Elephant Training: School-based Assessment

School-based Assessment Outline

Dr Masnah Ali Muda of the Malaysian Examinations Syndicate recently said that the new School-based Assessment just introduced would shift the focus from “Assessment of learning” to “Assessment of and for learning.”

What does this mean?

Well the key shift is away from 'learning the subject' and towards 'skills and learning development'. Learning the subject is still relevant but not in itself enough. There needs to be a move towards actually using the knowledge taught: a shift, therefore, towards performance.

The current, or 'traditional' focus is as follows:

Teachers focus on form and word lists

Teachers 'feed' language (e.g. by rote and memory exercises)

Teachers have in their mind what they want to hear and read

Teachers therefore teach to the test

Teachers therefore teach towards short-term goals and not long-term learning needs

Teachers therefore test what has been 'taught' and not what has been 'learnt' and 'how'

Let's return to 'of' and 'for' for a moment.

What does that mean in practice?

Well, assessment 'of' learning is summative; it tests the knowledge that has been taught, the content of the curriculum. It is usually done through formal paper-based, reading and writing tests.

Whereas, assessment 'for' learning is formative; it implies not just testing knowledge absorption but also how well the learners have done this. Additionally, it implies that assessment is ongoing and therefore should be systematically supporting learning through corrective decision making in regard to classroom practice. It therefore, should improve teaching too.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the more traditional summative assessment and testing?

+  Easy to write (though not always, well)

+  Quantifiable (1 out of 6, Grade B, etc)

+  Easy to teach towards

+  Good for external PR (parents understand it)

-  Tests what has been taught rather than what has been learnt

-  The transitions of learning are not assessed

-  Non-diagnostic

-  The focus is on production (writing) but not speaking

-  Knowledge-based not use- or skills-based

-  Adversely affects teaching standards (teach to the test)

-  Demotivation to learners (notion of right/wrong, only one answer possible, etc.)

All of the negatives stated above are turned into positives in formative assessment:

+  Focuses on what has been learnt as well as what has been taught

+  The developmental stages of learning can be identified and recorded

+  Can be used diagnostically – this is where you are now / this is where you can be in the future

+  Can help support learning

+  Can help to focus on traditionally neglected skills (listening and speaking)

+  Child-friendly

The above would then lead on to new processes and perspectives: Criterion-referenced assessment (so non-comparitive – this child is better than this child, etc); multiple ways of assessing (not just summative paper tests); ariety of assessment tools and environments; portfolio assessment; internal moderation; it can be used to assess the teaching programme me.

The Ministry of Education has adopted and adapted a model widely used throughout the world whereby every child's learning is assessed through national examinations and is also assessed on school-based performance.

The proposal is that after 6 years of primary school each child will take a summative national examination (watch out for a proposal to revamp UPSR in the not too distant future) which will account for 60% of their primary school 'grade' and the remaining 40% will be accounted for by formative assessment throughout their primary school life. 60/40 is the most often quoted division between summative and formative assessments in the published literature, but it could also have been 50/50, 70/30, or 40/60 too.

This throws up a lot of questions not only for the policy makers but also for the practitioners on the ground who will have to carry out the new policy. (There may be more than this list too!)

Will there be good governance in the system?

Will there be effective and informed processes (standards referencing)?

What is the link between school-based assessment and the National Curriculum?

Will non-academic development be assessed? How?

Will the teaching profession be trained in assessment & evaluation to empower it?

Will the teaching profession be trained in differentiating between teaching for understanding and learning for understanding? How? When? By whom?

How will the teachers' ability and integrity be developed and promoted?

Who decides on the types of assessment?

Who decides on the criteria for assessment?

Who decides on the assessment tools?

What's the range of abilities in the class? How will that be fairly reflected?

Will there be monitoring and standardization? How? When?

At this moment in time it is not clear whether any or all of these questions have been asked, and/or will be addressed. SBA has been rolled out without consultation (within and without the education system), mid-year to surprise and confusion. An elephant has been unleashed and it is far from clear what colour it is.

For policy changes to become firmly entrenched, the changes must be supported in the standard practices of the system. There is no evidence of this as yet. For example, no mention of proposed changes to the school testing regime that would be essential for SBA to take root. The old adage 'School should be a test of life, not a life of tests' comes to mind.

If teachers don't want to get involved, assessment of and for learning won't happen. Or it may happen in a way that ticks the boxes, but not much more than that. Teachers, in common with many people, tend to be resistant to change unless they feel in control of it or that it is beneficial to them (and their work). There is a risk that THE NEW is simply (mis)used to re-inforce current perceptions and practice rather than as a tool to transform.

