For Tutor Carole only! - Implementing Authentic Assessment

Hardin, B. J., Wortham, S.C. (2015) Assessment in Early Childhood Education (7th ed.).  [Vitalsource Bookshelf Online].  Retrieved from https://kaplan.bitalsource.com/#/books/9781323290804/

In-text citation:

(Hardin & Wortham, 2015)

CHAPTER 8 Teacher-Designed Assessment Strategies

Suzanne Clouzeau/Pearson

Chapter Objectives

As a result of reading this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Discuss the purposes of teacher-designed assessments and tests.

2. Describe the types of assessments used with preschool and primary-grade children.

3. Describe how to develop quality teacher-designed assessments.

4. Explain how tests are designed and used.

5. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using teacher-designed assessments.

Another type of classroom evaluation to be discussed is teacher-designed assessments. In assessing and evaluating children from birth through the primary grades, measures other than paper-and-pencil tests are generally more appropriate. As children progress through the primary grades, however, they develop skills in reading and writing that will make it possible for them to demonstrate learning on a written test. In this chapter, we discuss how teachers design their own assessments of classroom instruction and use commercially designed classroom tests.

Purposes of Teacher-Designed Assessments and Tests

Although all types of evaluation, both formal and informal, are used to measure and evaluate children’s behavior and learning, there are circumstances under which teacher-designed assessments or written classroom tests are especially useful for the teacher. Paper-and-pencil tests can supplement other types of evaluation and provide teachers with information that the other types lack. The purposes of these tests include providing objective data on student learning and accountability and providing additional information for making instructional decisions.

Assessments that teachers design are part of a balanced approach to assessment. The child needs to be able to demonstrate learning in more than one way. Standardized tests, checklists, rating scales, and rubrics contribute to the possible ways to measure child learning. Teacher-designed assessments add to the opportunities for children to demonstrate what they understand and can use for learning objectives. The teacher wants to use a holistic approach to understanding the child and to measure growth and accomplishments. Teacher-designed assessments can provide input that other types of assessment lack (Edutopia Staff, 2014; Epstein et al., 2004; Furger, 2014).

Teacher-designed assessments support other evaluation measures, enabling the teacher to make more accurate decisions for the instruction of individual students. The teacher uses observation, tasks during group instruction, and manipulative activities to determine a child’s progress in learning. A written test used with older children can reinforce or support the teacher’s evaluation with an objective assessment. Objective testing complements the teacher’s more subjective, personal evaluation, which can be subject to individual impressions or biases.

Teachers can design games to be used to teach concepts and for assessment.

Carla Mestas/Pearson

Classroom assessments can also support teachers’ decisions that may be questioned by parents or school staff members. The teacher may understand, from ongoing work with a child, that the child needs to be instructed at a different level or requires extended experiences with a concept that other children have mastered. Although the teacher is confident in making the decision, a task or paper-and-pencil assessment can support it and, at the same time, help the parents understand the nature of the problem. The teacher-designed assessment thus can increase the teacher’s accountability for decisions that affect students’ learning.

Teachers must make instructional decisions, both immediate and long term. As they teach, they must decide how long to spend on a particular science unit or math concept. In addition to using informal evaluation strategies, such as individual tasks and ongoing observations of class progress, they can use written tests to provide more information that will help them decide whether to include more experiences, use review activities, skip planned activities, or conclude the current topic and move on to a new one.

Unfortunately, at present, there is increased emphasis on assigning grades to young children. Although kindergarten children may be exempt, primary-grade students are being given letter or numerical grades in many schools, and the practice has expanded with the recent emphasis on higher instructional and grading standards. Teachers find it difficult to assign letter grades to primary-grade children. Whether the practice should continue is debatable; nevertheless, testing can help the teacher make decisions about student achievement. To use only written evaluations for grading would be inappropriate for all the reasons discussed throughout this book; however, when combined with other developmentally appropriate evaluation strategies, paper-and-pencil tests add supporting information on which grades can be based.

In the same fashion, tests can be used to support diagnostic decisions about student needs. The classroom teacher can supplement information from standardized tests and informal evaluations to determine student strengths and needs in content areas. Assessments can be designed that correspond to local instructional objectives and that provide specific information on student accomplishment and instructional needs. Once diagnostic information has been analyzed, the teacher can place students more accurately into instructional groups and regroup periodically as students move through the program at different rates.

Portfolios can be used to share a child’s performance with parents.

Suzanne Clouzeau/Pearson

Finally, teacher-designed assessments allow evaluation of the local instructional program. Unlike standardized tests, which reflect general objectives suitable for a broad range of school programs at a state, regional, or national level, the teacher-designed test assesses specific or local learning objectives. These outcome-based tests evaluate more closely the effectiveness of the local educational program. Without evaluation measures designed for the classroom, there is no ready method to assess local curriculum objectives.

Types of Assessments Used with Preschool and Primary-Grade Children

Teacher-designed assessments for preschool children must match the way these children learn—through active interaction with concrete materials. Children who do not yet read cannot demonstrate their learning effectively with a paper-and-pencil test. The teacher constructs assessment activities that allow the child to manipulate materials, explain understanding orally, or point to the correct response if expressive language is limited.

