Introduction
This blog is number one in a three-part series looking at some of the challenges that can work against assessment for learning.
For each one, I’ll outline what the challenge is, how it can get in the way of assessment for learning, and what we can do to solve the problem.
Problem One: The Student-Teacher Ratio
In every class, learners outnumber the teacher.
Only in a tutorial setting is there the possibility of one teacher and one learner.
It is for this reason, among others, that teaching is not tutoring and vice versa.
The majority of classes we teach are likely to contain, roughly, between sixteen and thirty-five learners.
In smaller schools you might encounter smaller classes.
So too in GCSE and A Level teaching of optional subjects.
And also in secondary schools were learners are set according to ability (the so-called ‘bottom’ sets can sometimes be made up of only a small number of learners).
Nonetheless, these cases represent the minority.
As such, the student-teacher ratio is generally weighted heavily against us.
This means we have to find ways of communicating with all learners that remain practicable.
It is impossible to explain every task individually to every learner.
Instead, we ensure a quiet atmosphere so we (one) can speak to the group (many).
With most learners working, as a result of the instructions received, we have time to focus our attention on those who are most in need of support.
The teacher’s relationship with their learners is different from a learner’s relationship to their teacher.
Let us imagine a class of thirty-three learners.
The following relationships exist:
- 33 individual learner-teacher relationships in which the learner conceives of themselves in relation to their teacher.
- 1 teacher-learner relationship in which the teacher conceives of themselves in relation to the class as a whole.
- 33 teacher-learner relationships in which the teacher conceives of themselves in relation to each individual learner.
It is the teacher’s job to ensure that all learners are learning.
They cannot help but prioritise their relationship to the whole class.
If they subordinate this to individual relationships then they cannot know that the whole class is learning.
They must deal with the whole-class relationship first. Individual relationships must come second.
If they do not take this approach then they are not fulfilling their role; they are not ensuring all the learners in front of them are learning.
It goes without saying that teachers will weave their individual relationships into their whole-class teaching.
However, the premise remains that the teacher will by necessity have to attend to the whole-class relationship first.
The prioritisation of this, brought about by the practical demands of the classroom, can make it difficult for the teacher to spend time thinking about learners as individuals.
It is easier in a primary school, where we spend all our time with a class.
In a secondary school, we may see as many as fifteen different classes in a week, making life trickier.
The tendency to become embroiled in the whole-class nature of teaching may lead, in part, to the giving out of grades rather than feedback and the ranking of learners by a relative measure of ability (relative, that is, to other members of the class).
An imaginary teacher can help us understand the situation.
Mr Thompson teaches in a secondary school. He is a geography specialist.
The school makes geography compulsory in years 7, 8 and 9. It is optional at GCSE and is consistently popular.
- Mr Thompson has two year 7 classes who he sees twice a week.
- He also has a year 8 class and a year 9 class, both of which he also sees twice.
- He teaches two year 10 classes, each for three periods a week.
- He also has two year 11 classes, one of which he teaches on his own, the other of which he shares with a colleague. This gives him four lessons of year 11 teaching.
- He has one year 12 class and one year 13 class. He shares both of these and teaches each one for three lessons.
The school has 50 minute lessons, six of which are taught every day.
Mr Thompson’s timetable looks like this:
- Year 7 – four lessons
- Year 8 – two lessons
- Year 9 – two lessons
- Year 10 – six lessons
- Year 11 – four lessons
- Year 12 – three lessons
- Year 13 – three lessons
In total, he teaches 24 lessons out of a possible 30.
He therefore has six free periods a week (for which he is forever grateful!).
Let us say that, on average, Mr Thompson’s classes each contain twenty-two learners.
This accounts for the fewer number of pupils in his sixth-form classes compared to those in his lower-school classes.
He teaches ten classes.
That means he has 220 learners, all of whom he must assess at regular intervals.
It is quite understandable to jump from this to the contention that assessment ought to consist of a grade and perhaps a brief comment.
220 is a lot of learners.
Ten classes is a lot of classes.
Mr Thompson does not have the energy or the time to attend to every one of his learners as individuals at all times.
It is almost inevitable that he will get caught up in the whole-class relationship and will view his learners’ books in a similar vein.
This is not his fault.
As we have noted, the structure of his job militates against him using assessment for learning when marking learners’ work.
It doesn’t make it impossible. Just harder.
The key for Mr Thompson is unlocking ways in which he can give quality feedback to such a large number of learners.
He must temper his whole-class outlook, marrying it up with a focus on the individual when the time is right.
It is much easier to do this if you have effective AFL tools on hand.
You can find dozens in my Assessment for Learning Knowledge Base, as well as in my free resources.
Solutions to the Problem of the Student-Teacher Ratio
- There are a lot of learners. This means there are a lot of books to mark. It would be easier to give grades than formative feedback.
