Essential Understandings

Cycle Step 2: What evidence will we accept that students have learned the required content?

What the Research Says:

Members of a collaborative team are committed to ensuring high levels of learning for every student. They focus on each student’s proficiency as related to the essential standards and use this information to guide and improve instructional practice. Any viable school improvement effort must be supported by assessment and analysis tools that provide immediate feedback to teachers about the effectiveness of their instruction and its impact on student learning. Setting appropriately high student expectations requires the teacher to accept the mindset that “if students are not learning, then it is because we are not using the right strategies; and we have to make changes to these strategies” (Hattie, 2015, p. 18). Successful collaborative teams assume the responsibility for considering new instructional strategies and adjusting existing ones in order to meet the needs of all learners.

With the current drive for accountability, few schools struggle with a shortage of testing. Assessments required by states, district instructional programs, and those embedded within instructional programming abound. “It is not that one type of test is good and another bad; rather that the lack of a balanced assessment vision may lead to over-testing and under-instructing. What is the purpose of each assessment and how is the information to be used?” (Kramer & Schuhl, 2017, p. 79). This is a critical question for collaborative teams to consider.

State assessments, advanced placement exams, and universal screening instruments may help to inform instructional decision making, but these tests are not always aligned to the essential standards of a unit (DuFour et al., 2016). Since improving student learning is the focus of our work, collaborative teams should prioritize designing and delivering common assessments and acting on the data gathered about student performance. A common assessment is a grade-level or course-alike assessment that is aligned with essential standards and ideally developed by the team. Formative and summative assessments can both provide important information about what students know and what they haven’t learned yet. According to Stiggins (2005), a summative assessment is an assessment of learning while a formative assessment is an assessment for learning.

Designing a common assessment requires teams to draw upon knowledge gained from Cycle Step 1: What do we want all students to know and be able to do? and helps to inform action around Cycle Step 3: What instructional practices will produce our best results? This information will drive intervention and enrichment discussed later in Cycle Step 4: What will we do if our students have not yet learned it? and Cycle Step 5: What will we do to differentiate instruction when students already know it? Common formative and summative assessments provide critical information needed by teachers to adjust their practice and ensure all students master the essential standards of each course or grade level. A powerful practice is for collaborative teams to develop common formative and summative assessments together, ensuring they are rigorous and aligned to essential standards. This practice ensures that teachers know what will be assessed and how it will be assessed and are able to align their instruction accordingly. Further, it diminishes the likelihood of blaming the assessment if students don’t do well.

A balanced assessment system requires school leaders to reach consensus around the purpose, frequency, and timing of needed tests. As previously noted, the school will ideally place an emphasis on teacher-created common assessments paired with periodic district benchmark assessments and progress-monitoring assessments. State mandated tests should be administered as required with care and time given to ensure that students understand both the importance of these tests and that it is essential that they produce their best work. School communities will benefit from a shared school-wide assessment calendar that communicates required testing dates, supports efficient school operations, and assists collaborative teams with planning and pacing.

Assessments should be carefully considered to ensure that they align with the guaranteed and viable curriculum, identify the appropriate depth of cognitive processing required to complete the associated performance tasks and that all assessment items exhibit desirable psychometric properties. Assessments should be administered in the manner best determined by the teacher, whenever possible, which may include online, paper-pencil, or using adaptive technology. Most critically, data should be quickly available after the assessment to determine which students have learned the targeted content to help the teacher determine the direct impact of their instruction on learning (Hattie, 2015). For students to gain insight into their current level of understanding, frequent and immediate feedback is critical. Students should be provided with goal setting, opportunities to monitor their progress on assessments, and to engage, actively, in support strategies designed to advance their understanding.