Teacher assessments using tasks or oral responses can be conducted during a teaching activity, as part of a learning-center experience, or as a separate assessment or series of assessments. For example, to determine whether children can recognize uppercase and lowercase letters, the teacher can select letters from concrete classroom materials or cards with the five letters and ask the child to match the upper- and lowercase. Figure 8-1 pictures an array of cards that can be used for this purpose. The alphabet cards are cut into individual cards. The teacher selects five letters to work with at a time and has the children match the uppercase and lowercase letters. There can be sets of cards for each child, or several sets for small group activities.

FIGURE 8-1 Uppercase and lowercase letters

To demonstrate an understanding of counting, the preschool child is given objects to count. The teacher can conduct the assessment in two ways. He or she may either select five objects and ask the child to count them or ask the child to group five of the objects. To assess knowledge of shapes, an array of basic shapes could be used. If the objective is to identify shapes, the teacher can ask the child to find a given shape by saying, “Show me a triangle.” The teacher can also point to the shape and ask the child to name it if the objective is to be able to name shapes. Figure 8-2 shows basic shape cards that can be used to identify circles, squares, triangles, and rectangles. After preschoolers can name the four basic geometric shapes, other familiar shapes, such as a star or heart, can be added.

FIGURE 8-2 Basic shapes

After more experience with shapes, the children can do a simple shape matching activity sheet (Figure 8-3, on next page).

For some preschool assessments, an oral response may be most appropriate. For example, a common preschool objective is for the child to know his or her first and last name. The teacher would ask the child to give this information.

For the objective of sequencing events in a story, the teacher shows the child a set of three to five picture cards that have a logical sequence and asks the child to put them in order. The child then is asked to tell the story. Figure 8-4 (on next page) shows a series of pictures that can be used for sequencing and providing verbal descriptions.

As children learn to read, the teacher’s assessments begin to include printed test activities with pictures and some written words. Instead of a physical response using concrete materials or an oral response, the child uses a pencil with a printed test. The best option is for teachers to design their own assessments to complement the curriculum being used in the classroom. Teachers must be able to design their own tests to evaluate their own or individual learning objectives most effectively. Commercially produced materials are also frequently used. Figure 8-5 (on page 193) shows a worksheet where beginning readers can match sequence pictures with sequence words by drawing lines between pictures and words.

Paper-and-pencil tests must be adapted to the child’s limited reading and writing skills. Therefore, tests designed for children in the primary grades use a format that provides pictorial or visual clues to help the student select or write the correct response. To prepare beginning readers and writers for written tests, the teacher introduces key words such as circle or draw that are commonly used in paper-and-pencil assessments. More words are taught until the child is able to read written instructions. Throughout the primary grades, the teacher introduces the assessment page to the children before asking them to complete the page independently.

FIGURE 8-3 Basic shapes worksheet

The most common beginning written tasks include marking or circling a response, drawing a line to a response, marking a response with an X, and writing simple numeral or word answers.

Children can circle pictures in response to questions before they have learned to read and write. This type of response is continued in the grades where beginning reading skills are acquired.

FIGURE 8-4 Sequencing cards

FIGURE 8-5 Sequencing worksheet

As reading and writing progress, words can be selected or written for assessment tasks. In Figure 8-6 (on the next page), the student circles the word that fits the blank in a sentence, using a multiple-choice format. In Figure 8-7 (on the next page), a teacher-designed assessment for reading vocabulary, the student must determine whether to write each word under the “People” category or the “Places” category.

All the examples of written assessments for the primary grades follow the same guidelines. Not only must the child have visual clues to be able to respond, but also an example is usually given to help the child understand the task. Also, although there are written instructions for the child to read, the teacher may need to read and discuss the instructions with the students to ensure that they understand what is required. In the following section, we discuss the design of teacher-constructed assessments and tests.

FIGURE 8-6 Assessment in which a student selects a word for a sentence

FIGURE 8-7 Teacher-designed assessment for reading vocabulary

Developing Quality Teacher-Designed Assessments

The steps in test design described in this chapter provide a guide to developing quality assessments that are directly linked to the learning process. Test items and learning activities are linked to the same learning objectives so that teachers are teaching and testing to the same levels of knowledge on Bloom’s taxonomy (discussed later in the chapter). Similar steps can be taken for all teacher-designed assessments. Following are some suggestions for teachers to consider when designing assessment tasks and tests.

Concrete Tasks for Preschool

• Be sure that the task is at the same level of difficulty as the learning activities designed for the learning objective.

• Have a variety of objects and/or concrete materials so that the assessment task can be administered several times.

• When possible, administer tasks for a number of learning objectives. Have materials for a number of tasks organized and available.

Tests for Primary-Grade Children

• Be sure that test items match the child’s reading level. (Use the lowest possible reading level.)

• Use clear directions, even if they will be read by the teacher.

• Ensure that response items for multiple-choice-type assessments have one correct answer.