You can use the ready-made strengths and targets in my AFL Knowledge Base.
Sections of learner work can be marked through peer- and self-assessment.
You can then focus on marking major pieces of work that encompass the key learning pupils have done over the course of a few weeks.
This leads to less frequent but more effective marking.
A target sheet in the front of learners’ books allows you and your learners to keep track of their targets.
Learners can indicate where there is evidence that they have met their targets.
This saves you time when checking – and lets you quickly see what a learner’s most recent target was and whether they’ve achieved it.
- There are a lot of learners and it is hard to give each of them the time I would like.
We have to be realistic here.
It is not possible to teach large numbers and to provide individual tutoring to all learners.
Through assessment for learning you can come close to achieving the same effect.
The formative feedback you provide will be personalised.
You will be able to elicit information on where your learners are at through the use of whole-class feedback techniques, by circulating, and by planning activities with feedback elicitation in mind.
You can use this to adapt teaching and to inform future planning.
You will be able to open up the assessment process for all learners by sharing success criteria and through the use of peer- and self-assessment.
And you will be able to give many learners targeted support during lessons and through your written feedback.
And if we can do that, which is definitely achievable, we’re going to create great outcomes.
Problem Two: Learner Peer Groups
Learners conceive of themselves in relation to their peers.
The understanding of oneself in relation to others is a psychological commonality.
Many people (most, perhaps) would agree that their self is, at least in part, predicated on identifications with and oppositions to others.
For example: Person A may be a member of a cricket club and strongly opposed to nuclear energy.
Their sense of self therefore contains an identification with the cricket club (and the other members of the club) and an opposition to those who are in favour of nuclear energy (as well as an identification with those who are against it).
Young people face a transitional period in which they are finding their place in the world.
For teenagers, this can involve the rejection of some of the norms and values of their family and a greater focus on peer-group relationships.
If this is the case, it is likely that peer groups will reinforce their own norms and values, with these being taken on by the members.
There are two ways in which this can militate against assessment for learning.
First, if a group of learners see learning as something negative, they will be less likely to respond to learning-focussed feedback.
Further, they may fail to engage with peer- and self-assessment tasks due to these being centred on learning and the opening up of the learning process.
Second, learners may see learning as a competitive experience, one in which they rank themselves against their peers.
If this is so, it is possible that feedback that does not contain marks or grades will draw frustration and annoyance.
Learners may expect work to be returned to them with a summative assessment.
They will want to know what this is so that they can rank themselves in relation to their peers.
Solutions to the Student Peer Groups Problem
The two issues we identified were a negative attitude towards learning and a desire for summative feedback.
Neither is easy to dispel, but both can be mitigated.
- A negative attitude towards learning.
You should act as a positive counterpoint.
Learning should be praised and opportunities taken to confer praise on learners and their work wherever possible.
Speak to learners whose attitude is negative and encourage them to tell you what has led to them feeling that way.
Use formative feedback.
Many learners develop a negative attitude because they continually receive low grades.
Take a moment to consider how demoralising this must be.
Stress to learners that they will only receive grades at certain points in the year (I would suggest on three occasions, more for exam classes).
The rest of the time they will receive feedback that explains what they have done well and what they can do to improve.
It is likely that over a period of time this will have a positive effect.
- Desire for summative feedback.
Be strong! Don’t give in.
Explain to learners that you will be giving strengths and targets and that these will help them to improve.
Outline the reasoning behind this.
Indicate that there will be points in the year when grades are shared, but that these times will be decided by you and chosen with good reason.
It is likely that learners will persist.
Reiterate why you are not giving summative feedback.
Remember that summative feedback tends to invoke the ego and when given alongside formative feedback often leads to the latter being ignored.
If you do give summative feedback more regularly – by choice or compulsion – separate it out from formative feedback so learners’ perception of one doesn’t leak into their perception of the other.
If learners really demand summative feedback from you (something I’ve experienced myself) it may be better to relent, particularly if it is at risk of damaging your relationship with them.
In these situations, again make sure you separate the summative feedback from the formative feedback, and keep reminding your learner(s) of the former’s benefit.
Problem Three: Learner Egos
This point connects closely to our previous one.
We all possess egos in the sense that we have personalities and that these, at times, can be concerned with little but ourselves.
Learners are no different.
They all have egos, although the extent and nature of these differs considerably.
In the classroom, ego can play a big role.
It can come out through the behaviour of learners, as well in the behaviour of the teacher.
It has great potential for disruption.
In any classroom it should be imperative that all learners are able to learn for as much of the lesson as possible.
If individual egos become heavily involved in what is going on, there is a good chance this will detract from that imperative.
Certain learners may draw the focus onto themselves.
This will be to satisfy psychological or emotional needs, rather than to further the learning.
