The role of assessment in teaching and learning

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER THREE CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Introduction

This study investigated the challenges affecting teachers’ classroom assessment practices and how these influenced teaching and learning; therefore, it is important to make explicit the bases on which the teachers’ classroom assessment challenges were interpreted.
The study utilized the conceptual framework based on the model suggested by Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt (2002). The model highlighted four perspectives – technological, cultural, political and postmodern, with the intention of accounting for teachers’ assessment practices. This model was offered as an attempt to comprehend the factors that hinder teachers’ assessment practices. It scrutinized the how and why, and not merely the commonness of use of classroom assessment tools, techniques and methods. The model was therefore based on the acknowledgement of the notion of assessment as reflective of values and epistemological beliefs about teaching and learning.
The suggested model consists of four perspectives that underpin teachers’ assessment practices and beliefs. The first perspective emphasizes the technological aspects of applying classroom assessment (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002:81). It involves technical views of time allocation and management, organisational structure and the availability of resources. It also involves teachers’ expertise in developing and conducting classroom assessment as well as likely gaps between home and school expectations pertaining to classroom assessment. These technical aspects can hinder teachers’ assessment practices.
The second perspective dwells on the cultural dimension, and refers to the interpretation and integration of assessment into the schools’ social and cultural context. This perspective views assessment as a continuous activity and a multifaceted process integrated with learning, with learners actively participating in the different stages of the assessment process (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002:81). This view takes into consideration partnerships among various stakeholders: learners, teachers, parents, community members and administrators. Teachers who support these principles appear to be more dedicated to the use of different assessment tools, techniques and methods.
The third perspective highlights the political dimension, which centres on “the exercise and negation of power, authority and competing interests among groups” (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002:81). This view is associated with the pressure of external evaluation on classroom-based assessment; top-down inspection and supervision performed by standardised tests; as well as bureaucratic meddling or institutional preferences and requisitions. Teachers who are powerfully influenced by the political aspect are likely to conduct classroom assessment according to external, standardised existing models.
The last perspective is post-modern, viewing assessment from the environment of ambiguity that distinguishes the current period in history; thus critically questioning the credibility and trustworthiness of assessment practices and beliefs (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002:81). Such a critical position may lead teachers to challenge or dispute the implementation of assessment methods, tools and techniques in their classrooms.
The model therefore takes a wide perspective in relation to teachers’ assessment practices, aiming at both the micro and the macro contexts. It thus acknowledges a multifaceted analysis of the issues underpinning classroom assessment from a critical standpoint, and incorporating related social, political and philosophical factors (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002). Simultaneously, it includes issues at a local level, such as availability of resources and partnership among the various stakeholders in the school context. As highlighted in the discussion above, and relating to an argument emphasized by Davison (2007), using different forms of assessment is not merely a technical innovation but an intensely conceptual one. Because the Hargreaves (2002) model is geared towards examining innovations in education, it is appropriate for the purpose of examining such a shift in various frameworks.
The model is research based; as highlighted in the research conducted among twenty-nine Canadian teachers teaching different learning areas in grades 7-8 (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002:81). The teachers were all identified as being familiar with and committed to using various forms of classroom assessment and confirmed with the existence of the four perspectives (Hargreaves, Earl and Schmidt, 2002). Nevertheless, questions can be posed as to the applicability of the model in a more varied teacher sample, that is, teachers who vary in their familiarity with and support of classroom assessment. In addition, the research strategy utilized in the research mentioned above employed a quantitative data collection method. A point of consideration is whether similar results, namely the existence of the four perspectives as outlined in the model, would emerge on the basis of a qualitative type of data collection and analysis. Additionally, another question can be whether the results mentioned in the above study would emerge in a different context/culture with teachers from a specific learning area. My study therefore undertook to use the Hargreaves (2001) model in a different setting; to understand the challenges affecting teachers’ classroom assessment practices, how they deal with these challenges, and also how the challenges influence effective teaching and learning.
Special significance has been placed on classroom assessment in educational contexts and this has fore grounded formal acknowledgement of the primary role that teachers play in the assessment process and therefore the discussion of teachers’ assessment practices, perceptions and expert knowledge in the area of assessment (Inbar-Lourie and Donitsa-Schmidt, 2009).
Consequently, the primary aim of this study is to shed light on the factors which influence teachers’ assessment practices, whether they emerge from the teachers’ local context, from their pedagogical belief systems, or whether they are affected by forces and considerations external to the school setting (Neesom, 2000; Davison, 2004). This conversation is specifically relevant in systems which have been made known and are advancing a classroom assessment paradigm while concurrently embracing top-down standardised testing, culminating in tension between formative assessment and high-stakes external examination (Brindley, 2007). Similarly, Leung and Rea-Dickens’ (2007) analysis of the rhetoric of policy documents attests to the gap between the official assessment policy within the National Curriculum in the United Kingdom, which dwells upon formative teacher assessment, and the dialogue within policy documentation which shows contempt for basic issues underpinning formative assessment.
Nonetheless, despite the growing research interest in teacher assessment, not enough is known about the challenges that teachers face with regard to classroom assessment and the perceptions, opinions and ideas which motivate their continuous classroom assessment practices.
As already mentioned in the literature review in Chapter Two, assessment plays a critical role in teaching and learning (Murray, 2006; Jones and Tanner, 2008; Stiggins, 2008). According to Danielson (2008) and Vadar (2010), assessment is crucial for education policy makers and practitioners involved both in accountability, implying how well the learners have learned, and instruction, that is, how to promote higher levels of learning.