• Ensure that response options for multiple-choice-type assessments are the same length and are brief.

• Keep the list of items brief for matching exercises.

• Be sure that the list of items for matching exercises is homogeneous.

• Ensure that the length of blanks is the same for completion test items.

• Use only one blank for each completion item.

How Tests Are Designed and Used

Classroom tests are closely matched to curriculum objectives and content. Whether designed by the teacher or obtained from a textbook or other commercial source, they are used to measure the student’s ability to benefit from classroom instruction.

Unlike standardized tests that provide general information about student achievement, classroom tests measure student accomplishment and learning needs in relation to specific classroom objectives. Classroom tests can be used for placement and diagnosis, formative testing, and summative testing (Linn & Miller, 2005).

Placement and diagnostic testing have a similar function. In placement testing, the student is assessed to determine the instructional group into which he or she should be placed. Tests are given to determine what the student already knows and is ready to learn. Diagnostic testing is used to determine student weaknesses that need to be corrected. The school diagnostician or psychologist can use the same tests for both purposes unless learning difficulties are persistent and need more extensive diagnosis. Placement and diagnostic testing in the classroom are similar to criterion-referenced testing using standardized tests; however, the tests may assess selected learning objectives, rather than objectives for an entire grade level.

Formative and summative tests are related to mastery learning (Bloom, Madaus, & Hastings, 1981). Benjamin Bloom believed that nearly all students could reach high achievement if teachers could provide sufficient time and quality learning conditions (Guskey, 2009, 2010). Formative tests are given periodically while teaching specific objectives to monitor student progress. These tests measure a limited number of objectives at a time so that the teacher can identify which objectives have been mastered and which call for additional work or activities. They provide feedback and are not used for grading purposes.

The summative test, in contrast, is the final test given on completion of a unit of work. The unit of work may be organized for a single objective or for a small group of objectives. The summative test is given after instruction and formative testing reveal that the material has been mastered. It is administered as the final step to verify the student’s achievement on the material covered in the unit or by a group of objectives.

The information gained from diagnostic, placement, formative, and summative testing provides the teacher with current, relevant information for instructional planning. It allows the teacher not only to group students for instruction effectively but also to determine how long the class needs to continue working on objectives and whether alternative types of experiences are needed to correct learning needs in particular students. Unlike standardized tests that are administered once a year, classroom tests provide ongoing, criterion-related information about student progress on objectives being covered in a particular classroom. To use classroom testing effectively, the teacher must know how to design appropriate tasks that match the students’ ability to use paper-and-pencil tests. The teacher must also know what kinds of tests will accurately measure the students’ progress or mastery of each learning objective.

Steps in Test Design

Teacher-designed classroom assessments, although less rigorously constructed than standardized tests, must accurately measure objectives for classroom instruction. Whether the teacher is organizing assessment strategies for preschool or primary-grade students, tests are carefully designed to fit the learning objectives. Although in this section of the chapter we discuss teacher assessment in terms of test design, we refer to evaluation strategies for preschool students who are nonreaders, as well as for students in the primary grades who are beginning to read and write.

Several steps in test design must be followed if a test is to measure student learning accurately. Based on Bloom’s model of mastery learning (Block, 1971; Block, Efthin, & Burns, 1989), the process includes the following:

1. Determining instructional objectives

2. Constructing a table of specifications

3. Designing formative and summative evaluations

4. Designing learning experiences

5. Designing correctives and enrichment activities

Watch this video overview of Bloom’s taxonomy to learn about each aspect of this model. Why is it important to consider this sequence of learning when designing an assessment? (www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfp3x_qx5IM)

Determining Instructional Objectives

In Chapter 5, we discussed objectives relative to skills continuums and checklists. Similar to objectives in relation to skills continuums and checklists, the same types of sources are used to develop instructional objectives that will be used to design classroom tests. Although the term learning outcomes has replaced instructional objectives in many states and school districts, they have the same purpose. School districts have various sources to draw from when determining curriculum objectives for each grade level.

During the 20th century, the common source of curriculum objectives was basal textbook series used in the classroom. Most textbooks in reading, mathematics, social studies, and science were based on learning objectives appropriate for that grade level in school districts in many states. A commonly accepted pool of learning objectives could be found in the content areas for each grade level; however, objectives could vary markedly among different basal series. Textbooks were organized around these objectives, and teacher’s editions of the textbooks contained activities to implement instruction for the objectives and tests to evaluate student learning on the objectives.

National and state standards were the framework for curriculum and instruction in recent decades. The standards were implemented to clarify educational objectives and raise the learning achievement of students in public schools. National standards developed for the Common Core Programs are now becoming the primary source for all levels of schools. Commercial materials are rapidly becoming available based on the Common Core. Abundant resources on the Internet assist teachers in developing curriculum an assessments in their classrooms.

Writing Behavioral Objectives.

