Overview
Biography
Publications
Conferences and Workshops
Links
Ask the Grade Doctor
Contact Me
Links
  

 
Ask The Grade Doctor

Full Question Detail

Return to All Questions

 : :

Question

Across the subject areas, many of us as secondary teachers are learning a great deal about connecting evaluative best practice with our teaching, whatever the subject area, and are making real progress with the connections between teaching and assessment for learning. Where this sometimes seems to break down, however, has to do with summative instruments. In other words, despite all of the new stuff people are embedding in terms of assessment of, and and for, when they get to final summative unit tests, exams, etc., we seem to sometimes return to a '1954 - style' instrument that does not reflect our Differentiated Instruction - influenced approach in every aspect of the teaching process before that point. Here's my question: is it appropriate to design summative instruments with 'tiered choice options' (e.g. "Choose two questions from the Level One section, two questions from the Level Two section..." etc.), or is that 'cheating'? I see no reason why what we're learning about effective assessment has to 'stop' at the summative stage, and return to older, less flexible instrument that do not reflect current best practice. Any help you can give would be appreciated.

2011-11-04
Michael Black
 

The
Grade
Doctor
says:

I agree with you that we should not return to "older, less flexible instrument(s)" for summative
assessment. To quote my friend and colleague Damian Cooper, summative assessment
should provide opportunities to "write, do and say." Sometimes then differentiation could
occur by students having choice in doing one or two of 'write, do and say.'

 

michael black's
Comment

2012-01-09

Thank you - it seems that many of us (including those of you who are much better versed in
the literature) have a similar view.


The Grade Doctor's
Comment

2012-01-09

Keep up the good work!

 

Top