Module 1: Exploring Assessment

One of the first things I learned in my teacher prep program about actually running a classroom was the difference between formative and summative assessments. It was drilled into my mind that formative assessments happened during instruction and that summative assessments happened after instruction. At the time, I didn't realize why it mattered that those were two different things. Now I understand that the reason their differences are important lies more in the reason the assessment is being given than at the time it is being given.

As a teacher, it feels like the mandated summative assessments are more of a hindrance than a help, especially during the spring semester. My instruction and time spent working on the actual curriculum gets interrupted by ACTs, Iowa Assessments, and Map testing. The state, nation, district, and colleges might all look at the data from these and use them to compare my students to others, but I don't use them in a way that improves my classroom instruction or the students' understanding of Algebra 2 material. My own summative assessments, the end-of-unit tests created at the district level, help to inform me of changes that need to be made in the future, students that need additional instruction, and comparisons to my colleagues, but they still feel too frequent and time-consuming.

Examining the balance between summative and formative assessments has helped to put these into perspective. ACTs and Iowa Assessments are given once a year each, MAP testing happens three times a year, and end-of-unit tests happen three times per semester. That adds up to 13 of these summative assessments, not including re-take opportunities. However, I could easily give 13 formative assessments in a single week.

An example of a formative assessment question and a summative assessment question are both shown below.

In-Class Practice Problem - Formative

Test Question - Summative

The difference is not in the problem. They are both testing knowledge of the same standard (and are actually the same problem with one minor change). The difference is in the use of the problem.

When students complete problems on their whiteboards, they get immediate feedback from me as well as their peers. Techniques I've learned through Schools for Rigor have helped this be more useful to the students. I give students success criteria, and we work through it to make sure everyone agrees what it means to be successful. Then I ask students to monitor their own work for the criteria, and once they feel more comfortable using it, they monitor their partner's work. Meanwhile, I am able to monitor through observation and give feedback by using "stoplight cups" that correspond to whether a student is at "Not Meeting," "Progressing Toward," or "At Target." Thanks to the opportunity for practice and immediate feedback, students are able to detect and fix errors. By checking the work of their peers, they get better at looking for mistakes in their own work.

The test question, on the other hand, is meant primarily to check a student's understanding and assign a grade. Students will get feedback in the form of an SRG grade eventually, but not in a way that allows for revision of understanding.

Garrison and Ehringhaus describe five strategies that could aid in formative assessments. Four of them (criteria and goal setting, observations, questioning, and self and peer assessment) have been covered extensively in my Schools for Rigor Training. The remaining strategy is one that I am very interested in pursuing - student record keeping.

The article suggests having students track their learning. In the past, I have shown students a collection of all the new pieces of information they have learned, and they are astonished to see such a vast compilation of knowledge. If they had been tracking it themselves, they would have seen the "small wins" they've been making along the way, even if they have been struggling.

I plan to ask students to track their progress through the last unit of the year. Every exit ticket, whiteboard problem, and partner practice problem give students a sense of exactly where they are and what they still need to work on.