Behavioral objectives, or instructional objectives, provide the framework for curriculum and instruction and the measurement of the effectiveness of instruction and learning. Many states and school districts require that behavioral objectives that specify the measurement of the effectiveness of instruction and learning be included in instructional planning. The objective is stated in observable, behavioral terms to include the following:

An observable behavior (action verb specifying the learning outcome)

Any special conditions under which the behaviors must by displayed

A performance level considered sufficient to demonstrate mastery (Kubiszyn & Borich, 2003)

Another approach to understanding the elements of a behavioral objective would be to use an ABCD acronym:

A is the audience

B is the behavior

C is the condition

D is the degree or level of mastery

For example, a common objective for preschool children is to be able to sort objects into two groups by using some type of criterion. An instructional or behavioral objective could be written as follows:

Given an array of nuts, the student will be able to sort the nuts correctly into two groups: nuts with smooth shells and nuts with rough shells.

An analysis of the objective would identify the components of an instructional objective as follows:

Given an array of nuts (condition, C), the student (A) will be able to sort the nuts correctly (100% performance standard implied, D) into two groups: nuts with smooth shells and nuts with rough shells (behavior, B).

An objective for physical development might include the ability to catch a ball with both hands. Stated behaviorally, the objective might be worded as follows:

Following a series of activities throwing and catching large rubber balls, the child will be able to catch the ball with both hands in four out of six tries.

To analyze the parts of this objective, it would be described as follows:

Following a series of activities throwing and catching large rubber balls (C), the child (A) will be able to catch the ball with both hands (B) in four out of six tries (D).

Before a learning objective or outcome can be measured, then, it must be stated clearly in terms of its content and the desired behavior. The content refers to the knowledge or skill to be learned. The behavior is what the student does to demonstrate that the knowledge or skill has been attained.

Analyzing Objectives to Determine Prerequisite Skills.

The teacher must not only develop the learning objective but also determine what must be taught to the student to master it. Part of planning for instruction involves studying the learning objective to decide what prior knowledge or skills the student must have to be able to learn the new information. For the objective “Recall addition facts through sums to 5,” the teacher plans instruction to help students to learn to combine all possible groups of numbers that equal 5. In addition, the teacher determines what the student must already know to understand and use addition skills. Prior skills to be considered include the following:

1. Knowledge of numbers through 5

2. Identification of numerals through 5

3. Understanding that small groups can be combined to make a larger group

The teacher must decide whether the students have the prerequisite skills to be able to master the targeted learning objective. If not, the prior skills will have to be taught, or retaught if necessary, before the new objective is introduced. A pretest or a diagnostic test may be used to determine student readiness for the learning objective.

Watch this video that describes the ABCD process for creating objectives. Write two to three objectives based on the ABCD process. What worked well? Where might you improve your skills in writing objectives? (www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge9QHn04WK0)

Setting a Standard for Mastery.

The final step in determining the instructional objectives is to set the level of mastery that will be expected for the student to learn the objective. In the section on writing behavioral objectives, information was included on how to include the performance level for the objective. In this context, the process for determining the level of performance desired or required is discussed. The teacher, the school district, or the state department of education may set the level of accomplishment. This is the minimum standard required to pass the objective. The learning objective can reflect the established standard for mastery. If 80% is established as the minimum standard for mastery, the learning objective can be stated to reflect the standard.

Constructing a Table of Specifications

After the learning objectives for a unit of study or the content of an entire course has been described behaviorally, the teacher or curriculum developer is ready to outline the course content. Before a test can be organized to measure the curriculum objectives, it is necessary to understand more accurately what concepts or skills are to be measured and to what extent the student will be expected to perform to demonstrate mastery of the objective. Will the student be expected to remember information, use the information to solve problems, or evaluate the information? The test items will reflect the level of understanding that is required to master the objective.

Analysis of objectives to determine the level of understanding is commonly done by constructing a table of specifications (Linn & Miller, 2005). Here learning objectives are charted by using Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Bloom, 1956). This work describes levels of understanding in the cognitive domain, ranging from the ability to recall information (the knowledge level) to the highest level of understanding (evaluation). Figure 8-8 explains the levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, with examples of terms that characterize each level. In Figure 8-9, an adaptation of the taxonomy is used to make a table of specifications for the mathematics unit covering addition sums to 5. The two objectives for the unit are listed to the left of the figure. The columns to the right describe how the objectives are charted on the taxonomy. The first objective requires that the student be able to recall addition facts and problems, understand the facts and problems, and apply that understanding. The second objective also requires that the student be able to analyze or solve problems. When designing test or assessment items, the teacher must know the type and level of understanding that test items will reflect and must organize the test so that the described levels of understanding are adequately sampled.

FIGURE 8-8 Explanation of Bloom’s taxonomy

FIGURE 8-9 Table of specifications for a unit on sums to 5

More recent work similar to mastery learning is Response to Intervention (RTI), which addresses students with learning and behavior problems (Conroy et al., 2006; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Guskey, 2010). RTI uses similar processes to improve successful learning, but has levels of intervention embedded in the process. Like mastery learning, it includes all students in the class (RTI Action Network, n.d.).

