In a crib sheet Guy Claxton prepared for @rethinkassessmt he says
Have we got the right word to describe the kind of test that we think is appropriate? Are we assessing, evaluating, measuring, testing, illustrating, tracking, demonstrating, or evidencing? Each of these words suggests a particular kind of assessment – which may or may not be appropriate.
It’s a good question. Perhaps it helps us if we think about what we hope happens when student learning is assessed.
What’s my hope for assessment? That it helps kids develop confidence in who they are and what they might be.
The Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment in Education hope for assessment is that it does no harm.
When we speak of things we hope for, it is values we’re dealing with, which means that assessment is about ethics.
We can justify things ethically if they do good. Now, there are arguments there around defining ‘good’, including if it’s good on an individual or collective basis.
So, for instance, we might say assessment does ‘good’ if it raises the excellent few above the average many, and as a result society is advanced to a higher plane of excellence. In this case, ‘good’ is judged on a collective basis - everyone benefits because these few are elevated. Conditions that emphasise rigour, the protection of standards and validity of the assessment are justified here as they serve to sort the few from the many.
This is what we’ve got, isn’t it.
Accordingly, we have to be very careful that we are assessing what we think we are - what’s been taught - and not privilege. Conditions that help sort the few from the many tend to entrench privilege.
You know what? I think we’d do more good if we tried to evidence what a student is capable of, and in doing so illustrate their potential.
Every single one of them.
