Assign Teachers According To Different Features Of The School
By: Arthur Hall
Submitted: 2011-09-23 12:10:32 | Word Count: 627
Teachers were matched in pairs according to school characteristics, and one member of each pair was then randomly assigned to a control group, which would teach FAST as they normally did, while the other was assigned to an experimental group, which would implement the curriculum-embedded assessments. The experimental group teachers attended a 5-day workshop, where they were trained to implement the curriculum-embedded assessments following the interpretive framework for formative assessment. Multiple measures of student learning were administered to all students of teachers in both the control and experimental groups. Pretests consisted of a multiple-choice achievement test and a science motivation questionnaire. Posttests included the achievement test and the motivation questionnaire, as well as a performance assessment, a predict-observe-explain assessment, and an open-ended question assessment.
Results of the study indicated that the teachers and their contexts were extremely influential on students' motivation, achievement, and conceptual change; teacher effects overshadowed the treatment effect. Possible interpretations suggest that some experienced teachers implemented their own informal formative assessment strategies regardless of the treatment group they belonged to; some experimental teachers, despite the 5-day workshop, could not implement the curriculum-embedded assessments as intended.
Although benchmarking assessment systems show promising student learning results, the quality of assessment systems is uneven. Stem and Ahlgren (2002) analyzed assessments provided in middle school curriculum materials. The study included only comprehensive middle school science programs that is those that covered 3 years of instruction and were in wide use by school districts and states. Two two-member teams independently analyzed the curriculum materials and accompanying assessments. With respect to curriculum-embedded assessments, the analysis revealed that all materials received poor scores in terms of providing guidance for teachers to use students' responses to modify instruction. Those curriculum-embedded assessments that were aligned with the curriculum materials usually focused on terms and definitions that could be easily copied from the text.
Few questions were included that were able to sufficiently elicit students' understanding, and even when those questions were included, the materials failed to provide interpretive frameworks for the teachers to interpret students' responses.
[ advertisement ]
The use of benchmarking assessment is clearly not a silver bullet. Effects are highly dependent on a number of factors. Bangert Drowns et al. (1991) found in a meta-analysis of 58 experiments that while periodic feedback generally improved student performance, the type of feedback students received had the largest effect. Feedback that helped students to correct errors and reflect on the original learning goals had the greatest positive impact. Comments unique to a particular student's performance relative to an absolute standard appear to motivate students to achieve at higher levels, while responses that include solely grades or praise (or no feedback at all) seem to have little effect on student achievement, and some evidence would indicate a small negative effect from these types of feedback (Butler, 1987, 1988). In a meta-analysis of 21 studies, teachers who had specific instructional processes to follow based on test outcomes and who had received explicit directions about how to share information with students based on the data from the assessments demonstrated significantly higher growth in student achievement than those teachers who used their own judgment about how to respond to the data (Fuchs and Fuchs, 1986).
Teachers may need clear guidance about how to use evidence from benchmarking systems, but there is no "teacher proof" curriculum. Well-designed benchmarking systems are closely integrated with instruction and nray lighten its immense cognitive load. But they require informed, professional teachers who make key decisions to structure and support student learning. For benchmarking assessment systems to support quality instruction and improvements in student learning, teachers must understand the desired stages of progression for students of varying ages and skill levels in the particular discipline being taught.