Another system, called Depth of Knowledge (DOK), was developed to provide a guide to teachers as they supported children’s learning to higher levels (Webb, 2002). Soon after its introduction, state departments of education were using DOK in their curriculum and instruction standards (Webb et al., 2005; Wyoming School Health and Physical Education Network, 2001).

The DOK is very similar to Bloom’s taxonomy. Instead of Bloom’s five levels of understanding, DOK has four. Level 1 is titled recall; Level 2, skill and concept; Level 3, strategic thinking; and Level 4, extended thinking. In addition, there are many more descriptors of student behaviors for each level. Figure 8-10 provides a chart of the DOK levels and descriptors. At the bottom of the figure, suggested activities are matched with the four levels. Figure 8-11 (on page 202) compares Bloom’s taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge levels.

Designing Formative and Summative Evaluations

After the teacher has determined what is to be measured by designing a table of specifications for the learning objectives to be taught, it is time to design the formative and summative evaluations. Both types of evaluations are derived from the table of specifications. Assessment items will be designed to measure the student’s achievement at the levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, as described in the table of specifications. The assessment items on the two forms are equivalent, but the evaluation purposes differ. The formative evaluation is not a test; it is a checkup or progress report on the student. The teacher uses the formative evaluation to decide whether the student needs further work with the objective.

If the student needs additional experiences, more activities, known as correctives, are implemented. Correctives are learning resources designed to approach the objective differently from the original instruction. The intent is to provide various kinds of activities to meet individual students’ needs.

If the student’s responses indicate mastery on the formative evaluation, the teacher provides enrichment activities. The student engages in activities that are at a higher level on Bloom’s taxonomy than are required for mastery. Thus, if the mastery level in the table of specifications is at the application level, students who master the information after an initial period of instruction may benefit from activities at the analysis, synthesis, or evaluation levels (Bloom et al., 1981).

The summative evaluation is the final assessment or test of what the student has learned or accomplished. It is given after all instruction has been concluded. Although formative and summative evaluations are interchangeable in content, only the summative form is used as a test. The decisions to be made about both assessments include the format, selection of assessment items, determination of length, and assembly of the assessment.

Test Formats and Assessment Items.

Earlier in the chapter, we talked about test formats for use with children in preschool and primary grades. When the teacher is ready to design classroom assessments, the appropriate format will have to be determined. Most preschool children respond best to concrete tasks and oral questions. Assessment items reflect the table of specifications and use appropriate concrete strategies for preschool children. Figure 8-12 shows a table of specifications for a preschool unit on classification. Objective B specifies that the student will be able to remove the object that is different from a set of four objects. Figure 8-13 (on page 203) pictures a group of objects that may be used to evaluate the child’s performance on the objective. The child chooses or points to the object that does not belong to the group.

FIGURE 8-10 Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels

FIGURE 8-11 Comparison of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge levels

FIGURE 8-12 Unit objective: Classifying objects by common attributes in a table of specifications

FIGURE 8-13 Classification of objects: Array of objects

Concrete tasks should also be used with children in the primary grades, along with activities using reading and writing. When a teacher moves to a written test for first graders, the teacher should limit student responses to tasks that require little or no reading or writing, such as circling, pictures, marking the correct response, and drawing lines to correct responses, as introduced earlier in the chapter. In the unit on coins described in Figure 8-14 (on page 204), children will have a variety of experiences using real coins to learn the objectives. More writing and reading can be incorporated into the test format. If several different tasks are to be used, more than one format can be included on a test. Figure 8-14 shows the table of specifications for the unit on coins. The teacher must develop test items that reflect the objectives to be tested.

Figures 8-15 (on page 205) and 8-16 (on page 206) are examples of an assessment that includes reading and writing. In Figure 8-15, the student is asked to draw a line from each coin to its letter name, as well as write the value of each coin. In Figure 8-16, the student adds the value of collections of coins and writes the total value of the collections.

Test Length.

After determining the format and developing a pool of items to provide the levels of understanding expected from the table of specifications, the test developer must determine how many test items or tasks will be included in the test. For young children, a balance is reached between the number of items needed to demonstrate and determine the child’s understanding and a reasonable length that will not overtax the child’s ability to attend to the task. For preschool and primary grades, the test length should not exceed the time normally needed to complete classroom activities and assignments. A maximum of 20 to 30 minutes is reasonable in testing primary-grade students. Commercial tests designed to evaluate these students are commonly one page long.

Assembly.

The final step in test design is to assemble test items into both a formative and a summative form. The teacher should construct enough items so that both forms of the test can be put together at the same time. The formative evaluation, conducted after the students have had some work with the objective, will enable the teacher to assess how well the students are learning the information. After the formative assessment has been examined, the teacher can reteach, provide different types of experiences or practice for some students, or move on to the summative test if the students show adequate progress. The teacher should have enough items to obtain the feedback needed to monitor student learning and mastery. The formative and summative assessments should be equivalent in terms of the level of understanding required and the types of items used.