I do think, though, that this offers up opportunity to help our Project schools and colleagues to focus more on performance and learning behaviours and also in the process to help policy makers as well as practitioners to start asking and answering those questions above. It may be possible, and only from the ground up, to assist the elephant to tread a purposeful path.

Soon more come.

Coursebook Conundrums (Pt 2)

What to check in a course book. Identify:
(1) actual methodology (which may differ from the stated one)
(2) syllabus (topic? notional? functional? structural? combination?)
(3) content and balance (grammar, lexis, pronunciation, skills, strategies)
(4) organisation (starting point, integration, recycling)
(5) lesson/unit aims (don’t teach ‘pages’!)


What to check in a unit
(1) Content & Balance
Grammar, Lexis, Pronunciation, Skills, Integration, Learning Strategies
(2) Aims
Relevance, Quantity, Challenge
(3) Topics
Relevance, Interest
(4) Methodology
Telling vs. Eliciting, Input vs. Discovery, Teaching vs. Testing, Teacher vs. Learner centered, Fluency vs. Accuracy, Communication vs. Mechanical Practice
(5) Text
Relevance to aims, Complexity, Authenticity, Length, Interest
(6) Teacher / learner support
Rules, Explanations, Guidelines


Important Questions for Teachers to Answer


1. Why may I want to adapt?


1.1 Omit something because...

•      pupils are clear about a language point.
•      pupils are competent in a skill.
•      there are too many tasks on a particular area/point.
•      the item/area concerned is not a priority.
•      the item/task is not well designed.
•      the item/task is not well-suited to its aim(s).
•      the topic is not appropriate for pupils.


1.2 Re-order or combine in order to...

•      match aims.
•      use a practice task for lead-in and elicitation.
•      revise an area earlier than the book does.
•      compare and contrast areas.
•      provide thematic unity.
•      provide an appropriate follow-up.


1.3 Replace because...

•      texts are of inappropriate length.
•      materials are inappropriate to the aim.
•      materials are inappropriate to the pupils' experience.
•      materials are unclear/ confusing / misleading.
•      tasks are badly designed.


1.4 Add something because...

•      areas are not covered (sufficiently).
•      texts/pictures/tasks are not provided.
•      texts/pictures/tasks are fewer than needed.
•      tasks are limited in scope.
•      tasks are of limited range regarding methodology.


2. What can I adapt?

•      Aims
•      Topics
•      Texts
•      Visuals
•      Guidelines and Explanations
•      Exercises, Activities, Tasks
•      Games, Quizzes, Questionnaires



3. Where do I find alternatives?

•      Same course book

•      Other ELT books

•      Publications (newspapers, magazines, encyclopedia, etc)

•      Media (TV, Radio)

•      Internet

•      Own materials production

•      From colleagues

Coursebook Conundrums (Pt 1)

You have heard, I'm sure, comments from our teachers that they 'must complete the book' and the syllabus, etc. They'll tell you this instruction has come down from the education departments to the GBs and that the Inspectorate expect it to happen too. I have checked this with the MoE and there are no expectations that they will 'complete' it but that they will use it as a guideline. A conflicting message, and most teachers will tend to do as told rather than buck the system and use the book as is necessary in the interests of their children.
“Coursebooks are not always clear regarding the methodology they use in terms of ‘what’ and ‘how’ to teach. There are also cases of inconsistency between stated and actual methodology. Finally, coursebooks cannot be relevant to all teaching/learning contexts." This quotation comes from Cunningham's influential book, Choosing Your Coursebook. Heinemann (1995). So adaptation and supplementation are the really the key words as opposed to complete it. But appropriate adaptation requires teachers to recognise and be informed about the methodology used by the author(s), or to be able to identify the lack of clear methodology. What is more, teachers need to be conscious of their own methodological orientation, that is, their theories and beliefs about the nature of language and teaching/learning. Such awareness is important because teachers’ actual practice may contradict their perceived methodological orientation. Therefore, the effectiveness of coursebook use is contingent on the level of the teachers’ awareness and knowledge.
The basic problems in using a coursebook are that there is rarely enough time to use all of it; it cannot match all possible teaching contexts; it may not offer enough material to cover all of the curriculum, or those parts that the children need most.
The implications are therefore quite obvious: what it offers can never be exactly what the children need; the methodology may not match the teacher's; the curriculum aims and the teacher's aims are rarely matched by the coursebook; the aims of a particular lesson/unit may not match lesson-by-lesson aims; teachers need to prioritize and select; teachers need to supplement (the obvious example here with KSSR1 is with regard to spoken and listening skills development, which are almost non-existent in the book).

