If an education means classroom experiences should provide students with the necessary tools they will need to one day enter the global economy, then assessment needs to be, and should be, meaningful to the students. Jacobs (2010) noted that our global economy was changing exponentially and that there is uncertainty as to whether classroom experiences and curriculum are preparing students for the future. If the business of teaching is focused on a curriculum, rooted in an established antiquated system, and our provincial test scores are a driving force in the teaching community, then it is quite possible we are failing our students. "Our responsibility [as educators] is to prepare the learners in our care for their world and their future. There is a rising concern about the 21st century skills and tools for our learners... almost 10 percent of the 21st century has already passed" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 2). Assessment needs to take this into consideration if our students, the learners, are to become critical consumers and productive members of a global economy. Assessment therefore needs to be rethought and reexamined. Assessment needs to "directly engage learners with 21st century products and proficiencies" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 5).
Wiggins and McTighe (2007) ask teachers to start with the end in mind. What is it really that we want our students to know, think and do? Teachers need to be deliberate in their planning and assessing. "Our challenge is to match the needs of our learners to a world that is changing with great rapidity. To meet this challenge, we need to become strategic learners ourselves by deliberately expanding our perspectives and updating our approaches" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 7). Clear standards are important and Jacobs (2010) argues teachers need latitude to ensure all learners' needs are met thus promoting standards and not standardization. Teaching to the test does not count; it has no applicable value in the real world for our students. For our students to be prepared citizens of the future, the teaching and learning needs to be relevant to our unknown future. Therefore, assessment must be a way, or an opportunity, to show growth in a positive and deep way, an authentic way.
Jacobs (2010) notes that there are many myths that "operate on beliefs and values... in our organizations and... in curriculum and instruction practice" (p. 14). "The good old days are still good enough" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 15) is one myth that needs to be considered. Holding on to the familiar may feel comfortable to some people but Jacobs (2010) argues that it is really insecurity from not growing or changing. We do a great disservice to our students, ourselves, and essentially the world, when we allow myths to create obstacles for student success. Genuine progress needs to happen in these times of exponential change; we need to be advocates for our students and support them by engaging them to think critically. Another myth is that "we're better off if we all think alike-and not too much" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 15). Teachers need to "openly engage in discussion and debate about what should matter in the subject matter" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 16). There are attitudes at play in our education system and what should be important is the choices available to the learner. "Too much creativity is dangerous-and the arts are frills" (Jacobs, 2010, p. 17) is another myth that needs be to considered. Jacobs offers the work of Daniel H. Pink (2006) for consideration. In A Whole New Mind, Pink (2006) argues that change is upon us and the future depends on right-brained thinkers or thinking. "The future belongs to a very different kind of person with a very different kind of mind-creators and empathizers, pattern recognizers, and meaning makers" (Pink, 2006, p. 1). "The left hemisphere [of the brain] is sequential, logical, and analytical. The right hemisphere [of the brain] is nonlinear, intuitive, and holistic." (Pink, 2006, p. 3). We need to value and foster creative thinking in our students. "An intellect is a creative thinker and an idea shaper" (Jacobs, 2010, p.17). Thus, there needs to be a place for creativity and the arts.
What are we, the teachers, part of this business of educating, to do about our assessment dilemma? After all, "when all is said and done, school leaders are the ones who are accountable for the work... [But] they are not always sure what "being accountable" means" (Earl & Katz, 2006, p. 9). Teachers, the student advocates, can feel constrained by the accountability factor. It puts them in a position where they may have to respond to curriculum requirements that they do not see as fitting with what they professionally see in their classroom and school community. Earl and Katz (2006) note that "in theory, accountability sounds wonderful. In practice, [however] it raises a host of thorny issues, not the least of which is a philosophical one-What does accountability mean?" (p. 9). Accountability is far more than a student report card; "it is a moral and professional responsibility to be knowledgeable and fair in teaching and in interactions with students and their parents" (Earl & Katz, 2006, p. 10). When student learning is at the heart of assessment then it can be authentic. "When students are engaged and involved in their learning, they learn more. When they see why they are doing something, they are more likely to participate. Students are also the most important points of connection between home and school. When students understand the school's priorities, there is more chance the parents will hear about them as well" (Earl & Katz, 2006, p. 97).
Essentially, teachers need to become assessment literate to become true student advocates. Earl and Katz (2006) believe that when the teaching community has a shared understanding about what assessment is then they can communicate about student learning without doubt; the conversation about assessment becomes transparent within the community. It is also important to note that "teachers can influence the nature of a new professionalism in education by investing in their own learning and in the learning of others" (Earl & Katz, 2006, p. 98). "Conversations that are challenging, informative and productive, even when they are often emotional and unsettling" (Earl & Katz, 2006, p. 98), will help change program and practices so that the needs of students are being met and that they are being prepared for a future world that is unknown and rapidly changing. What surfaces in Earl and Katz's (2006) work is that change is beginning to happen, and needs to continue to happen, around accountability through professional judgment. Returning control to classroom educators and promoting the use of evidence, assessment, and research to authenticate educational decisions being made for our students, will make educators informed professionals, knowledge rich, that can professionally judge the needs of students and help them achieve success.
"Teachers cannot run up and down the halls of their buildings with notepads gathering information about curriculum and assessment. They cannot call every teacher each student has had for the past few years… We need a 21st century approach" (Jacobs, 1997, p. 5). Teachers need to plan appropriately. They need to plan with the end in mind and once planned the "assessment [piece] should be edited, audited, and revised to reflect what we know about the learners in our care" (Jacobs, 1997, p. 36). Essentially, curriculum and assessment need to be integrated. This means that teachers need to be skilled at matching or guiding learners towards the right forms of assessment so that they have opportunities to develop habits of mind. This is the metacognition we want students to experience. We want students to learn to think about an answer when one is not readily available. We want them to learn to construct meaning and to self assess.
When teachers interact with students and provide good feedback about their work, students achieve more. Good feedback addresses "both cognitive and motivational factors at the same time" (Brookhart, 2008, p. 2). Feedback is a major part of classroom assessment. It is an opportunity for students to see constructive criticism positively and recognize that learning does require practice (Brookhart, 2008). Brookhart (2008) contends that it would be unfair for teachers to not provide opportunity to use the feedback to improve student learning and achievement and would even be worse to use the constructive criticism against them in final grading and evaluation. Effective feedback should raise standards in the classroom and provide opportunity. "The nature of feedback and the context in which it is given matter a great deal" (Brookhart, 2008, p. 2). The type of feedback a teacher uses when assessing is extremely important. The timing of the feedback must be considered as well the amount of feedback that will be given. The mode of feedback should lend itself to the assignments and the ability of the student to receive it. Brookhart's (2008) work references the work of Hattie and Timperley (2007) when arguing the focus of effective feedback; feedback should be about the task, the processing of the task, self-regulation and the self as a person. The objective should be that effective feedback give students information that they can use and apply. Differentiation of feedback must then be accounted for. Different types of learners will benefit from different feedback and if feedback is the conduit to help students construct meaning and achieve success, it must be differentiated.