FIGURE 8-14 Unit on coins: Table of specifications

When assembling the tests, the teacher must decide how instructions will be given to the students. If written instructions requiring reading skills will be used, they must be simply stated to match the students’ reading ability. Pictures used must be clear and easily interpreted. Poorly drawn or inappropriate pictures will hamper the child’s ability to respond correctly and distort the child’s performance on the test. If the teacher is unable to draw simple pictures, he or she should obtain them from another source or ask a colleague for help.

FIGURE 8-15 Teacher-designed test on coins

Half dollar, backs of dime and nickel: © asafeliason/Fotolia; quarter and penny: © Chris Hill/Fotolia; dime: © Sam Spiro/Fotolia; nickel: © Vladimir Wrangel/Fotolia.

Designing Learning Experiences

After the table of specifications and the formative and summative evaluations have been constructed, the teacher collects and prepares the activities and instruction that will enable the student to learn the information designed in the objective. Instruction also matches the level given in the table of specifications. Instruction to introduce and work with the objectives includes teacher instruction and other resources normally used by the teacher to help children practice and master new concepts and skills.

The instructional objective contains the structure for the learning experiences that will be provided for the students to interact with and master concepts. The teacher-directed lessons and child-centered activities enable the child to work with information and skills. When planning the activities, the teacher establishes some type of format to describe each activity and how it will be used. The activity description includes the objective, the materials needed, and any other relevant information.

For example, one objective of the unit on classifying objects discussed earlier could be used to describe appropriate activities. Figure 8-12 had the objective under “B. Noting Differences” as follows: From a set of four objects, the student will remove the one object that is different from the others. Figure 8-13 shows an assessment task that uses an array of objects to permit the child to demonstrate understanding of the objective. Figure 8-17 describes an activity that can be used for young children to experience the same concepts, first as a teacher-directed activity and later in a learning center.

FIGURE 8-16 Test on coins

Half dollar, backs of dime and nickel: © asafeliason/Fotolia; quarter and penny: © Chris Hill/Fotolia; dime: © Sam Spiro/Fotolia; nickel: © Vladimir Wrangel/Fotolia.

Designing Correctives and Enrichment Activities

Corrective activities provide learning alternatives for children who need additional work after initial instruction and formative evaluation. These include audiovisual resources, games, workbooks, peer tutoring, student–teacher discussions, and other opportunities that are different from the original instruction and activities. The purpose is to provide different or alternative ways for the student to learn the information in the learning objective.

FIGURE 8-17 Example of a learning activity

Examples of corrective activities and enrichment activities may use the objective cited previously: From a set of four objects, the student will remove the one object that is different from the others. A child who needs additional activities to internalize the concept would benefit from opportunities to practice, but with alternative types of experiences. If the teacher-directed activities have focused on concrete objects, a corrective activity might consist of a card game of several sets of four cards that could be played by two children. Another corrective might use a flannel board and have the child remove the item that is different from an array of four items.

Children who are English language learners (ELLs) would benefit from opportunities to use the vocabulary associated with the concept. The terms alike and different would be basic to understanding the concept. Then if colors, shoes, blocks, leaves, and so on were used in lessons, those words would also be used so that they could become part of the child’s vocabulary. A similar process would be important for children with special needs. Children with mental delay will need many extra experiences on a one-to-one basis with the concept, while children with visual difficulties may need to have the lesson adapted with items that can be differentiated by touch. Teachers and support staff for children with special needs must plan ahead how the concept could be presented for individual children.

Enrichment activities provide opportunities for higher-level thinking. If additional complexity is desired, the number of items may be increased to five, with two items that are different, rather than one. Another way to increase complexity is to make the difference in the item more difficult to identify. Only a slight difference is evident between the three identical items and the one that is different. For example, if the four pictured items are gift-wrapped boxes, the ribbon on one of the boxes is different or part of the ribbon is missing.

Enrichment activities also allow students who easily mastered the objective initially to engage in challenging and more creative activities. The students can work on individual projects that allow them to problem-solve and apply their own ideas in various types of activities that emerge from their own efforts (Block, 1977). Students may develop pictures of items that are alike and different or write a story in which each page has a different category of items with one that is different.

Phyllis and Amy

Phyllis and Amy are both in the first grade. Phyllis is an accelerated learner who grasps classroom information with little effort. Amy has cognitive delay. She works at a much simpler cognitive level than the other children in the classroom. During the mastery learning process used in the classroom, Amy often works with a teacher’s aide who has activities designed for her learning needs. When the class works on the concept of alike and different, Amy has activities that concentrate on two colors. She and the aide have large discs that are red and blue. After many lessons, Amy is able to say which disc is different in an array of three red discs and one blue disc.

When the class is working on correctives and enrichment activities, Phyllis often asks to work with Amy. Phyllis is given classroom objects that Amy is familiar with and can name. Together, they practice the concepts of alike and different with pairs of objects. Phyllis alternates using like objects and different objects with Amy as if they are playing a game. Amy loves having Phyllis work with her, and Phyllis enjoys helping Amy feel that she is part of the class.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Teacher-Designed Assessments

Teacher-designed assessments in the classroom have several advantages over commercially produced tests developed for the same purpose. The advantages are related to the flexibility of the tests constructed for the teacher’s own classroom.

