What this standard says to me as a teacher is that I must use assessments that are appropriate for all learners and to understand the structural and conceptual aspects to reveal where students may need additional support to promote learning.
Upon reading this standard, I am puzzled by what we consider are "equitable assessments" and how we determine if an assessment is fair. After thinking about this standard more deeply, however, I find that an assessment is equal if it allows students multiple opportunities to be successful by asking them to demonstrate their knowledge in a varieties of unique ways. Regarding "equality," I was also struck by a conversation that happened in my seminar regarding equal grading for all students. Some of my peers suggested that if a student does not complete an assignment that he or she should receive a "0," while others advocated for a minimum grade, such as a "50." Those arguing for a minimum grade suggested that we, as teachers were not helping students by giving them a "0," which could prevent them from being successful in the class. Those arguing against said that it wasn't equitable to give a person a "50" when they had completed 0% of the work, while at the same time giving a person say a "60" for completing 60% of the work. Based on the arguments, I would say that I am in favor of establishing a minimum grade, but I would contend that this grade should not be a passing one, so that the students have some incentive to be more motivated to complete the work.
The second question that I had in relation to this statement was "how do teachers know what the limitations are of the assessments that they 'employ'." I think to better understand what students are going to struggle with on a particular assessment is important to create the actual assessment. I acknowledge that time constraints may prevent a teacher from doing so, but it is important for the teacher to create their own assessments rather than rely on the assessments of others, in order to reveal possible limitations and areas where students will be confused.
Regarding meeting aspects of this standard, I have tried to understand the limitations of my assessments by always completing the assignments for myself before giving them to my students. In this way, I have been able to see if it is possible for the students to complete the assignment, and within the allotted time frame. The majority of the time, I have also opted to create my own assessments wherever possible, so that I may have a more concrete understanding of its characteristics and limitations. When I have selected to use assessments of other teachers, I have also completed the assessments before asking my students to. At the same time, I have edited these assessments to better suit the learning needs and interests of my students.
Unfortunately, I do not believe that I have varied my assessment types enough this semester. The majority of assessments that I have used have been practice worksheets over important economic concepts, that give students many scenarios that they have to analyze. However, I have also employed graphic organizers with guided questions and closer writing assignments during specific inquiry lessons.
In future years I would like to implement different forms of assessment types akin to inquiry-based practices. I have tended to focus on document analysis during this semester; however, I would also like for students to write formally about their interpretations of graphs, tables, and other images. During this semester I have been required to give more summative and standardized based assessments, like multiple choice tests; however, if possible I would like to implement assessments that are more similar to what Sonia Janis employs. Dr. Janis assesses students through weekly work packets that are inquiry-based and directly tied to all parts of the week's lesson. In this way, students are given multiple opportunities to demonstrate their knowledge and to be successful.
A large part of what I want to do as a social studies teacher is to allow students to engage in inquiry around content and questions that do not have a singular nor straightforward answer or interpretations. Thus, to assess their knowledge and what they are able to do, I recognize that I must use different forms of assessments, as opposed to standardized tests or quizzes. While such assessments may be easier to grade or produce data quickly, they rarely ask compelling questions or questions that allow students to interpret content. Thus, it is important to use assessment types that are unique, designed for inquiry and interpretation, and ones that can measure the complex responses that students can give.
The way that I see this standard is that a teacher should use performance data and allow students to monitor their own learning to achieve learning goals.
Regarding this standard I had one question related to the type of pre-assessment that should be given out to students. I questioned whether informal pre-assessments should be used or more formal pre-assessments should be used to drive future assessments. In the end I think that students might be more receptive and forthcoming to a more casual pre-assessment like a survey, than they would be taking a pre-test or some other formal assessment. Additionally, I questioned when pre-assessments should be given out, as in a day before, a week before, or a month before the the actual assessment or task is given? I don't think I have a definite answer for this question, but I would say that certainly the pre-assessment should be given out well in advance of the actual assessment in order to provide enough substantial data.
Regarding this standard, I am afraid that I haven't given out many formal pre-assessments to my students. For the edTPA lessons, I did give out a formal survey to my students asking them to tell me about their prior knowledge related to macroeconomic concepts. For example, on the individual survey, I asked the students to give me a definition for macroeconomics and Gross Domestic Product if they had one. At the same time, I asked the students if, in their opinion, America was prosperous and if every American shared in this prosperity.
The majority of the time, I used prior academic performances to guide what assessments I would choose, and make changes where necessary in relation to student needs.
In future years, I would like to find other ways to pre-assess my students and their prior knowledge, besides using formal surveys and pre-tests. In addition I would also like to meet the second part of this standard related to having students engage in self-assessments and self-monitoring of their learning. Primarily, I envision this occurring during the lesson and in group work when the student must assume more instructional and leadership roles, such as summarizer, predictor, and time keeper. In this way all students will be responsible for their learning and the learning of those in their groups. I would also like for students to sometimes grade their own work and evaluate the quality of the response that they have given.
For the connections to my rationale, I would like to address the second part of the standard and its declaration that students should be involved in self-assessment. As specified in my rationale, I want students to play an active role in the classroom, where they collaborate with others, analyze current social problems, and form solution to these contemporary problems. By becoming more active students are given more autonomy and power in the classroom, and with that they must be more responsible and evaluative of their own learning and intellectual output. It is not to say that I will not help students and give them support, but students need to be more in charge of their learning and what they are learning in order to be successful in civic life.
Not unlike what is already suggested in this standard, I contend that a teacher should design assessments to meet what he or she is wanting the students to do in his or her classroom.
Once reading the standard I am perplexed with the following question: Do all assessments that I use have to match my instructional goals? For example, what if I make an assignment that assesses the students ability to pick out the who is answering the three economic questions in a given scenario? While this assessment does somewhat meet my instructional goal of having students analyze and interpret certain accounts, the larger reason that I selected to use this assessment was for students to be able to identify the three economic questions. In addition, what if I use an assessment from another teacher? While I am not opposed to using such materials, the instructional goals of the teacher who created the assessment may not directly match my overall goals for what students should be able to do. Finally, I would ask are their other frameworks that I can use to match my instructional goals to my assessments, other than backwards design? Todd Dinkelman, confirmed that there were indeed other models, which is why collaboration with other teachers and investigating research is such an important part of this profession.
During this semester, my assessments have directly related to my instructional goals when I have had students engage in inquiry lessons. During such lessons I have had some sort of combination of station readings with guided analytical and comprehension questions, graphic organizers for writing down both sides of a debate during structured academic controversies, or writing assignments where students have been asked to make a claim to an inquiry question and support themselves with evidence. These assessments have all been linked to my instructional goals, where students should be able to listen to multiple perspectives on a complex issue, analyze and interpret social studies accounts, form answers to inquiry questions, and using evidence as support for their claims.
In moving forward, I would like to develop more assessments that directly connect to my instructional goals, as for the most part I feel like I have selected assignments that are more "filler" tasks, than assessments that will cause students to invoke social change or to look at issues more critically. In addition, I would like to expand on developing more subject-specific inquiry assessments. For example, after teaching economics this semester, I have felt like I have just recycle the format for many of my inquiry assessments because they have produced sufficient outcomes (here I am specifically referring to my use of guided station readings). However, I would have liked to incorporate more formal analyses around graphs, statistical data points, and or tables, as such indicators are used more by economists.
I feel like my rationale is directly related to this standard because of its inclusion of the phrase "instructional goals." As mentioned before, students should be able to do the following as a result of taking social studies: investigate contemporary issues more critically, analyze and interpret social studies accounts and information, form answers to compelling and complex questions, cite evidence as support in claims, and possibly make changes in their communities and larger societies. Thus, if I want to assess based on instructional goals, I need to have assignments that allow students to navigate complex issues and acquire and practice the aforementioned civic skills and actions.