 |
| Gene M. Kerns, Ed.D. |
|
Ask a group of educators to brainstorm words associated with "assessment," and something interesting, yet quite predictable, will happen. Because of the many pressures they face, the words they come up with will most frequently be associated high-stakes, accountability-related, summative assessment. They will far less frequently mention more informal, formative assessments.
The effect of this perspective on student performance is profound. Stiggins states, "Because that standardized testing light has been so brilliant in our eyes, we haven't seen past it to another application of assessment in schools that promises even greater impact on student learning. This is the classroom level of assessment." It is this other application of assessment—formative classroom assessment—-that is at the center of the 2Know! Toolbar, which now works on NEO 2.
We choose to refer to this type of assessment as "informative" because it informs the learning process. Teachers are informed about how their students are doing, and learners can even get feedback that they can use on their own to regulate and adjust their learning. Researchers like Rick Stiggins and Dylan Wiliam have documented dozens of strategies. We will focus on one of the simplest. Let's look at the use of "hinge-point questions" with the 2Know! Toolbar and NEO 2.
While teachers continually present portions of content and then "check for understanding," Leahy, Lyon, Thompson, and Wiliam (2005) make that cycle more thoughtful by specifically naming and discussing the lesson's "hingepoint" – the point in the lesson when, after covering new content, you check for understanding. It is called a hingepoint, because "the lesson can go in different directions depending on student responses."
At a lesson's hinge-point, the 2Know! Toolbar is invaluable. Without sacrificing much instructional time, teachers are trying to decide which way the "hinge" is going to turn. Will their check for understanding indicate that they can move on to the next piece of to content or lesson phase (e.g. let students work independently)? Or will re-teaching be in order? Or will results be mixed? With a single click to indicate question type, the 2Know! Toolbar is ready to accept and graph information for teachers.
If a high percentage of students answer a hinge-point question correctly, the teacher clearly can move on. If less than 50% answer correctly, re-teaching is clearly needed. If the results are inbetween, the path may be less clear, and the information from the Toolbar is even more valuable.
Fogarty and Kerns (2009) note that "the most difficult turn of the hinge to manage is when student responses are mixed. " They note, however, that "at this point, the teacher has a unique opportunity to involve students in peer instruction."
You see, if more than 50% of the students answer correctly but overall success rate is still not high enough to move ahead (e.g. 90% of better), this is a great time for peer instruction. Let the students discuss their answers with one another.
Discussing this peer teaching opportunity, Fogarty and Kerns (2009) note the following advantage:
When peer instruction is used in this informed manner, everyone benefits. The students who grasp the content at the hinge point will gain deeper understanding through explaining the content in their own words to their peers. Their peers who were struggling at the hinge point will be brought up to speed. Additionally, many teachers report that in these instances, peer instruction is far superior to anything they might have offered in re-teaching because, when teacher their peers, students translate the content into more kid-friendly terms.
This is just one example of how formative assessment strategies "inform" teachers at key instructional moments and how these strategies are more easily implemented with NEO 2 and the 2Know! Toolbar. When we're informed, our practice becomes more precise and efficient, and student performance improves. Black and Wiliam (1998) found that "students taught by teachers who integrated assessment with instruction could achieve in six or seven months what would otherwise take a year" because each decision these teachers made was informed.
References
Black, P., and D. Wiliam. 1998. Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-144, 144-148.
Fogarty, R. and Kerns, G. (2009 – in press) Informative Assessment: When It's Not About a Grade. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Leahy, S., C. Lyon, M. Thompson, and D. Wiliam. 2005. Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by Day. Educational Leadership 63(3) 18-24. Note: Renaissance Learning offers onsite "Informative Assessment" training as well as a NEO2/"Informative Assessment" hardware and training bundled package.
|