When a teacher plans an assessment activity or test, the objective or objectives to be tested may be selected to suit individual class needs. Unlike commercial tests, which may be programmed to fit student progress in a grade-level textbook, the teacher-designed test can vary from the structure or plan of the book. A teacher may be concerned about an objective outside the textbook sequence and feel compelled to conduct an evaluation. Because he or she is developing tests to fit classroom needs, the targeted objective can be tested within the teacher’s assessment plans whenever needed.

In addition, teacher-constructed assessments can be designed for a particular class. If the children are nonreaders but have advanced concepts that are normally introduced to children who have reading skills, the teacher can write the test to accommodate their abilities. If the students are advanced readers, the test can be designed to take advantage of their reading skills. The most common difficulty with commercial classroom tests is that they are set for a certain reading level or penalize the child for being unable to perform well because pencil-and-paper skills are required. The teacher can modify test tasks to include manipulative activities, oral responses, and assessment within instructional periods if the child understands concepts but cannot yet respond on a written test.

Assessments for Instructional Objectives: How Useful Are They?

Norris teaches kindergarten. He and the other kindergarten teachers have been sent to a training session on designing assessments for instructional objectives using mastery learning. In the session, the teachers have reviewed how to write behavioral objectives and how to construct a table of specifications based on Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Working with the table of specifications prepares them to design assessment strategies for the objectives.

On the way home after the training session, Norris and the other teachers voice skepticism. How can this kind of testing be used with kindergarten children? Norris comments, “I can see how some areas, such as math, can be organized and assessed by behavioral objectives, but how do you decide what 80% accuracy is on learning the Pledge of Allegiance, or what they learn from art or using concepts in science?” Norris finally decides that it is a matter of common sense. The teacher can apply the strategies with some parts of the curriculum in kindergarten but not others. The question is whether the school’s principal and the kindergarten coordinator will share Norris’s perspective. He and the other kindergarten teachers decide to talk to teachers at other grade levels to determine how they are implementing the assessment strategies. Afterward, they want to study their curriculum and decide where they can use assessments based on a table of specifications. They want to meet with the principal and the coordinator to discuss where the process will work and which parts of the curriculum do not lend themselves to that type of assessment.

When Norris and the other teachers meet with the principal and the kindergarten coordinator, they present tables of specifications and assessments for mathematics and units in science. After they explain their reluctance to use the process with their reading program and other curriculum components, the kindergarten coordinator supports their position. The principal is more reluctant but decides to let the coordinator work with the teachers to determine how and where the assessment strategies will be implemented at the kindergarten level.

Teacher-designed assessments can be improved whenever needed. Each time the teacher administers a test, student responses provide feedback on its effectiveness. The test can be changed and improved whenever students’ responses indicate problems with the format or test items.

Teacher-designed tests also have disadvantages; potential weaknesses generally focus on the teacher’s skill in designing classroom assessments. Because teachers do not generally have extensive experience in developing their own tests, the evaluations they design may not be effective in evaluating student learning.

Because of the abundance of commercially designed tests that accompany curriculum texts and kits, teachers are not always required to construct their own tests. Teachers become dependent on commercial tests and do not consider the necessity of designing their own. As a result, the teacher may not clearly understand the purpose of the tests or the levels of knowledge that are tested.

Teachers may lack the training in test design that affects both understanding of the purpose of the commercial tests and the skills needed to construct tests. For example, teachers may not have learned how to use a table of specifications for curriculum objectives. When they design tests, they are not aware of the levels of knowledge in the curriculum that need to be part of the evaluation process. This lack of awareness may be more true of early childhood teachers than of teachers in intermediate grades and secondary schools. Teachers of preschool and primary-grade children need to be aware of the various levels of cognitive understanding, as well as alternative methods of evaluation that are developmentally suited to young students.

Finally, the process of developing good classroom tests, especially for younger students, is time consuming. Because test items must be developed to accommodate emerging reading and writing skills, each item must be carefully considered for both content and method or format. This consideration takes more time than developing items for students who have good reading and writing skills. The method of presentation is as important as the concepts and skills being tested.

A discussion of the weaknesses of teacher-designed assessments must include mention of the issues surrounding the use of mastery learning in early childhood education. Because mastery learning requires that the teacher analyze learning objectives and determine the level of mastery to be achieved, it would seem to conflict with the philosophy that early childhood educators should provide developmentally appropriate classroom experiences; that is, the teacher is encouraged to provide learning experiences that are consistent with the child’s level of development, rather than to ask the child to fit into a predetermined style of learning that requires specific types of responses to achieve mastery.

The interest in providing developmentally appropriate practices also extends to the use of behavioral or instructional objectives specifically. One criticism of the objectives is the division of learning into small, skill-based objectives, rather than more global constructivist learning. The performance standard or level of mastery seems limiting when compared to the emphasis on child-centered learning that emerges from the child’s interests and previous experiences.

