Introduction
Educators normally evaluate and account for student’s learning results. They put into service variety of evaluation schemes that are fair and reliable to students. Educational records of students are as well kept by these educators to enable them check the students’ progress (Miller, Telljohann, & Symons, 1996).
One key to making grades more meaningful is carefully of a distinctive feature in academic accomplishments. This elaborate and systematic plan of action remains the first step as we look to develop gracing practices that support higher level thinking (Winger, 2005). Parents and teachers assess the development of young children as they avail chance for growth and skills needed for their progress in life (Ritzel, 1996). Nevertheless, the educator will be forced to use the following methods to assessing students:
- determining how well students have achieved the outcomes
- Diagnosing learners difficulties
- Providing feedback to learners
- To identify ways of improving teaching and students’ learning.
Consequently, for assessment to be focused, teachers must lessen the misconception aspects of students’ products (Meeks, Heit, & Page, 1996).
Assessment Concepts
In as much as it may be seen that several assessments makes the students more perfect, numerous appraises do not transform into excellent proof. Using information to divide student desires in order to overpower the reason of getting additional results (Stiggins, 2005).
Teachers should deeply appreciate these notions and their repercussions. These notions are reliability and fairness and through them high quality of teaching and understanding is experienced (Wiggins, & McTighe, 2005).
Reliability
This is the extent upon which results are fault. Unreliable results do not provide a good basis for any of the purposes of assessment
Results of unreliable results
- Students usually react differently to different parts of the test that were supposed to determine the same thing.
- Students different response to test while their understanding did not changed
Accordingly, it will not provide information from which we can draw conclusions which are well grounded in logic about student’s teaching (McMillan, 2011).
Fairness
Fairness in assessment should be considered from three perspectives: a) fairness of what students are asked to do to express their learning b) judging the fairness of one’s judgements about the quality of students’ performance. To achieve fairness in assessment focused on quality of being the same in quantity, concern will primarily be on assessing all students in the same standardised way using the same assessment tasks and methods, administering the task in the same way/time, marking in a consistent way and interpreting the results consistently (Pealer, & Dorman, 1997).
Reduction of gender influence in an unfair way associated to students’ social and cultural backgrounds are critical areas for these programs to be addressed, and perceived (Marzano, 2000).
Reference List
Marzano, R.J. (2000). Transforming classroom grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
McMillan, J. H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for Effective Standards-Based Instruction (5th Ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Meeks, L. B., Heit, P., & Page, R. (1996). Comprehensive school health education: Totally awesome strategies for teaching health (2nd ed.). Blacklick, OH: Meeks Heit.
Miller, D. F., Telljohann, S. K., & Symons, C. W. (1996). Health education in the elementary & middle-level school (2nd ed.). Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.
Pealer, L. N., & Dorman, S. M. (1997). Evaluating health related web sites. Journal of School Health, 67(6), 232-235.
Ritzel, D. O. (1996). Resources in safety education and injury prevention. The Health Education Monograph Series, 14(3), 34-38.
Stiggins, R. (2005). Student-involved assessment for learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Under-standing by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Winger, T. (2005). Grading to communicate. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 61-65.