Module 2 focused on informal assessment and standardized tests. A part that stood out to me in Opitz (2011) chapter five was “There are some limitations associated with performance assessments.” I believe performance assessments are a great way to see what students truly know and understand but like chapter five discussed they take a lot of time and resources. I recently ran into this problem in my own classroom with a math performance task with counting large numbers. I felt like the task would be hard to manage whole group, so I decided to conduct it in small groups, but it is taking an excessive amount of time to complete. The second part of chapter five that I connected with was on p.79 when the authors discussed understanding students’ attitudes and interest as a way to motivate students to read. Once again interviews and surveys were mentioned. The text provided some great examples of interviews and surveys. I think these resources will be helpful to me in the future, and I am eager to use them in my classroom. The assessment methods mentioned in chapter five were informative and useful.
Chapter six in the Opitz text explained many terms associated with standardized tests and scores. Once I read the explanation of norm-referenced tests on page 92-93 I felt that this was the type of test I would find beneficial. I connected with this test because it compares students to others in the same class, school system, city, state, and nation. Then, the authors pointed out that just because a child is considered above average in a certain class doesn’t mean that same child will still be above average when compared to others outside his/her own class. However, the authors also listed some limitations of norm-referenced tests.
The article, Making the Most of Assessments to Inform Instruction, suggested that educators make the most of their potential by assessing more than a single skill, using formative assessments, and designing multimodal assessments. By focusing on higher order thinking, deep comprehension, and open-ended questions teachers will be able to assess how students solve problems and apply strategies while reading. I was interested to read on p. 421of this article that, “[E]xpectations for teachers to rely on interim or benchmark assessments for forming instructional decisions are based on faulty assumptions.” This struck me because my county takes a District Benchmark Assessment three times a year and those scores help determine things such as placement in the Early Intervention Program (EIP), and we are expected to drive our instruction from these test results. However, this article made it sound like that isn’t the best approach.
Chapter six in the Opitz text explained many terms associated with standardized tests and scores. Once I read the explanation of norm-referenced tests on page 92-93 I felt that this was the type of test I would find beneficial. I connected with this test because it compares students to others in the same class, school system, city, state, and nation. Then, the authors pointed out that just because a child is considered above average in a certain class doesn’t mean that same child will still be above average when compared to others outside his/her own class. However, the authors also listed some limitations of norm-referenced tests.
The article, Making the Most of Assessments to Inform Instruction, suggested that educators make the most of their potential by assessing more than a single skill, using formative assessments, and designing multimodal assessments. By focusing on higher order thinking, deep comprehension, and open-ended questions teachers will be able to assess how students solve problems and apply strategies while reading. I was interested to read on p. 421of this article that, “[E]xpectations for teachers to rely on interim or benchmark assessments for forming instructional decisions are based on faulty assumptions.” This struck me because my county takes a District Benchmark Assessment three times a year and those scores help determine things such as placement in the Early Intervention Program (EIP), and we are expected to drive our instruction from these test results. However, this article made it sound like that isn’t the best approach.
References
Risko, V. J., & Walker-Dalhouse. (2010). Making the most of assessments to inform
instruction. The reading teacher, 63(5), 420-422. DOI:10.1598/RT.63.5.7
Opitz, M., Rubin, D., & Erekson, J. (2011). Reading diagnosis and improvement:
Assessment and instruction. (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
No comments:
Post a Comment