So... What is Assessment?  The informal and formal gathering of student data to assess student learning.  “Classroom Assessment helps individual college teachers obtain useful feedback on what, how much, and how well their students are learning” (Angelo & Cross, 1998)

Partner Prediction: Predict the relationship between assessment and student learning in the classroom.  “The research reported here shows conclusively that... assessment does improve learning.”  “The gains in achievement appear to be quite considerable... among the largest ever reported for educational interventions.” (Black, P., William, D.,1998)

Why Assessment? Marzano, R.M. (2006)

Assessment Formative Summative Student /Self Authentic

Assessment, Continued FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT:  Used before or while instruction is occurring  Information gathered by teacher to inform instruction SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT:  Information gathered at the end of “an instructional episode”(Marzano, 2010) for purpose of judging outcome

Formative vs. Summative (in the classroom) Formative Assessments  Questions (no hands, teacher randomly calls on students)  Item Analysis (after homework grading, quizzes, etc.)  Clickers (periodically after key points in presentations)  Homework (if teacher uses to assess whether students learned the objective)  Quizzes  Mini-whiteboards  Pretests  Scanning the class to assess comprehension (Radar!)  Discussion board responses  Note sheets incorporating periodic comprehension checks Summative Assessments  End of unit tests  Mid-Term and final exams  State and national tests  Accreditation tests

Which is More Powerful – Formative or Summative?  In Black and Williams (1998) meta-analysis of some 250 studies... The most powerful feedback/assessment strategy is FORMATIVE And it is at it’s strongest when it informs the teacher and the student.

Formative Assessment – A Brain Tickler!  Do you know the difference between obtrusive and unobtrusive formative assessment?

Obtrusive vs. Unobtrusive Formative Assessment ObtrusiveUnobtrusive (Marzano, et. al., 2013)

Obtrusive Assessment Purposeful interruption of flow of instruction  Paper-and-pencil test or quiz  Demonstration (teacher or student)  Oral report (student)  Constructed conversation  Presentation (teacher or student)  Use of mini-whiteboards  Note-taking interruption with task (e.g. Cornell Notes)  In-class item analysis  Use of clickers in Ppt presentations

Unobtrusive Assessment Does not interrupt flow of instruction  Teacher observation  Use of proximity  Guided questions during group work  Observation of individual student or student interactions in groups, with feedback  Importance of teacher circulation

Teaching Assessment Tip – Circulate!  Break the plane  Full access required  Engage while circulating  Move systematically but unpredictably  Position for power Lemov, D. (2009) Bottom line about circulation  Necessary component of unobtrusive assessment  Effective classroom management tool

What about student Self- Assessment? When students track their own progress:  Marzano Research Laboratory: meta-analysis of 14 different studies in which teachers had students chart their progress on specific learning goals. The results?  Effect Size (the larger the ES, the more powerful) =.92  Percentile Gain = 32 Marzano, R.J. (2010)

Self-Assessment Strategies

Other Ideas:  Student “Grade Checks” at regular intervals  Logs or Journals of grades  Low grade student responses (for major projects, assessments, etc.)  Identify why they got the grade they got  Resubmit assignment after correcting mistakes  Identify what they need to do for next unit assessment or assignment

Authentic Assessment  Assessment technique “most consistent with the Learning College” (Shugart, 2012)  “Authentic learning mirrors the tasks and problem solving that are required in the reality outside of school“ (Ormiston, 2011) Performances/ Demonstrations Simulations/ Role Plays Portfolios w/ Strategic Selections Life-connected Research w/ Exhibitions

Assessment Formative Summative Student /Self Authentic

The EMCC Assessment Cycle

Comprehensive Assessment Tracking System (CATS)

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES 1. Faculty are more likely to change their teaching practices and strategies through the influence of their peers than through administrative dictum or externally imposed professional development (Huber, 2012; Reeves, 2008; Turner, 2013).

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES 2. Faculty (and leaders) who care about student learning have a persistent discomfort with the status quo (DuFour & DuFour, 2006; O’Banion, 2007; Wilson, 2010).

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES 3. Frequent formative assessment is one of the most viable, research-backed techniques to optimize student learning ( Angelo & Cross, 1993; Black & William, 2008; Marzano, 2006)

Four UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES 4. The Action Research Cycle, employed both formally and informally, is the most effective vehicle for implementing, assessing, and reforming instructional techniques to maximize student learning (Mertler, 2009; Mills, 2007; Reeves, 2008; Stringer, 2007; Turner, 2003) PlanAct Observe/ Assess Reflect

Now let’s get to CATS! 

CATS Scavenger Hunt  Locate CATS page  Log on  Search for CATS submissions in your division  Search the most recent CATS of the month winners  Search for CATS that focus on online courses  Rate and comment on two different CATS  Completing the Cycle check list  Creation of CATS

References Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P. (1998). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2 nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Black, P., and William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), DuFour, R. & DuFour, R. (2006). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Huber, M.T. (2008). The promise of faculty inquiry for teaching and learning basic skills. A Report from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Strengthening Pre-Collegiate Education in Community Colleges. Retrieved from: Lemov, D. (2009). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Marzano, R. (2006). Classroom assessment and grading that work. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marzano, R.J. (2010). Formative assessment & standards-based grading. Bloomington, IA: Marzano Research Laboratory Marzano, R.J., Yanoski, D.C., Hoegh, J. K., Simms, J. A. (2013). Using Common Core Standards to enhance instruction and assessment. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research Laboratories. Mertler, C. (2009). Action research: Teachers as researchers in the classroom (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mills, G.E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (3 rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. O'Banion, T. (2007). Leadership for learning. Community College Journal, 78(2), Retrieved from Research Library. (Document ID: ). Ormiston, Meg (2011). Creating a digital-rich classroom: Teaching & learning in a Web 2.0 World. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Reeves, D. B. (2008). Reframing teacher leadership to improve your school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Shugart, S. (2012). From an interview with Northcentral University Doctoral Candidate Peter Turner on July 18. Stringer, E.T. (2007). Action research (3 rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Turner, P. (2013). Informal faculty leadership that transforms: Evidences and practices for the Learning College. Dissertation, Northcentral University. UMI # Turner, R. (2003). A pragmatic approach to educating: Connecting problem-based learning to Service Learning. Dissertation, Capella University. UMI # Wilson, C. (August 23, 2010). From a telephone interview conducted by Peter Turner, Doctoral candidate, Northcentral University; and Learning College Project Director at the League for Innovation in the Community College.