remarkable improvement in the mean mark of the (PT) group from the formative practice test to the unit test. Moreover, the (PT) group impressively outperformed the (non-PT) group, they were notably better on both tests, although apparently most of the (PT) group were considered under achievers, so based on those results, the study suggested that formative practice tests should be offered to students before all unit assessments (Sly, L, 1999: 339). On the other hand (Sly, L, 1999) argued that there are plenty of possible explanations to the findings of this study. One option could be that the more motivated students chose to take the practice test which explains the result. However, the results don’t seem to support the first claim, because the students who chose not to take the practice test (non-PT) scored better on their material test. Another possibility might be that the formative practice test group were more familiar with the computer system which caused to reduce their test anxiety. The third possibility could be that the practice test group (PT) became more accustomed to the university test predictions, so their test anxiety may not be reduced using this practice test, but rather by the frequency of using the computer system and the general realization of the university testing procedures. One last possibility might be the familiarity with the type of the question, students could be alerted to the type of the questions, and they could have started to study the same category between the practice test and the unit assessment, which could be the more probable explanation of them (Sly, L, 1999: 342-343).

These reasons might raise the idea that formative assessment could be beneficial to develop self-regulated learning, although sometimes it could have contributed to more than one factor, like decreasing test anxiety, or the familiarity with test questions, but that doesn’t mean that there are a number of researchers agrees that formative assessment might help to develop self-regulated learning, and that it might enhance the learning process, so further research may clarify this more precisely.


Formative assessment and learners' motivation

Motivation seems to be the fuel that prompts learners to increase their desire for deeper learning. Formative Assessment (FA) has a great impact on learners, as it provides feedback that enhances their motivation. According to Brookhart (2008), students who receive formative written feedback experience improvements in their motivation levels (pp. 7–8). Consequently, Saeboe conducted a study in Norway on 38 seventh grade students of to investigate the role of FA in developing English writing besides accuracy and motivation; the result of this study showed that pupils' motivation was positively influenced (2017, p. 2). This finding supports Cauley and McMillan’s claim that FA can strengthen students' motivation considerably (2010, p. 1). On the other hand, Yin et al. (2008) researched 12 teachers from different schools on the implementation of FA in classrooms and its effects on students’ motivation level, which showed no considerable change in learners' motivation (pp. 341–354). Yin et al. claimed that students might have higher motivation if the teachers have control of the classroom and use effective teaching strategies (2008, p. 354). Therefore, teachers who can control their classroom and improve motivation implement formative assessment more effectively (Izci, 2016, p. 2543). In addition, the implementation of FA in different schools and by different teachers might be the cause of the unexpected effects of FA (Nolen, 2011, p. 323). There are many factors linked to the use of FA in the classroom that have to be considered before the implementation of the assessment. These include teachers' motivation, experiences, and knowledge. In fact, these aspects are essential in improving the motivation of the learners. However, it is difficult to rely mainly on FA for boosting positive motivation because there are some factors that influence FA negatively.


The effect of using grades in formative assessment on learners’ self-esteem.

Considering learners’ feelings is an essential element the determines the usefulness of the formative assessment. Feedback plays a major role in learners’ self-esteem by how they value themselves as successful or failure learners (Black, 1998b:133). Therefore, learners’ self-esteem depends on the feedback on their own efforts is compared to the feedback on others’ efforts (Black, 1998b: 134). Miller & Lavin (2007) believed that young primary school learners have higher self-esteem and more positive towards learning than older learners (12). A study was carried by Miller & Lavin (2007) studied the impact of formative assessment on learners’ self-esteem. After applying different formative assessment techniques to 370 learners, the result indicated that formative assessment enhances learners’ self-esteem which, therefore, increases learners’ ability to achieve the learning goals (20). On the other hand, Black (1998a) argued that formative assessment could affect learners’ self-esteem when teachers use stars, grades, or class rank (42-43). According to Black (1998b), such rewards could be harmful to low achievers by damaging their self-esteem in a way that learners would be avoiding the difficult tasks, looking for cues to get the right answer, the fear of failure and criticism stop them from asking questions, and the belief that they lack the ability (134; Black, 1998a: 43).



3- Authentic Assessment

[edit]

Definition:

The precise definition and characteristics of authentic assessment are not totally agreed on among educators in educational research and literature. Authentic assessment is usually distinguished by its relation to real-world tasks and using knowledge outside classroom. However, some authors emphasize that realism is only one feature of authenticity and there are other aspects that define it. The term authentic tests was first referred to by Archbald and Newman in 1988, in their book that criticize standardized testing. According to Newman, assessment is authentic when it measures products or performances that “have meaning or value beyond success in school” (Newman, Brandt & Wiggins, 1998: 19).

Features:

To develop a precise definition of authentic assessment, Frey, Schmitt, & Allen (2012:4) tried to define it through its characteristics after surveying literature in more than 109 documents basically in books, journal articles and dissertations, written by 100 different authors who defined authentic assessment and identified its characteristics to develop a comprehensive list of critical components that determine the authentic nature of any classroom assessment. They identify nine characteristics including realism that is agreed upon. These nine aspects are put in three groups in relation to: the context of the assessment, the student’s role and scoring procedures. The context of the assessment task needs to be realistic, performance-based and cognitively complex. While the role of the student includes a defense of the given answer or product, collaborating with other students and with the teacher, and responding to the feedback of the formative assessment. The scoring category includes the scoring criteria that should be known by students, using multiple indicators in rubrics for scoring, and assigning mastery to be the performance expectation. 3.3 Validity, reliability and practicality of authentic assessment: • Validity: The validity of authentic assessment can be clearly seen in the sense that it gives direct observable evidence of students’ learning. The psychologist Lauren Resnick has indicated three basic lines of performance based assessment, (what we assess is what we value. We get what we assess, and if we don't assess it, we don't get it" (as cited in Wiggins, 1990:3). Therefore, the quality of students’ performance can be clearly distinguished by parents and community members with no need for sophisticated interpretation from specialists. • Reliability: Many authors indicted the difficulty in obtaining reliability in authentic assessment as one of the issues that is related to the reliability of authentic assessment is the objectivity of its judgement-based scoring. Aiken (1996) indicated that it is not easy to maintain validity and reliability of any authentic assessment. Schurr (1999) has overstated that gaining consistency, objectivity, and/or standardization in authentic assessment results is difficult, and maybe even impossible. However, Wiggins (1990:2-3), in defense of the reliability of authentic assessment, noted that aiming at real accountability does not contradict with human judgment if it is monitored as scorers are trained, model performances are provided as exemplars, papers are read "blind" to the names of students or any previous acquaintance, and certain oversight policies and procedures are conducted as it is the case with professional athletic and artistic judgement of performance to prevent bias and drift and to ensure adequate reliability. • Practicality: Authentic assessment takes time longer than traditional assessment tools and that may take time from learning. However, William (1998:2) indicated that authentic tasks are not only for assessment purpose. They are for learning too. While doing the task, learners encounter new situations that they learn from and the assessment of learner’s products takes place at the end of accomplishing the task. While during the task learners learn by doing and working on their own pace. In terms of money the cost of scoring judgment-based tasks is obviously more than the cost of scoring multiple-choice tests, (about $2 per student vs. 1 cent) as estimated by Wiggins (1990:2). However, such comparison is misleading as the profits seen in students learners and teacher professional development are much priceless.


References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

[10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

[19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29]

  1. ^ Taras, M. (2005). Assessment–summative and formative–some theoretical reflections. British journal of educational studies, 53(4), 466-478.‏
  2. ^ Howe, M. J. A. (1987). Using cognitive psychology to help students learn how to learn. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck, & D. W. Piper (Eds.), Student learning: Research in education and cognitive psychology. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press & Society for Research into Higher Education.
  3. ^ Harlen, W. (2005). Teachers' summative practices and assessment for learning–tensions and synergies. Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 207-223
  4. ^ William, D. (1998). The Validity of Teachers’ Assessments . Education-line database.
  5. ^ Schurr, S. (1999). Authentic Assessment From A to Z, USA: National Middle School Association.
  6. ^ Aiken, L. R. (1996). Tests Psicológicos y Evaluación, México. Prentice Hall.
  7. ^ Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation , 2(2) November . Available online: http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=2&n=2
  8. ^ Frey, B. B., Schmitt, V. L., & Allen J. P. (2012). Defining Authentic Classroom Assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(2).
  9. ^ Newman, F. (1998). Research news and Comment: An Exchange of Views on “Semantics, Psychometrics, and Assessment Reform: A Close Look at ‘Authentic’Assessments”. Educational Researcher, 27(6), 19-22.
  10. ^ • Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7.
  11. ^ • Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5(1): 77.
  12. ^ • Shute, V. (2008). Focus on Formative Feedback. Review of Education. Research. 78 (1), 154.
  13. ^ • Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education, 45(4), 477.
  14. ^ Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into practice, 48(1), 20-27.
  15. ^ Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 82-91.
  16. ^ Sly, L. (1999). Practice tests as formative assessment improve student performance on computer-managed learning assessments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 339-343.
  17. ^ Hwang, G., & Chang, H. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers and Education, 56(4), 1023–1031.
  18. ^ Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 205-249.
  19. ^ Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students. Virginia: ASCD. Retrieved November 6, 2017, from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.sdl.idm.oclc.org/lib/sauduniversity-ebooks/reader.action?docID=361035#
  20. ^ Saeboe, M. (2017). A case study of the effect of formative assessment on the English writing development, accuracy and motivation of pupils in a Norwegian 7th grade (Master's Thesis). Retrieved November 6, 2017, from https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2446922/Saeboe_Merethe.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
  21. ^ Cauley, K. M., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). Formative Assessment Techniques to Support Student Motivation and Achievement. A Journal of Educational Strategies, 1-6.
  22. ^ Yin, Y., Shavelson, R. J., Ayala, C. C., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Brandon, P. R., Furtak, E. M., . . . Young, D. B. (2008). On the Impact of Formative Assessment on Student Motivation, Achievement, and Conceptual Change. Applied Measurement in Education, 335-359. Retrieved November 1, 2017, from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08957340802347845
  23. ^ Nolen, S. B. (2011). The Role of Educational Systems in the Link Between Formative Assessment and Motivation . Theory into Practice, 319-326.
  24. ^ Izci, K. (2016). Internal and External Factors Affecting Teachers' Adoption of Formative Assessment to Support Learning. International Science Index, Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 2541-2548.
  25. ^ Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box (p. 142). GL assessment.
  26. ^ Miller, D., & Lavin, F. (2007). ‘But now I feel I want to give it a try’: formative assessment, self-esteem and a sense of competence. The Curriculum Journal, 18(1), 12-20.
  27. ^ 1. Concepts, L. (2015). Assessment Definition. The Glossary of Education Reform. Retrieved 9 November 2017, from http://edglossary.org/assessment/
  28. ^ 2. Desforges, C. (1989). Testing and Assessment. Education Matters Series. . Continuum Publishing, Co.
  29. ^ 3. Eriesd. (2015). types of assessment. Retrieved from Erie's Public Schools : https://www.eriesd.org/cms/lib/PA01001942/Centricity/Domain/1917/Types%20of%20Assessments%20information%20sheets.pdf
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Reemaa1&oldid=813565915"