which standards students are struggling
to master.
From a summative point of view,
users at the classroom and periodic
assessment levels want evidence of
mastery of particular standards; at the
annual testing level, decision makers
want the percentage of students meeting
each standard.
; Use a reading score from a state
accountability test as a diagnostic instrument for reading group placement.
; Use SAT scores to determine
instructional effectiveness.
; Rely solely on performance assessments to test factual knowledge and
recall.
; Assess learning targets requiring the
“doing” of science with a multiple-choice test.
Assessment literacy is the foundation
for a system that can take advantage of a
wider use of multiple measures. At the
classroom level, teachers can choose
The classroom is also a practical location to give students multiple opportunities to demonstrate what they know
and can do, adding to the accuracy of
the information available from that level
of assessment.
What are the essential
assessment conditions?
These conditions are most articulated at
the classroom assessment level, through
the use of clear curriculum maps for
each standard, accurate assessment
results, effective feedback, and results
that point student and teacher clearly to
next steps. Summative applications at
this level include accurate summaries of
evidence and grading symbols that carry
clear and consistent meaning for all.
At the periodic level of assessment,
essential assessment conditions include
results that show mastery of program
standards aggregated over students. At
the annual testing level, accurate
evidence of how each student did in
mastering each standard aggregated over
students is needed.
A Solid Foundation
for a Balanced System
Educators are more likely to attend to
issues of quality and serve the best interests of students when we build balanced
systems, with assessment-literate users.
From that foundation we can develop
coordinated plans for the use of
Assessment literacy is the foundation
for a system that can take advantage of
a wider use of multiple measures.
What Assessments Can—
and Cannot—Tell Us
In such an intentionally designed and
comprehensive system, a wealth of data
emerges. Inherent in its design is the
need for all assessors and users of
assessment results to be assessment
literate—to know what constitutes
appropriate and inappropriate uses of
assessment results—thereby reducing
the risk of applying data to decisions for
which they aren’t suited.
For example, because they understand what is appropriate at each of the
three levels of assessment—both formatively and summatively—
assessment-literate teachers would not
among the four assessment methods
(selected-response, extended written
response, performance assessment, and
personal communication). Most assessments developed beyond the classroom
rely largely on selected-response or
short-answer formats and are not
designed to meet the daily, ongoing
information needs of teachers and
students. As such, not only are they
limited in key formative uses, but they
also cannot measure more complex
learning targets at the heart of
instruction.
Because classroom teachers can effectively use all available assessment
methods, including the more labor-intensive methods of performance
assessment and personal communication, they can provide information
about student progress not typically
available from student information
systems or standardized test results.
multiple measures, taking advantage of
dependable data generated at every level
of assessment.
1A detailed chart listing key issues and
their formative and summative applications
at each of the three assessment levels is
available at www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf
/journals/ed_lead/el200911_chappius
_table.pdf
References
Chappuis, J. (2009). Seven strategies of assessment for learning. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service.
Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2006). Classroom assessment for
student learning—Doing it right, using it
well. Portland, OR: Educational Testing
Service.
EL
Stephen Chappuis ( schappuis@ets.org),
Jan Chappuis ( jchappuis@ets.org), and
Rick Stiggins ( rstiggins@ets.org) work
with the ETS Assessment Training
Institute in Portland, Oregon ( www.ets
.org/ati).