Differentiated Learning

As we will be looking at differentiated / mixed ability learning and teaching next year as a part of Core Input here are a few thoughts to wet the appetite. (The cartoon above has been with me for many years and I have lost the source).

Richards, S. (1998). ELT Spectrum, 6. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.1 - "Every class we ever teach is mixed ability".

Rinvolucri, M. (1986). Strategies for a mixed ability group. Practical English Teaching, 7/1, p.17 - "We do not teach a group, but thirty separate people. Because of this, the problem of mixed abilities in the same room seems absolutely natural, and it is the idea of teaching a unitary lesson that seems odd."

Sukhnandan, L. & Lee, B. (1998). Streaming, Setting and Grouping by Ability. National Foundation for Educational Research. United Kingdom - would support this observation: "Streaming and setting have been said to deprive low ability pupils of peer support and positive role models outside their own ability group."

Hemingway, P. (1986). Teaching a Mixed-Level Class. Practical English Teaching, 7/1, p.22 - "Any strategy that enables the whole class to work together is useful . . . The use of the mother tongue may be an advantage, not a distraction, if it involves all students in the lesson, avoids frustrating misunderstandings, and encourages collaboration."

The gap between the students is not skill-specific, though individuals do perform better in some skills than in others, supporting the notion that learners usually have a variable rather than a uniform linguistic competence. But there is more to the learner than just language...

Prodromou, L. (1992). Mixed Ability Classes. London: Macmillan p.7 - "Every learner brings into the classroom a whole complex of personal characteristics which influence their approach to what is happening there. They carry with them a world of experience and knowledge, feeling and ideology, which may help or hinder, the acquisition of a foreign language."

These "characteristics" form an inherent and fundamental part of any methodological equation...

Prodromou, L. (1992). Mixed Ability Classes. London: Macmillan p.1 - "It is difficult to talk about the mixed ability class without seeming to subscribe to a kind of fatalism about the abilities of the less confident, outspoken or high-achieving." And in doing so, there is always a danger of thinking about them in terms of their weaknesses rather than their strengths.

Learner Motivation

This is one area we can focus on next year as a part of Core Input and also link it with School-based Assessment (SBA).
Here's a possible starting point to experiment with with your teachers before the end of the semester. Feel free to improve upon it.
You will need to prepare a grid document with four columns and four rows. The four columns are: Pupil; Motivation; Learning Bevahiour; Comments. The four rows are the names of four pupils.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What motivates learners?
Studies have suggested that there are two broad categories that learners fall into: instrumental and integrative. Instrumental motivation refers to wanting to learn because it will enhance job prospects, help with practical skills such as reading newspapers or texts, passing an exam or obtaining promotion. Integrative motivation, on the other hand, refers to wanting to learn for reasons of understanding, relating to or communicating with the people of the culture who speak the language being learned.

In the past it was thought that learners with integrative motivation learnt better but recent studies suggest a balance gains better results. Whatever the basis of the motivation highly motivated learners are more likely to synchronise their roles willingly with the teacher’s role; and are more likely to co-operate with the teacher in the various processes involved in classroom learning.

Classroom observation task

Before the lesson
1. make yourself familiar with the grid document.
2. choose four pupils whom you consider you know well enough to comment on their motivation for learning. Consider their reasons for wanting to learn the language. Comment in the Motivation column whether you think it is high or low.

During the lesson
1. consider the behaviour of your pupils in the class and the degree to which they synchronise and co-operate with the teacher and complete the grid. For example, consider a pupil’s:

    - response to the teacher;
    - involvement in tasks;
    - willingness to ask when uncertain;
    - tolerance of other pupils, etc.

2. There is room in the far right column for any further comments. You may like to consider whether the motivation might be instrumental, integrative or a blend, for example.

After the lesson
1. Comment on the linkage between motivation and behaviour.
2. Discuss your assumptions with the pupils in their mother tongue briefly and report on that.
3. How important is it for a teacher to know what and to understand their pupils’ motivations are?
4. What means/methods might a teacher deploy in order to obtain this information?
5. How might the information you have gathered affect your teaching priorities?

Acknowledgement: adapted from Wajnryb. Ruth. Classroom Observation Tasks (CUP 1992)

The start

I thought I'd try using a blog as a way of communicating with everyone. I don't have a clear idea of how it will develop yet. I'll probably post ideas and thoughts on issues arising, some articles and anything I notice coming out of the project (from you) that I think would be good to share.