Introduction
This blog is number two 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: Parental Expectations
All parents were once learners.
This means they will have some notion of what to expect in relation to school.
It is highly likely that this will be based primarily on their own experiences.
These will form the bedrock of their beliefs about what happens in school and what ought to happen.
Even parents who have experience of schools as adults, who have reflected on whether their own experiences are indicative of general experience, and who acknowledge that change takes place, bringing with it new ways of working, will still retain their own experience of education as part of their wider conception of what school is and how things are done there.
This is inevitable.
The process helped shape their lives.
They were a part of it for a long time.
It was and remains influential.
Parents may hold the belief that summative assessment is and ought to be the norm.
They may expect that the school should communicate grades to them.
They may expect their children to be able to tell them what marks they have received for the work they have done.
Maybe even where they are in relation to their peers.
If this is the case, it is probable that the parents are invested in their children’s progress and want to know how they are doing.
Their focus is on bridging the gap between home and school.
Parental expectations can influence individual children.
And they can influence the whole school.
This can impact teachers in the classroom.
In the first case, learners may either repeat the requests of their parents (Sir, what grade am I? My mum wants to know) or take on their expectations as their own (Miss, I want you to tell me my grade because my dad says I should know what it is).
In the second case, if parents are insistent that they are regularly provided with summative assessment information and that this information is also communicated to their children, then there is a possibility that the school will feel obliged to meet these demands.
Solutions to the Problem of Parental Expectations
Whenever you get the opportunity to talk to parents about assessment for learning, do so.
Tell them how it works and why it works.
Explain that it raises achievement and that it helps every child to make progress.
Outline the rationale behind it and the evidence on which it is based.
Give them examples to show what you mean.
Tell them that you are delighted that they are interested in their children’s education.
Explain they can help by asking their children to talk to them about their strengths and targets.
Indicate that grades will be shared at certain times but that for the rest of the year the focus will be on formative feedback.
Point out that, if parents know their children’s targets then they can actually help them to make progress at home.
This is not possible with grades.
Problem Two :Whole-School Policies
Teachers are expected to work in accordance with the policies set out by their school.
These might militate against assessment for learning for a number of reasons.
First, the school requires teachers to regularly share summative assessment data with learners.
What ‘regularly’ entails will be important here.
Summative data is necessary even within assessment for learning.
However, sharing it with learners every week may significantly detract from any formative targets you set.
It will also reinforce the psychological and emotional responses that come from getting grades.
If the school interprets ‘regularly’ as meaning every week or fortnight, then it may be that this method of feedback comes to predominate in learners’ minds, casting a shadow across formative feedback.
Second, the school requires learners to know their grades, marks or levels.
If this policy is in place then it puts pressure on teachers to keep sharing such information.
This is because it is not specified when the learners ought to know the information.
The assumption, therefore, has to be that they must know it all the time.
Teachers will tend to work from this as they will not want to fall foul of the rules under which they are expected to be operating.
Better policies in the context of assessment for learning could be:
- ‘Learners should know their grades at three pre-defined points in the year.’
- ‘Learners should know their next steps, and have these recorded, at all times.’
Third, the school has no assessment for learning policy.
If this is the case, then it might be that the school is not prioritising AFL.
It may be that individual teachers (perhaps many of them) use AFL strategies in their classrooms.
If, however, there is no policy in place to formalise the school’s stance, then there may be a lack of clarity over what is understood as best practice.
The remedy is not a prescriptive document that sets out in detail what every teacher must be doing.
Rather, it is a general policy, specific in places, that supports the use of AFL across the school and makes it clear why it is a necessary part of good teaching.
Fourth, the school has an assessment for learning policy that lacks clarity.
The purpose of policies is to provide a standardised point of reference for individuals within an organisation that can be referred to across time and space to ascertain what is deemed appropriate in given situations common to that organisation.
It is a way of saying:
- ‘This is what we do and this is how we do it’.
Policies do not have to be adhered to by the letter. But they should provide guidance on what is done and how it is done.
If a policy lacks clarity then its functionality is impaired.
An unclear assessment for learning policy does not give teachers the assistance that it should.
Nor does it give the school the direction it is meant to provide.
There needs to be coherence between what the school wants in terms of assessment, what the teachers want to do in their classrooms in terms of assessment, and what AFL best practice is seen to be.
Fifth, whatever the policy is, it does not result in teachers using AFL consistently across the school.
We are not suggesting here that a policy ought to impose rigid order on what happens in classrooms.
It should, however, reflect and reinforce the assessment ethos of the school.
If it is not doing that, or if there is a good AFL policy but it is not reflected in classrooms, then an individual teacher who is using AFL may find their job harder than it ought to be.
