In Chapter 5 of Reading Diagnosis and Improvement (Opitz, 2011), several types of informal assessments are detailed and this was a great refresher for me. In my classroom, some of our instruction is in the form of Discrete Trials which produces mounds of raw data on IEP goals and objectives. While this kind of instruction is effective for repeated and intensive skill practice, it does not help to establish connections with content or strategies, so I limit this instruction to a portion of the day and compare the data compiled with checklists and observations from other instructional segments. The table on p. 63 was a great reminder of the different types of informal assessment and their best suited purpose.
Some assessments that I need to implement more often are anecdotal records and rubrics. I could develop a rubric that included educational and behavioral objectives. Most of the assessments that we use are informal so I found the article Making the Most of Assessments to Inform Instruction (Risko & Walker-Dalhouse, 2011) very informative. If designed and implemented correctly, this is the most telling and informative kind of assessment for evaluating instruction. Because classroom assessments have traditionally been modeled after school-wide benchmark tests they do not illustrate the students' progress or potential; these kinds of assessments do not really measure the effectiveness of day to day instruction. I love that the article stated that "there is no research to suggest they have direct educational benefits for students." That statement completely validated my feelings of such assessments!
The idea of having students collaborate on formative assessments is wonderful. If they're being evaluated on the content, then they should be involved in the process. This would help them take ownership and adjust their approach to learning as needed.
To me, designing multi modal assessments could be quite daunting, but if you take the author's advice and start a little at a time, perhaps adding one assessment every quarter, it would not be as overwhelming. I use computer and technology based assessments in my classroom; we recently received an Ipad as a donation and it helps me take data as well. These kinds of assessments have helped me to support my knowledge of students' progress with multiple sources of data.
As far as standardized assessments go, I have not had to give the CRCT in three years since I have K-2 in my classroom. Therefore, my students on Gen Ed assessments have completed benchmarks and checkpoints. Although I have not heard of all of the tests mentioned in the book, the descriptions of the different types and the definitions of associated terms helped to remind me of how much work goes into creating and implementing the tests.
No comments:
Post a Comment