Formative assessment refers to a wide variety of methods that teachers use to conduct in-process evaluations of student comprehension, learning needs, and academic progress during a lesson, unit, or course. Formative assessments help teachers identify concepts that students are struggling to understand, skills they are having difficulty acquiring, or learning standards they have not yet achieved so that adjustments can be made to lessons, instructional techniques, and academic support.
The general goal of formative
assessment is to collect detailed information that can be used to improve
instruction and student learning while it’s happening. What makes an assessment
“formative” is not the design of a test, technique, or self-evaluation, per se,
but the way it is used—i.e., to inform in-process teaching and learning
modifications.
Formative assessments are commonly
contrasted with summative assessments, which
are used to evaluate student learning progress and achievement at the
conclusion of a specific instructional period—usually at the end of a project,
unit, course, semester, program, or school year. In other words, formative
assessments are for learning,
while summative assessments are of learning.
Or as assessment expert Paul Black put it, “When the cook tastes the soup,
that’s formative assessment. When the customer tastes the soup, that’s
summative assessment.” It should be noted, however, that the distinction
between formative and summative is often fuzzy in practice, and
educators may hold divergent interpretations of and opinions on the subject.
Many educators and experts believe
that formative assessment is an integral part of effective teaching. In
contrast with most summative assessments, which are deliberately set apart from
instruction, formative assessments are integrated into the teaching and
learning process. For example, a formative-assessment technique could be as
simple as a teacher asking students to raise their hands if they feel they have
understood a newly introduced concept, or it could be as sophisticated as
having students complete a self-assessment of their own writing (typically
using a rubricoutlining
the criteria) that the teacher then reviews and comments on. While formative
assessments help teachers identify learning needs and problems, in many cases
the assessments also help students develop a stronger understanding of their
own academic strengths and weaknesses. When students know what they do well and
what they need to work harder on, it can help them take greater responsibility
over their own learning and academic progress.
While the same assessment technique
or process could, in theory, be used for either formative or summative
purposes, many summative assessments are unsuitable for formative purposes
because they do not provide useful feedback. For example,standardized-test scores
may not be available to teachers for months after their students take the test
(so the results cannot be used to modify lessons or teaching and better prepare
students), or the assessments may not be specific or fine-grained enough to
give teachers and students the detailed information they need to improve.
The following are a few
representative examples of formative assessments:
·
Questions
that teachers pose to individual students and groups of students during the
learning process to determine what specific concepts or skills they may be
having trouble with. A wide variety of intentional questioning strategies may
be employed, such as phrasing questions in specific ways to elicit more useful
responses.
·
Specific,
detailed, and constructive feedback that teachers provide on student work, such
as journal entries, essays, worksheets, research papers, projects, ungraded
quizzes, lab results, or works of art, design, and performance. The feedback
may be used to revise or improve a work product, for example.
·
“Exit
slips” or “exit tickets” that quickly collect student responses to a teacher’s
questions at the end of a lesson or class period. Based on what the responses
indicate, the teacher can then modify the next lesson to address concepts that
students have failed to comprehend or skills they may be struggling with.
“Admit slips” are a similar strategy used at the beginning of a class or lesson
to determine what students have retained from previous learning experiences.
·
Self-assessments
that ask students to think about their own learning process, to reflect on what
they do well or struggle with, and to articulate what they have learned or
still need to learn to meet course expectations or learning standards.
·
Peer
assessments that allow students to use one another as learning resources. For
example, “workshopping” a piece of writing with classmates is one common form
of peer assessment, particularly if students follow a rubric or guidelines
provided by a teacher.
In addition to the reasons addressed
above, educators may also use formative assessment to:
·
Refocus
students on the learning process and its intrinsic value, rather than on grades
or extrinsic rewards.
·
Encourage
students to build on their strengths rather than fixate or dwell on their
deficits. (For a related discussion, see growth mindset.)
·
Help
students become more aware of their learning needs, strengths, and interests so
they can take greater responsibility over their own educational growth. For
example, students may learn how to self-assess their own progress and
self-regulate their behaviors.
·
Give
students more detailed, precise, and useful information. Because grades and
test scores only provide a general impression of academic achievement, usually
at the completion of an instructional period, formative feedback can help to
clarify and calibrate learning expectations for both students and parents.
Students gain a clearer understanding of what is expected of them, and parents
have more detailed information they can use to more effectively support their
child’s education.
·
Raise
or accelerate the educational
achievement of all students, while also reducing learning gaps and achievement gaps.
Reform
While the formative-assessment
concept has only existed since the 1960s, educators have arguably been using
“formative assessments” in various forms since the invention of teaching. As an
intentional school-improvement strategy, however, formative assessment has
received growing attention from educators and researchers in recent decades. In
fact, it is now widely considered to be one of the more effective instructional
strategies used by teachers, and there is a growing body of literature and
academic research on the topic.
Schools are now more likely to
encourage or require teachers to use formative-assessment strategies in the
classroom, and there are a growing number ofprofessional-development
opportunities available to
educators on the subject. Formative assessments are also integral components of personalized learning and other educational strategies designed to tailor lessons and
instruction to the distinct learning needs and interests of individual
students.
Debate
While there is relatively little
disagreement in the education community about the utility of formative
assessment, debates or disagreements may stem from differing interpretations of
the term. For example, some educators believe the term is loosely applied to
forms of assessment that are not “truly” formative, while others believe that
formative assessment is rarely used appropriately or effectively in the
classroom.
Another common debate is whether
formative assessments can or should be graded. Many educators contend that
formative assessments can only be considered truly formative when they are
ungraded and used exclusively to improve student learning. If grades are
assigned to a quiz, test, project, or other work product, the reasoning goes,
they become de facto summative assessments—i.e., the act of assigning a grade
turns the assessment into a performance evaluation that is documented in a
student’s academic record, as opposed to a diagnostic strategy used to improve
student understanding and preparation before they are given a graded test or
assignment.
Some educators also make a
distinction between “pure” formative assessments—those that are used on a daily
basis by teachers while they are instructing students—and “interim” or
“benchmark” assessments, which are typically periodic or quarterly assessments
used to determine where students are in their learning progress or whether they
are on track to meeting expected learning standards. While some educators may
argue that any assessment method that is used diagnostically could be
considered formative, including interim assessments, others contend that these
two forms of assessment should remain distinct, given that different
strategies, techniques, and professional development may be required.
Some proponents of formative
assessment also suspect that testing companies mislabel and market some interim
standardized tests as “formative” to capitalize on and profit from the
popularity of the idea. Some observers express skepticism that commercial or
prepackaged products can be authentically formative, arguing that formative
assessment is a sophisticated instructional technique, and to do it well
requires both a first-hand understanding of the students being assessed and
sufficient training and professional development.
No comments:
Post a Comment