World Bank 3. Harry: I think your principles are helpful if you want to provide a step-by-step guide for how to implement formative assessment. I’ll have to consider whether I need to restructure the book! 51 0 obj
The principles are hierarchical: successfully showing students what’s expected relies on having determined exactly what they need to know and do; providing feedback which causes improvement depends on a good understanding of what students have understood.
I’m not yet sure how to incorporate this within the guide, but formative assessment will achieve little without it. Formative assessment needs to be adapted to suit the demands of a knowledge-rich curriculum. Assuming you accept the premise that in training novice teachers we want to reduce cognitive load as much as possible when introducing new ideas then the 5 point framework helps to do that.
AMLE Assessment Resources Downloadable PDF version of this article Effective Classroom Assessment: Linking Assessment with Instruction by Catherine Garrison, Dennis Chandler, and Michael Ehringhaus. In the guide, I intend to exemplify each principle through detailed discussion of one technique. Why (or why not)? Still, the first (and most important) point: “1.Determine exactly what students need to know and be able to do: setting clear learning objectives” is a place for discussion. Most of what I’ve learned about conveying formative assessment to others has been through training new or early-career teachers, so it makes sense that this framework is more suitable for novices. Strategic Questioning. Our models are different because they serve different purposes. This looks very different from the canonical formulation of formative assessment as five strategies: My view is that a hierarchical formulation sets out priorities more helpfully, and where the bulk of responsibility lies – with the teacher – more clearly. Thanks very much for the comment, which I’ve spent a good deal of time thinking over. Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Rowling by Anders Norén. Alexandria, VA 22311-1714. Abundant scope remains for peer and self assessment once students know what they’re expected to do and have sufficient guidance to succeed. (There’s a clear debt here to the careful sequencing of teacher improvement in leverage coaching). I like the idea of an editable wiki and adding things in – but I also feel there’s merit in reducing cognitive load even further by inviting teachers to focus on one point at a time, and in order…
Putting Students at the Center: Student Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment, Chapter 5. I also agree that differentiated objectives are important, within the same overall goals: this is what I’ve always used in formulating my own objectives and what I advocate in training teachers. Peer instruction has a wealth of evidence behind it at tertiary level and surprise surprise the in class workflow fits virtually exactly to aspects of the five point structure with virtually no alterations. * I’ve since critiqued David’s arguments in more depth here. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from ASCD. ASCD respects intellectual property rights and adheres to the laws governing them. Getting Themselves to the Learning Target: Developing Strong Goal-Setters and Goal-Getters, Chapter 6.
Leveling the Playing Field: Sharing the Whole Learning Target; …