What is assessment?

The term “assessment” has captured an array of meanings within the educational environment (Bennett and Gitomer, 2009). The concept can allude to the procedure teachers use to grade student assignments (Marzano, 2006; Harlen, 2007); to standardised testing imposed in schools (Stiggins and Chappius, 2005); to any activity designed to collect information to be used as feedback to alter teaching and learning activities (Angelo, 2001); or to improve instruction and learner performance (Sparks, 2005). These multifaceted approaches have consequently shifted assessment away from the primary role that it should play in educational institutions – the collection of evidence to improve instructional practices.
Over the years, classroom assessment has been acknowledged as a means of providing an index of student learning (Rea-Dickens, 2000; Stiggins, 2002; Nitko and Brookhart, 2007). It has also been applied as a clear and understandable testing activity that happens after teachers have taught a particular lesson or subject matter (Sanchez and Brisk, 2004; Harlen, 2007). Nevertheless, assessment and testing are two different concepts. Kubiszyn and Borich (2007) and Robinson-Karpius (2006) asserted that testing is only part of assessment because assessment is an inclusive data collection and evaluation process made up of various elements. These scholars added that an inclusive assessment process involves not only test results but also consists of results from different measurement procedures, such as portfolio and performance assessment, observations, checklists, rating scales and rubrics. On the other hand, Angelo and Cross (2002) defined classroom assessment as a comprehensive approach intended to assist teachers in deciding what learners are learning and how well they are learning. Thus, the assessment process helps teachers obtain useful feedback on what, how much, and how well their learners are learning. Therefore, it must react directly to concerns about effective teaching and learning.

Why do teachers conduct classroom assessment?