Although these issues first applied to preschool classrooms, they are also a concern with primary-grade teachers. Constructivist learning or a “thinking curriculum” (Linn & Miller, 2005) focuses on the student’s active involvement in constructing meaning, rather than mastery of specific skills. Thus, students should be engaged in more divergent types of learning and more complex types of outcomes. Performance assessment, discussed in Chapter 9, addresses this issue.

Certain components of the preschool classroom curriculum lend themselves to the mastery learning approach. Concept development, particularly in mathematics, has sequential objectives that can be taught within the mastery learning format. Nevertheless, many early childhood educators object to attempts to limit early childhood programs to this approach. Exploratory and inquiry-based experiences, originating from the child’s opportunity to initiate activities both indoors and outdoors and using self-directed learning, are essential in early childhood classrooms. In fact, these experiences are essential for both preschool and primary-grade levels.

Teachers must ultimately be able to understand and use their own assessments appropriately to match the curriculum and their students’ development. Mastery learning must also be used appropriately in early childhood programs.

Despite their weaknesses, teacher-designed evaluations have an important place in early childhood classrooms. An answer to the difficulties in using these assessments may be to help teachers understand the process of test design and to support their efforts to develop tests.

Summary

Although written tests are the least commonly used method of evaluating the learning of young students, there is a place for these tests once children have mastered some reading and writing skills. Teachers and parents can use written tests as sources of objective information of student progress.

Like standardized tests, teacher-designed and commercially produced classroom assessments are developed through the use of procedures that ensure they are correct in content and method of evaluation. Test design begins with careful analysis and description of learning objectives for the curriculum. The objectives are examined for the prerequisite skills that must be mastered prior to their use and for how the content and skills must be taught. In addition to determining the level of mastery for the learning objectives, the test developer must use a developmentally appropriate test format that will maximize the performance of students who are learning to read and write.

Before test items are constructed, the test designer must describe the level at which the student must demonstrate the new knowledge. A table of specifications organized for the learning objectives is used for this purpose. While constructing the formative and summative evaluations, the teacher must consider length, equivalent items for both evaluations, and what types of test instructions are most appropriate.

Because paper-and-pencil tests may not be the most effective way to evaluate or assess children through the primary grades, teachers must understand when and how such tests are appropriate. Teachers must have acquired the skills to develop such tests if they are to measure learning accurately and appropriately. Teachers of young students must also understand the limitations of written tests and become skilled in combining them with alternative evaluation methods to ensure that each student is tested with procedures that are most appropriate for his or her own level of development and ability to respond.

Key Terms

behavioral objective 197

corrective 200

enrichment activity 200

formative test 195

instructional objective 197

mastery learning 195

summative test 195

table of specifications 198

Selected Organizations

Search for the following organizations online:

Educational Testing Service

National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER)

Learning Resources

RTI Action Network

Edutopia: What Works in Education

References

Block, J. H. (1971). Introduction. In J. H. Block (Ed.). Mastery learning: Theory and practice (pp. 2–12). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Block, J. H. (1977). Individualized instruction: A mastery learning perspective. Educational Leadership, 34, 337–341.

Block, J. H., Efthim, H. E., & Burns, R. B. (1989). Building effective mastery learning schools. New York, NY: Longman.

Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: McKay.

Conroy, M. A., Sutherland, K. S., Snyder, A. L., & Marsh, S. (2008). Classroom interventions: Effective instruction makes a difference. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40, 24–30.

Edutopia Staff. (2014). Grant Wiggins: Defining assessment. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/grant-wiggins-assessment

Edutopia Staff. (2014). What are some types of assessment? Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/assessment-guide-description

Epstein, A. S., Schweinhart, L. J., Debruin-Parecki, A., & Robin, K. B. (2004, July). Preschool Assessment: A guide to developing a balanced approach. National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER). Preschool policy facts. Retrieved from http://www.nieer.org

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93–99.

Furger, R. (2014). Assessments. What teachers can do. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/what-teachers-can-do

Guskey, T. R. (2009). Mastery learning. In T. L. Good (Ed.), 21st Century education: A reference handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 104–202). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Guskey, T. R. (2010, October). Lessons of mastery learning. Educational Leadership, 68, 52–57.

Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2003). Educational testing and measurement: Classroom application and practice (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

Linn, R. L., & Miller, M. D. (2005). Measurement and assessment in teaching (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Stiggens, R. (2009). Assessment “for” learning in upper elementary grades. Portland, OR: ETS Assessment Training Institute.

Webb, N. L. (2002, March 28). Depth-of-knowledge levels for four content areas. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Center for Educational Resources.

Webb, N. L., Alt, M., Ely, R., Cormier, M., & Vesperman, B. (2005). Web alignment tool. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Center for Educational Resources.

Wyoming School Health and Physical Education Network. (2001). Standards, assessment, and beyond. Retrieved March 10, 2010, from http://www.uwyo.edu/wyhpenet

(Wortham 187)

Wortham, Sue C., Belinda Hardin. Assessment in Early Childhood Education, 7th Edition. Pearson Learning Solutions, 02/2015. VitalBook file.

The citation provided is a guideline. Please check each citation for accuracy before use.