This is because learners will not be receiving the same messages about assessment across the board.
It means that the teacher who is using AFL will be more likely to come up against resistance.
This is because the experience, for the learners, will be contextualised against that of other classrooms where AFL methods are not in play.
The key is to marry consistency with autonomy.
Autonomy for individual teachers over what choices they make, how they teach, and how they plan.
Consistency in terms of the assessment ethos and what the school is trying to achieve for its learners.
Solutions to the Problem of Whole-School Policies
Do your best.
Use assessment for learning strategies from the Knowledge Base.
Share them with colleagues.
See if you can put together a group of like-minded colleagues who are keen to try out different AFL approaches and then reflect on the results.
Run a pilot with your class trialling something specific, then share the outcome with senior leaders.
Set up informal peer observations so you and your colleagues can drop into each other’s classrooms and see what techniques you are using.
Offer to put on AFL training.
(If you do, prioritise practical strategies colleagues can take away and start using in their classrooms.)
Problem Three: Colleagues opt for a Different Approach to Assessment
We have alluded to this in the previous point.
If colleagues do not use assessment for learning techniques, for whatever reason, then life may be made a little harder for the teacher who does.
All of us become habituated.
The regimented nature of school life strengthens the habits that form.
Learners who experience different assessment approaches from different teachers are likely, eventually, to associate these with the individual teachers and their lessons.
However, if teacher A comes in and starts using AFL techniques when teacher B has never done so, and has worked with the learners for some time, it may be a while before the learners accept the new approach to assessment.
Of course, it is nonsense to suggest there is a correct way of teaching, one that every teacher should follow.
There isn’t.
How could there be?
Yet, it is not facile to identify things that have been shown to work and to present these as best practice.
In the case of AFL, the onus is still on the teacher to craft their own pedagogy.
It is a large toolkit of techniques, methods and activities that all share certain premises:
- The elicitation and use of information
- The opening up of success criteria
- The giving of formative feedback
The teacher still must decide how to make AFL their own.
A more general issue concerning the approach of colleagues is that of the presuppositions they work under regarding their own role and the generic role of ‘the teacher’.
For some, the teacher is a ‘corrector’, a person who knows what happens to be the case; someone who tells learners if what they say, write and do is right or wrong.
It is quite natural that this model exists. It works from the following premises:
- Teachers have been through education themselves.
- Teachers plan what will be studied and know what it is that learners are expected to learn.
- A teacher’s job is to ensure learners know what there is to be known, so they too can complete their education.
Most people would agree that all these premises are true.
I would.
The problem though, is that they do not by necessity lead to the contention that the teacher ought to be a corrector who identifies only what is wrong and what is right.
A teacher working with the methods and techniques of AFL will see themselves as more of a coach.
They are talking to learners about what they have done well and explaining how they can improve.
Certainly there will be times (plenty of them) when they identify what is right and what is wrong, but this is not their sole aim.
Successful teaching, which surely must include successful learning, is more likely to happen when the teacher presupposes that part of their role is to guide learners, to show them how to improve.
It is less likely to happen if the teacher presupposes that their role is exclusively to ensure learners ‘get it right’ and learn what it is the teacher knows.
Elements of the latter are contained in the former, but they are subordinate to the notion of coaching.
To return to our theme, if colleagues do not share the same presuppositions about the teacher’s role then this may militate against the use of assessment for learning.
It may mean they are less likely to use it themselves and it may provide learners with conflicting messages about how learning takes place.
Solutions to the Problem of Colleagues opting for a Different Approach to Assessment
You might just choose to ignore this and to carry on regardless.
There’s nothing wrong with that.
And, indeed, there is benefit to learners being exposed to a plurality of approaches.
Plus there’s always the possibility that they are right and we are wrong.
If instead you decide to see if you can instigate a little change, I would suggest talking in terms of other people’s interests.
Sell AFL to your colleagues in terms of what it can do for them.
(Because we’re all interested in that.)
Assessment for learning helps learners to improve their work.
Once embedded it saves the teacher time.
The use of formative feedback and the opening up of the assessment process help learners feel more at ease and more motivated.
All of which benefits teachers.
So, sell AFL to your colleagues by talking in terms of their interests.
I am sure that they will want their learners to do better, to save time, and to have a good atmosphere in their classrooms.
Show them how AFL can help achieve all this.
Invite them into your classroom to see you and your learners at work.
Point them in the direction of my Assessment for Learning Knowledge Base.
Share your resources with them.
Offer to help them develop some resources together.
Set up a group in which teachers can talk about their experiences of embedding AFL in their practice, and invite them.
See what happens.
But don’t lose heart if you’re rebuffed.
After all, it is their choice.
And you can still do what you want to do with AFL in your classroom.