The basic reason why teachers conduct classroom assessment is to collect evidence about the performance of learners (Nitko and Brookhart, 2007; Bennett and Gitomer, 2009). However, teachers become aware that they are not the only end-users of information collected from the process. Undoubtedly, learners also require feedback or feed-forward (Murray, 2006; Mbelani, 2008). The results of the assessment process need to make learners aware of their strengths and weaknesses. On the other hand, parents too are interested in understanding and being aware of their children’s performance (Raty, Kasanen and Honkalampi, 2006; Popham, 2008). Assessment is also important to stakeholders such as school administrators and other teachers in the sense that they use information gathered from assessment processes and exercises. Jones and Tanner (2008) therefore highlight three general aims for classroom assessment; pedagogical, managerial and communicative. Collectively, as Sparks (2005) posits, the purpose of learner assessment is to improve the effectiveness of teaching and learning. In order for teaching and learning to be effective, teachers must be aware that learning takes place when there is interplay between the teaching process and the outcomes (Raty, Kasanen and Honkalampi, 2006). This means that in order to achieve effective teaching and learning, teachers must move from mere presentations of lessons towards making sure that learners achieve the desired outcome. During assessment of learning, teachers need to identify specific goals and objectives for each learning area or lesson, consistently measure the extent to which these expected outcomes are actually achieved, and determine to what extent learning occurs (Earl, 2005). Additionally, as highlighted by Danielson (2008) and Stake (2004), when conducting classroom assessment teachers are also expected to give descriptions of the role of assessment in making instructional and educational decisions.
Rust (2002) argued that it is easy for teachers to become absorbed in their job and lose track of the precise aim of any specific component of classroom assessment. There is then the possibility that the aim is not achieved, or that they overlook another form of assessment that may be more appropriate. There are a variety of reasons why teachers conduct assessment. These range from motivation, providing opportunities to learn, providing feedback, grading, and as a quality assurance device both internally and externally. Therefore, it is quite apparent that when teachers perform assessment, they have a transparent goal and believe that their assessments advance excellence in learners (Sanchez and Brisk, 2004; Murray, 2006).
In order to achieve effective teaching and learning, teachers need to develop tests and other strategies and administer them to learners at a particular time (Robinson-Karpius, 2006). Consequently, the results would be used for accountability and for determining the extent to which learners have achieved the expertise and whether the learning skills and outcomes have been achieved. Test marks usually provide the focus for improvement of learners’ learning and achievement. Information obtained from assessment may be used to motivate learners to learn more and teachers to teach with greater force. Hence, assessment functions best when its objectives and purposes are clear and when it is carefully outlined to attain those objectives and purposes (Sparks, 2005; Earl and Katz, 2007). In conducting classroom assessment, teachers need to ensure that the assessment process practised adheres to policy requirements. When conducting assessment, it remains crucial that learning outcomes and skills to be achieved are clear and concise (Shepard, 2000). Clarity in learning outcomes means that knowledge, skills and products, as Harlen (2007) posits, need to be stated in behavioural terms or in terms that denote something can be observed through the learners’ behaviour. Kizlik (2009) supported this view and argues that it is essential to be clear about what the behaviour defined by the learning outcomes actually means. Furthermore, Stiggins et al. (2004) firmly contended that classroom assessment should always begin with a transparent assertion of the anticipated learning outcomes and benefits of teaching. These scholars maintain that if one does not begin with the anticipated learning outcomes, one would not end up with valid and reliable assessments.
Once the learning outcomes are clarified, the subsequent critical step in establishing assessment measures is to decide on which types of questions or assessment tasks are to be included and what form of test is to be used. Teachers are expected to follow the basic principles and guidelines in constructing assessment tools. These involve adherence to sound testing processes, fair grading and accountable communication of assessment results (Oosterhof, 2001; Johnson and Johnson, 2002; Robinson-Karpius, 2006; Popham, 2008).

Issues of assessment quality

Classroom assessment literature has acknowledged that in order for it to be successfully implemented, three quality-aligned criteria should be observed as crucial. Consequently, classroom assessment needs to accommodate at least reliability and validity, which are both crucial for making decisions about the quality of evidence collected in the classroom, and fairness, which needs to be carefully acknowledged in the construction and use of assessment.