It is possible to use one’s ego, or the ego of a learner, to move learning on (for example, through a charismatic introduction to a subject or a Socratic dialogue between the teacher and a learner who is particularly forthright) however situations where this possibility arises are not that frequent.
It is better for everyone if egos are kept in check. Or channelled in positive directions.
This applies to successful implementation of assessment for learning as well.
Learners may see assessment as a means of fulfilling their psychological and emotional needs.
They may use summative feedback as a reinforcing tool.
This can be true of learners who receive grades of any kind.
For example, a learner who works at an ‘A’ grade level may use summative feedback as a reinforcement of their success and as a way to generate good feelings about themselves.
To reconfirm in their mind that they are an ‘A’ grade learner.
Equally, a learner whose work tends to be at an ‘F’ grade level may use summative feedback to reinforce their conception that school is not for them and that they are incapable of learning (and so why should they bother?).
In the latter case, the reasoning is being used to protect the ego.
(Few like to feel they have failed or to find themselves judged unfavourably against those with whom they spend much of their time.)
If learners identify assessment with the fulfilment of psychological and emotional needs through the receiving of marks or grades then they may respond badly to the instigation of a new regime.
One that focuses on formative feedback rather than summative.
Even if the reasons for such a change are outlined, learners may still initially search for an answer to the question (which they may not be able to articulate): ‘Why can I not get what I was getting before?’
Inherent to this are unmet expectations.
Those the learners have become habituated to through prior experience of summative assessment.
Solutions to the Problem of Student Egos
You are using assessment for learning to help your learners.
That is why you are here, reading this blog – to develop your teaching and to improve their learning.
You know that assessment for learning helps raise achievement.
You understand the reasons behind this.
Communicate this to your learners.
It might convince them.
I’ve seen it happen.
And if it doesn’t quite douse the fire of their egos, it will keep things rational and professional.
If we consider that all learners once lived in a time (perhaps before arriving at school) when they did not receive grades, and that during this time they got on pretty well, it is easy to see that a negative response to not getting grades is conditioned rather than innate.
Remind learners that there will be points in the year when you will share their grades, but that this information isn’t as useful as your formative feedback. It doesn’t help them to learn in the same way.
Tell them that the feedback you give them will show them how to get better.
And then do this.
Again and again.
Learners will get used to it and the fires lit by their expectations not being met will die down.
Problem Four: Learners’ Prior Experience
Learners have a great deal of previous experience when it comes to assessment.
Unless you are teaching reception and Year One, your learners will have been assessed on a regular basis by all their former (and current) teachers.
Many learners will have had extensive experience of summative assessment.
They may well be used to getting grades, marks and levels for the work they produce.
Before we explore the effect of this, let us digress for a moment.
Young people have limited experience of life and the world.
A major function of education is broadening their horizons through introducing them to information, ideas and concepts which those who have come before them either discovered, wrote about or did.
Nonetheless, this still takes place in a single setting – school – that learners attend in one form or another for a lengthy period of time.
Their direct experience is thus heavily bound up with their experience of schooling.
Despite learning about new things in a variety of subjects day after day, they will repeat again and again the experience of being in school and all that comes with this.
It is not necessarily a bad thing; in fact it may be a very good thing.
It does mean, however, that for some (perhaps many) learners the arrival of change can be disconcerting.
They are used to repetition and they internalise expected ways of doing things.
If we now return to assessment we can see that if learners are used to getting grades, marks and levels then the introduction of a new system of assessment will be, for them, a significant change.
Unlike us (teachers), learners do not have a wide range of experience on which to call.
They will be more likely to see what they know as how things are done.
They may make judgements accordingly, and rest these on inductive reasoning that is severely limited (We have always done it this way so why should we change now? I’ve been alright doing it that way up until now – why change? This is who we are; this is how we do things here).
These are themes we see in adult life as well.
We may act and think in this way ourselves on occasion, perhaps in the form of an intuitive, immediate response to some change (particularly one over which we feel we have no control).
The tendency can be pronounced in children though, with this leading to knock-on effects for embedding assessment for learning in your practice.
Solutions to the Problem of Learners’ Prior Experience
You cannot do anything about this.
It is their experience for now and forever.
It is not worth getting into a debate with them about it.
If they say: ‘But this isn’t how so-and-so does it,’ ‘Well it’s not done me any harm up until now,’ or something similar, thank them for their comment and let them know that you will be happy to talk to them about it after the lesson.
Then, carry on as you intend. It is likely that learners will soon get used to your way of doing things.
From the youngest learners to the oldest learners, we see resistance to new ways of doing things.
To the breaking of existing habits.
However, what we also see is a rapid assimilation of new habits.
In my experience, two weeks is usually sufficient time in a primary setting, a month in a secondary setting, to get learners doing things differently.
Persist a little longer and the old habits are swiftly forgotten.
