Understanding Authentic Classroom-Based Literacy Assessment "The goal of assessment has to be, above all, to support the improvement of learning and teaching." (Frederikson & Collins, 1989)

by Sheila W. Valencia

• Introduction

• The Changing Picture of Assessment

• What Is Authentic Assessment?

• Why Is It Important to Align Instruction and Assessment?

• Why Does Assessment Need to Be Ongoing?

• What Are the Different Forms of Authentic Assessment?

• Why Is Student Self-Assessment Important?

• Authentic Classroom Assessment in Action: Ms. Rodriguez's Classroom

• How Can Teachers Become More Effective and Efficient at Classroom-Based Assessment?

• Final Thoughts

Introduction

John Frederikson and Alan Collins, two nationally recognized assessment experts, remind us why we engage in assessment. Although assessment is used for many different purposes and comes in many different forms, all assessment should help us become better teachers and should help our students become more accomplished learners. Assessment should not simply monitor achievement or report scores. Whether we are assessing to report to others or for ourselves, whether we are using standardized tests or portfolios, assessment should lead to instructional action. In the past, this goal was often lost. Today, measurement experts, policy makers, administrators, and teachers recognize the importance of meaningful, useful assessment, and they are working together to create new approaches to it.

The Changing Picture of Assessment

Assessment used to be viewed as formal tests, usually multiple-choice, selected by school districts or state administrators, and given to students once or several times a year. The purpose was to obtain information that could be easily reported to the public, school boards, administrators, and parents. Obviously, such assessment had limited potential to influence teaching and learning in a positive way. It was something separate and different from normal classroom life, and it often tested lower-level skills and concepts that were easy to test, rather than more complex, and often more significant, aspects of the curriculum. In addition, the information from these traditional assessments was most often reported as a number, which was not useful for determining what students knew or what teachers needed to do to help them learn. Other information gathered by teachers was not considered valid assessment; it was thought of as the teachers' anecdotal observations or the students' papers or classroom work. Students were the object of assessment, the people who were tested, rather than collaborators -- or even recipients of the information.

Fortunately, in the past ten years we have witnessed a revolution in assessment, one that has finally taken hold in classrooms, schools, districts, states, and the nation (Office of Technology Assessment, 1992; Pelavin, 1991). As a result, the definition of assessment has been expanded in two important ways:

• Assessment is acknowledged to have many different purposes and audiences. For example, assessments are used to qualify students for special services; to report to school boards, states, and parents; to evaluate program effectiveness; to monitor student learning and adjust teaching strategies; to evaluate students' growth over time; to engage students in self-evaluation; and to understand students' strengths and needs. Each of these different purposes and audiences may require different kinds of assessment and different types of information (Farr, 1992; Haney, 1991; Office of Technology Assessment, 1992; Pearson & Valencia, 1987). One type of assessment cannot meet the needs of all audiences. Administrators, for example, want to know about school programs or large groups of students. They might need that information only once or a couple of times a year and might not be concerned with individual students' strengths and needs. Teachers, parents, and students need more specific information and need it more often. By understanding different purposes and choosing different assessments to fit these purposes, we are more likely to discover information that will enhance teaching and learning (Hiebert & Calfee, 1989; Linn, Baker & Dunbar, 1991; Pearson & Valencia, 1987).

• The importance of classroom-based assessment has been recognized, giving it a central position in all assessment discussions (Hiebert & Calfee, 1989). Classroom-based assessment is closest to actual learning and to children; therefore, it is most likely to influence instructional decisions and to engage children in evaluation of their own work. It is more specific to individual children and to instruction, and it occurs more frequently than formal norm-referenced testing. When assessment and instruction are melded, both teachers and students become learners. Teachers become more focused on what and how to teach, and students become more self-directed, motivated, and focused on learning (Graue, 1993; Wolf, 1989). Classroom assessment puts teachers and children in charge of assessment. Consequently, it is our responsibility to understand the elements of good classroom-based assessment and how to put them into action.

A complete assessment system is responsive to these audiences and purposes, and it values classroom-based assessment as a major component of the system. It includes a balance of formal normative tests that help teachers and administrators know how students are performing compared to other students across the nation or the state; formal assessments published in conjunction with instructional programs that help teachers and students know how well students are learning; informal classroom work samples, performances, and observations that help teachers and students evaluate the application of skills to everyday learning; and student self-assessment that helps students become self-directed learners.