Validity

Validity in classroom assessment refers to the extent to which an assessment measures what it purports to measure (Maree, 2010). In simpler terms, it is the extent to which the evidence gathered genuinely reflects the characteristic a teacher needs to know about (Tierney, 2006). Additionally, in classroom assessment, three major types of validity should be acknowledged (Hamidi, 2010). The first is the content validity, which serves as agreement between curriculum objectives and the objectives beings assessed. This means that it is an aspect of construct validity that emphasizes evidence bearing on the appropriateness of the knowledge, skills and abilities measured by an assessment (Lambert and Lines, 2000). The second is consequential validity, which refers to the way in which the assessment is used to benefit teaching and learning processes and to benefit learners. According to Fulcher and Davidson (2007), assessment forms have sequential validity to the extent that they lead teachers to focussing on classroom activities which support learners’ learning and are responsive to individual needs. McNamara (2000) claimed that the consequences of an assessment are potentially important because the focus is on the influence it can have on variables and the state and district levels. The third type of validity is Ipsative validity (Hamidi, 2010), which is used when teachers take into account their learners’ performance that is formatively assessed during lessons, not using their past records or performance as a valid criterion to judge their learning abilities. To put it in another way: the learner evaluates his/her performance against his/her previous performances. This type of validity is regarded by various scholars (McNamara, 2000; Lambert and Lines 2000; Hamidi, 2010) as important because it places the learner at the centre of the assessment activity and provides diagnostic information on the progress of the individual. It is also called pupil-referenced validity.

Reliability

Reliability is defined as the extent to which assessment produces consistent results. An assessment is reliable when there is limited contrast in learners’ scores or in judges’ ratings across different occasions with different judges (Brindley, 2003). As a result, reliability needs to be based on performance instead of distinctive scores that have no preset criteria (Lambert and Lines, 2000). Other scholars call this dependability. By this they argue that classroom assessment is dependable when discourse (which means the extent to which a learner gets a question right or wrong, depending on the nature of the question itself), and fidelity (which refers to the way the evidence is or is not recorded) are present (Lambert and Lines, 2000:11). Three general sources of problems have been discovered with the reliability of classroom-based assessment: variation in scoring by people gathering the information, the instrumentation of data collection, and fluctuations in the learner (Brown, 2004). One practical way of improving reliability is that the assessors need to be trained or experienced so that they know exactly how to find the desired information (Brindley, 2003).

Fairness

The issue of fairness remains the most important challenge in assessment (Kunnan, 2005). According to Lynch, (2001) fairness refers to treating all individuals the same way and providing an equal opportunity to contribute to the research process, or in the case of assessment research, to demonstrate their ability. Cameron (2001) calls it equity in the design and use of assessment. Issues of assessment are at the heart of performance assessment validity. Consequently, all learners taking performance assessments need to have reasonable opportunities to manifest their know-how without difficulty. Fairness will also need to direct the results of assessment, that is, we need to analyze the uses to which our assessment procedures are being put, including the intended as well as unintended effects on the individuals being assessed (Lynch, 2001:232). In stressing the fairness of assessments or tests, Brown (2005) argues that teachers would generally like to ensure that their personal feelings do not interfere with fair assessment of the learners or bias the assignment of scores. Fairness or equity principles, as referred to by various scholars (Cameron, 2001; Brown, 2005; Kunnan, 2005), require learners to be given abundant opportunities to demonstrate what they can do and also that their learning be assessed through multiple methods. Cameron (2001) also stressed that fairness is critical in planning and designing assessment; that the content is closely examined to make sure that culturally unfamiliar concepts or pictures do not decrease children’s chances to demonstrate their learning (Lambert and Lines, 2000). As Hughes (2003) posits, fairness in assessment starts with fairness in the learning process. This scholar suggests that learners be given an opportunity to analyze outcomes and assessment standards at the beginning of the lesson, and a mid-year review conducted to evaluate learners’ standing and level of performance against particular standards. Fairness is not without disadvantages in authentic assessment. Four problems with fairness in assessment have been identified by Hamidi (2010). The first one is that the performance called for in authentic assessment forms is either oral or written. Secondly, the responses called for in performance assessment involve complex thinking skills. Finally, the use of authentic assessment might aggravate the difficulties with culturally unfamiliar content. According to Hamidi (2010), if the content related to a particular theme is unfamiliar, the learner may be unable to respond to any questions contained in the assessment.

