Is teaching a 'partial' profession?

Is teaching a 'partial' profession? Words John Gardner

The public, politicians, policymakers and pressure groups ·prefer students to be graded bv external testing rather than teache r assessment. But there is no reason why the first method should be fairer than the second he role of teachers in assessment is a thorny topic. Some readers may be surprised to see this role described as problematic, but the dependence in many countries on huge statewide systems of external testing instead of assessments by teachers suggests that something is missing. What might it be? Well arguably doctors have it. Architects also have it. Even lawyers have itl What appears to be missing is public trust.

18 MAKE THE GRADE • SUMMER 2007

Most people accept the expertise and judgment of accredited doctors and lawyers. Ukewise, most of the public are content with the quality of the teaching provided by teachers in schools. But if teachers do enjoy our confidence to teach, why do we depend so much on externally administered tests to assess the results of their teaching? Surely assessment is just as much a part of teaching as it is of learning. Do we bat an eyelid at college or university teachers judging the performance of their own students? Not to any significant extent. Yet political groups, parents' groups and even other teachers can be quick to

criticise teachers' judgments and their assessment of learning outcomes. Many simply consider teachers to be "partial", that is, subject to bias. There is clearly much more public faith in the "objectivity" of external tests than in the potential subjectivity of teachers in making assessments of learning. All forms of distrust exist. Teachers may mark too generously because they do not want to disappoint their students. Or they mark too harshly as they "cash in stamps" against pupils who have given them bother during the year. They might even mark over the odds because it makes the school look

yr/.r-. [ ...____ _ / ~ CJ..d f"'

T s.-... -...--....,_ ~ ~ ::.::.=:::..-=.~"'!-.

t.1 4.

!:

.=:-~tr._.._

~ 1:

~--~fl"

.. . &

better. Many such claims swirl in the general milieu of distrust of teacher assessments of students' work but it has to be said, there is an element of truth in them. For example, there is clear evidence from a systematic review by Har1en et al (2004) of bias in teachers' assessments in several research reports. This included gender factors: for example, well-behaved girls may be graded higher than badly behaved boys for the same quality of work. Students with special needs may be marked at lower or higher levels because qf low expectations or even sympathy, respectively. Similarty, students' perceived "ability" may cause some teachers inadvertently to score lower than they should, agail perhaps due to low expectations. However, the review also suggests that bias and error may be significantly reduced or even corrected by a combination of training and moderation. There is also evidence that involving teachers in developing and setting criteria can considerably reduce bias error. Another dimension that prompts me to argue that teaching is a "partial" profession is the lack of assessment expertise. To me, such expertise comprises three main elements: assessment literacy, skills and values. Assessment literacy would include knowledge of the types, methods and purposes of assessment, and an understanding of the reliability and validity

am

of assessment results, the interpretation of responses, scores and grades, and so on, and their implications for learners. Assessment skills would in turn include competence in different assessment methods, question design, item writing, feedback, moderation, facilitation of self and peer assessment and so on. Assessment values would include an endorsement of the importance of consistency, Impartiality and transparency In assessment practice.

Absent by definition Is assessment expertise, by this definition, a part of every teacher's repertoire? Not in my view. In my experience, many teachers hold relatively simple notions of assessment reliability and validity. My feeling is that a significant proportion of teachers, who use commercial standardised tests, mistakenly believe that an 'A' grade is indisputably an 'I\ grade, and that a mark of 67 per cent is defanitely not 66 per cent or 68 per cent; it is an unchallengeable 67 per cent. Despite the many caveats on the interpretation of results that most test developers provide, I would argue that most teachers take comfort in assuming that there is precision, clarity and objectivity in external testing. They do not reflect on how inaccurate a picture of a student's learning such interpretations may actually be. The level of assessment rrteracy, skills and vaiUEiS is at best limited! Teaching is arguably a

• ...,fl,

....,.,..,.

a.c..wauo . -...,....,~ ...

'· / '!" ....,..,.,.., .... ,.,~ .. ---.. .!nr~ ~ . . .... . c.r.

.

.. · -r... u. ~

\,P

(

:-::~~-...,· ~--~Q.

!:::'=,....,.... CIIl!DIU. . . . A\II'ft* . . C:X• ( - .-.. ., ......,_. ....... :r ..., ._

........... .......... .... ...........

:.~.-~-""¥Y.-...,

~

~-.

;::

1.

~

... . _• .....coo..,..flllll:. . ._ ,..,.....,,_,__ do.J p,.~~ --'~'*""·~---.-:.

~ ............... ~ • .n............~ ....

=:r:::-1!.-..