Weeden, Paul;, Winter, Jan & Broadfoot, Patricia. (2002). Assessment: What’s in it for Schools? Reviewed by Gale A. Mentzer

Weeden, Paul;, Winter, Jan & Broadfoot, Patricia. (2002). Assessment: What’s in it for Schools? London: RoutledgeFalmer. Pp. xii + 164 $ 29.95 (Hardcover)     ISBN 0-415-23592-8 Reviewed by Gale A. Mentzer Toledo, Ohio September 30, 2005 Assessment. What’s in it for Schools? is part of the What’s in it for Schools? series edited by Kate Myers and John MacBeath. This series of five books, according to Myers and MacBeath , “make educational policy issues relevant to practitioners” (p. xii) by providing teachers with an understanding of how policies such as mandatory assessment, in this case, can be incorporated into the daily teaching/learning process. While Assessment focuses on the educational system in England and Wales, the topics—mandated standardized tests, the continual rise of standards within these tests, and an emphasis on testing performance as the means by which learning is assessed—are relevant to all educational systems. The premise upon which the book is based is that teachers do not make use of testing or assessment results to “more effectively plan and teach their lessons” (p. 2). What Weeden, Winter, and Broadfoot provide in this book is not a new or fresh approach to the use of assessment as an instructional tool, but rather discuss the application of tried and true uses of classroom assessment to improve learning and therefore improve high stakes test results. Considering that the intended audience consists of teachers and other educational practitioners, there is an underlying sense that this book is preaching to the choir. The first few chapters focus upon providing a background of the use of assessment in the teaching/learning process. This includes the role high stakes tests do or do not play in that process, the various purposes of assessment (diagnostic, formative, summative, and evaluative), the emphasis among students to obtain high marks on these tests, and, as a result, the de-emphasis on assisting students to develop the skills to become self-motivated learners. The authors believe that the priority placed upon external, mandated tests have limited student independent thinking and creativity. This, of course, is not a new perspective. There has been an ongoing outcry (for at least 15 years) that claims that mandated testing disrupts the learning process and that the tests simply do not provide useful feedback for classroom teachers (Pedulla, et al, 2003). The authors assert that the use of frequent, formative assessment—what they refer to as “assessment for learning”—will improve student performance on summative evaluations (“assessment of learning”). In Chapter 3 the authors discuss the effects summative testing has had on teaching. Teachers, they believe, have fallen into a kind of “test and grade” rut where the only type of classroom assessment that is done is through tests and the subsequent assignment of grades. Little if any teacher time is spent on using the data collected to diagnose individual student learning difficulties and to develop strategies to address those difficulties. While there well may be teachers who function under this modus operandi, many teachers (the intended audience of this book) might take offense with this blanket categorization as to how assessment and teaching are practiced in their classrooms. Chapters 4, 5, and 6 present tips on the use of student self-assessment, on the value of teacher feedback, and the development of effective assessment. Self-assessment is the key to “assessment for learning”. Self-assessment, where students evaluate their own work, allows students to gauge their own progress, to set personal goals for improvement, and to develop self-efficacy and practices for life-long learning. However, research referenced by the authors (James, 2000) led them to the conclusion that self-assessment is underused in the schools and when it is used, it is often not done so with adequate student training and/or clear instructions as to what constitutes “good work” (p.85). Without careful planning and implementation, self-assessment becomes just another type of “busy-work” from the students’ perspective. However, the strategies that are presented to improve learning through self-assessment are somewhat pedestrian—developing learning outcomes, providing scoring sheets or rubrics to students, making use of different types of assessments like portfolios, journals and checklists—and are not treated in enough depth to really provide a teacher with an understanding as to how to design and implement not only self-assessment but also the instructional tools needed to engage in self-assessment. Chapter 5 (providing feedback, or marking student work), assumes that teachers have not had much experience in this area. Based upon the anecdotal account of one new teacher (p. 96), there is speculation that marking is synonymous with grading. Topics within the chapter include a discussion as to whether teachers should mark all assignments using the same system, making sure students understand what the “marks” or comments represent (or understand the rating scheme if