Classroom assessment design

A fundamental aspect in classroom assessment is how to design accountable assessment which will provide good quality information about learners’ actual performance without distorting good teaching and learning practice (Farhady, 2003). As Bryant and Timmins (2002) argued, classroom assessment design requires teachers to have determined the appropriate objectives. They also need to take great care that the design does not affect or distort those objectives. As a result, assessment in the classroom should be carried out through six specific steps followed in order of function (Hamidi, 2010). These steps include planning, data collection, data organisation, data evaluating and final reporting.

Planning

Planning is an integral component of assessment. It determines why a teacher needs to conduct assessment, what the teacher aims to achieve, and who is to be assessed. It also specifies the entire assessment process. The aspect of time needs to be considered in dealing with assessment and the extent to which the teacher can assess the learners.
Teachers have meaningful goals for teaching and learning and clear purposes for assessment (Brindley, 2003). They assess to achieve a goal, to inspect the effectiveness of continuous teaching and learning, and to improve the learning process. One of the major purposes of assessment is to collect evidence of learning in order to adapt the materials and curricula. Teachers make decisions about learners’ current learning needs (Brown, 2008).
In classroom assessment teachers are expected to assess learners’ current abilities in a particular skill or task; for example, when the teacher assesses learners’ oral communication ability when they need to communicate orally. Teachers can also assess multiple abilities of learners simultaneously; for example, assess their learners’ vocabulary expansion, how they have progressed in reading comprehension, and also how they have observed rules in reading passages. Hence, it is essential that teachers should have an adequate perception of what they assess in their classrooms.
The issue of who to assess is of utmost importance as well. According to Alderson and Banerjee (2001), teachers need to be aware that learners have different levels of efficiency and skilfulness and different types of schematic and systemic knowledge. Teachers also need to take into consideration that some learners are more active than others; some are quick at learning and some are slow at it. Furthermore, they should anticipate that learners vary in how they learn by establishing different goals for learning (Penaflorida, 2002). Consequently, classroom assessment requires sensible prior judgment of the individuals before teachers assess their performance.
In classroom assessment, teachers require the use of a variety of instruments, formal or informal. Teachers need to keep records through portfolios, observations, tests, assignments, journals, quizzes, checklists, drawings, learner-teacher conference, peer editing, self-assessment, peer-assessment and narrative records.
On the question of when to assess, teachers must take note that assessment is interwoven with instruction. Whatever teachers assess, they are actually in the process of teaching. They assess when they need to make instructional decisions at the formative and summative levels, even if the decisions are small.

Collection

In order to make decisions about the effectiveness of classroom assessment in different aspects of pedagogy, we need to gather adequate and appropriate evidence (Inbar-Lourie and Schmidt, 2009). Previously, tests were the only means used as the end-of-term instruments to collect evidence about learners’ learning, progress and achievement. Assessment reform involves adopting diverse alternatives to classroom assessment. According to Suurtamm, Koch and Arden (2010), these alternatives are believed to reflect the real-world and authentic picture of the learning process. Record keeping and collection of work samples by both teachers and learners provide systematic information that enhances communication.

Organisation

The information gathered cannot by itself be evidence based on which decisions are made. It should be orderly and well structured. Orderly collections need to be carefully planned in the same way as instruction (Berry, 2006). Teachers need to structure the evidence they collect through various assessment types in order to make the evaluation and reporting processes possible and help the authorities to make easier decisions (Earl, 2003).

Selection

According to Hamidi (2010), even though structuring, organising and sequencing information are at the service of facilitating optimal processing, not all the gathered organised evidence is needed for immediate reporting. Teachers need to choose those chunks of assessment information that serve teachers’ and learners’ immediate needs and are of use for classroom activities.

