In previous posts, we looked at several recent studies that examine the necessity of having more student involvement in the evaluation of their own learning. When we think of high reliability professions, we must surely submit there are perhaps few or none that can be judged in a once-off capacity. Even pilots and surgeons whose professions require 100% success 100% of the time do not get to perform their responsible and high-stakes jobs without having initially undergone arduous apprenticeships where every conceivable eventuality is tried and tested, and where they are put through the most rigorous and exacting preparation and training to ensure they will perform with consistent success – the mistakes they are allowed to make happen as they build skill and expertise, not once they have acquired them. No pilot or surgeon is given one and only one summative opportunity to succeed. That would be absurd.
As mentioned earlier, learning is as consequential in the lives of students as the highest stakes professions, and we educators are duty bound to get it right. When Grant Wiggins refers to ‘Educative Assessment’, he means assessment as an integral part of the learning process and not just simply a final measure of attainment. This is why Wiggins also stresses learning transfer and mastery, or that ability to apply one’s knowledge, understanding, and skill to new and varied contexts. It is why he places great importance on authentic assessments, or assessments that are grounded in real-world tasks and challenges, assessments that require the practical application of learning rather than simply recalling information for a final test.
Wiggins critiques the limitations of traditional testing and claims it cannot measure deep understanding or real-world application. He contends such tests are more suited to the rote learning of low-level skills. A more effective model, he argues, entails involving students as active participants in the evaluation of their own learning. When students are engaged in this way, ownership and self-regulation are promoted, and students also gain a much deeper understanding of their growth, development, progress, and indeed the overarching goals of learning. Wiggins encourages students to self-assess their work against established criteria, thereby building their critical thinking and problem-solving skills and boosting their ability to self-reflect. When students are proficient goal-setters, they are more apt to solicit and use constructive feedback and to view learning as a journey of continuous improvement. Students who own their learning in this way are more active, engaged, and reflective learners.
Wiggins goes much further in his analysis and promotes the movement away from grades as the only or exclusive measure of student performance: he suggests that grades should be just one part of a broader, more comprehensive assessment system. If grades are to provide a summary of student performance, then they should be complemented by detailed feedback and multiple forms of evidence of learning. Wiggins decries instances where students sit for standardised tests and only know the final outcome: such tests typically come at the end rather than at the start or during the learning process, and Wiggins claims students could learn much from their performance in such tests. He prefers performance-based assessments, where students demonstrate knowledge, understanding, and skill in multiple contexts via multiple forms of application.
The direction suggested by his critiques is to shift the focus of assessment towards an appreciation of the intrinsic value of learning, or away from the stress and anxiety caused by high-stakes examinations. He asks that educators replicate real-world contexts more often instead of simply mandating artificial, once-off scenarios. Without the fear of grades, he muses students may feel more comfortable taking risks, thinking creatively, and engaging in deeper exploration of subjects. Maybe students will be more amenable to assimilating feedback and seeing their learning beyond the purely transactional. Student involvement at this level also removes many of the iniquities and biases that currently plague assessment, making the process fairer, more flexible, more personal, responsive, and meaningful of students’ learning needs. The focus ought to be on developing authentic, autonomous understanding and skill rather than norm-referenced measures that are limited and sadly miss so much.
Read other parts of the “Going Gradeless” blogs here:
Part 1: https://premieraedu.com/going-gradeless-part-1/
Part 2: https://premieraedu.com/going-gradeless-part-ii-putting-children-first-in-education/