used), the link between teacher feedback and learning, and the link between feedback and student motivation. Obvious advice such as “markings should be linked to clear learning objectives” (p. 101) makes me fear for the students in England and Wales considering that this book targets the practitioner and not the pre-service student teacher. According to the authors, assessment in England and Wales focuses upon “assessment of learning” and is used, therefore, at the end of instruction to determine how much a student has learned. In Chapter 6, the authors provide some guidance as to how to develop “assessment for learning”—formative assessment that will allow teachers to assist students in gaining knowledge or skills. This chapter is divided into four parts: (1) how policy can be used as a tool for change; (2) how planning for assessment can improve teaching and learning; (3) how to develop different methods of collecting and analyzing assessment data; and (4) how to record and report achievement for different purposes. Needless to say, each topic could be a book within itself—or at least a chapter. As a result, discussion of each topic is cursory and somewhat vague. For example, in the section covering policy, the authors note that if schools and teachers want to make the type of changes this book discusses, then they must “…reconsider their approach to teaching and learning and…re-evaluate their working practices” (p. 127). No scheme as to how this might be accomplished is provided other than the suggestion that a small group of teachers begin the initial exploration and that administrative support is vital. The section that addresses how planning for assessment can improve teaching simply reiterates the classic Dick and Carey instructional design model first introduced in 1968— stating learning outcomes or performance objectives, developing tests based upon the objectives, developing instructional strategy based upon objectives and assessments (Dick & Carey, 1996), but in exponentially less detail. The remaining two topics of this chapter are treated with equal brevity. Methods of data collection include observation, discussions (both classroom and with individual students), oral assessments (student presentations) and providing feedback. A brief listing of different types of tests is included as well (such as norm-referenced and criterion-referenced) along with cursory descriptions. The section that addresses recording achievement does not touch upon grading schemes, weighting scores, or data collection as such, but rather suggests that teachers reflect upon the data collected, share it with other teachers, and use the information collected when computing final grades. Rather than providing the guidance to employ strategies, the authors simply suggest that these are the types of things they might try out in the classroom. For the practitioner who is serious about improving student assessment practice, I suggest rather lengthy, in-depth textbooks such as Popham’s Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know (2005) which provide a more comprehensive and step by step description of not only what one should know about the various types of assessment but also how one might develop and use effective classroom assessment to improve learning. The conclusions Weeden, Winter, and Broadfoot draw, their emphasis on the essential relationship between formative assessment and learning, the need to employ a variety of assessment methods, the fact that summative assessment does not alone assist the teacher in the instructional process, the need to shift our emphasis from using assessment of learning to assessment for learning, are all admirable and relevant. However, the message is not new nor is it heralded in a convincing or compelling manner. References Dick, W., & Carey L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction. New York: Harper and Collins. James, D. (2000). “Making the graduate: Perspectives on student experience of assessment in higher education”, in A. Filer (ed.), Assessment: Social practice and social product. London: Routledge Falmer Pedulla, J.J., Abrams, L.M., Madaus, G.F., Russell, M.K., Ramos, M.Z. Miao, J. (2003). “Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and learning: Findings from a national survey of teachers”. Chestnut Hill, ME: National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 481836). Popham, W. James (2005). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know, 4th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. About the Reviewer Gale Mentzer, Ph.D. is a professional program evaluator and a research and measurement consultant who has worked with a variety of educational institutions and community service organizations in Northwest Ohio. She is currently serving as the internal evaluator on a U.S. Department of Education Teacher Quality Enhancement project at The University of Toledo and has interests in evaluation and assessment, the study of quality distance learning instruction, the effective use of technology as an instructional tool, and educational enhancement programs that partner with community service organizations. Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.