Evaluation

For the purpose of reporting and communicating assessment information to stakeholders, judgements need to be made regarding the effectiveness of instruction and curriculum and how much the learners have been able to progress towards the goals they have set (Tierney, 2007). This evaluation process preferably takes place after each lesson or each instructional session until the end of the term. Evaluating learner progress at the end of major units can assist teachers to decide whether the learners are ready to proceed to the next unit and for planning the next unit (Gilmore, 2002). Assessment at the end of each unit of instruction can also provide information about how effective the unit was.

Reporting

The final phase in designing classroom assessment is to communicate assessment results to various stakeholders. Teachers are the main users of the evidence gathered. They use assessment to check the effectiveness of instruction and materials (Grosser and Lombard, 2005). They also make decisions about learners’ needs in the next term. Teachers acquire information on how well their learners reached stated goals and achieved outcomes. Thus, they evaluate learner progress or achievement. Moreover, teachers use the evidence gathered to do more careful planning for the next teaching cycle.
Involving learners in assessment provides them with clear feedback as to their progress and makes them more accountable for their own learning. Learners can reflect on what they have learned. They can take more active roles in making decisions about what their needs are for the next lessons. As Hamidi (2010) opined, communicating assessment results to learners can facilitate learning that is to follow because learners become aware of what learning outcomes are.
Parents also play a prominent role in classroom assessment. Assessment results communicated to parents provide them with concise feedback and explicit evidence of their children’s progress. Parents are then able to use the information to monitor and supervise their children’s work and assignments at home based on the suggestive guidance provided by the teacher. Parents can gather relevant evidence about their children’s learning in order to assist the teacher in internal decision-making (Hill and Tyson, 2009). Communicating assessment results to parents can create a communication line between teachers and parents and they both would be able to monitor learners’ learning more effectively through exchanging views.
Finally, school administrators need reports to make a variety of decisions about assessment-related issues at a global level. They are concerned with more convenient and careful scheduling and curriculum planning. They are expected to make sound decisions about different needs for different levels in line with assessment policy. This major responsibility constitutes administrative accountability.

Table of Contents
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
DEDICATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ABSTRACT
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER ONE: ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY
1.1 Introduction and background context
1.2 Statement of the problem
1.3 Rationale of the study
1.4 Research questions
1.5 Aims and objectives
1.6 Research methodology
1.7 Clarification of concepts
1.8 Outline of chapters
1.9 Synthesis
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Assessment policy environment (South African context)
2.3 Classroom assessment environment
2.4. The role of assessment in teaching and learning
2. 5 Challenges and issues with regard to assessment
2.6 Teachers’ assessment practices
2.7 Synthesis
CHAPTER THREE: CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3.1 Introduction
3.2 What is assessment?
3.3 Why do teachers conduct classroom assessment?
3.4 Issues of assessment quality
3.5 Classroom assessment design
3.6 Synthesis
CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Paradigmatic assumptions
4.3 Methodological paradigm
4.4 Data collection methods
4.5 Data analysis and interpretation
4.6 Quality criteria of the study
4.7 Ethical considerations
4.8 Synthesis
CHAPTER FIVE: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Case Study One: Mrs Bloom
5.3 Case Study Two: Mrs Naidoo
5.4 Case Study Three: Ms Motsepe
5.5 Case Study Four: Mrs Smith
5.6 Assessment narrative: teachers’ challenges with assessment
5.7 Synthesis
CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Findings about teachers’ classroom assessment challenges
6.3 New insights into teachers’ challenges on classroom assessment
6.4 Relating teachers’ challenges to existing literature
6.5 Synthesis
CHAPTER SEVEN: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Summary of key findings
7.3 Significance of the findings and contribution of new knowledge
7.4 Suggestions for further research
7.5 Recommendations
7.6 Synthesis
BIBLIOGRAPHY
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT