Learning Oriented Assessment

Assessment serves two main purposes: certification, which focuses principally on evaluating student achievement, and learning. When assessment is functioning efficiently, there should be substantial overlap between these two functions. However, the aim of assessment should be to strengthen the learning aspects of assessment; this can be achieved through either formative or summative assessments as long as a central focus is on engineering appropriate student learning. For formative assessments that learning purpose is an inherent characteristic, for summative assessments they develop productive student learning when the features described below are present.

Principle 1: Assessment tasks should be designed to stimulate sound learning practices amongst students
When assessment tasks embody the desired learning outcomes, students are primed for deep learning experiences by progressing towards these outcomes, akin to what Biggs (cited in Carless, 2007) describes as constructive alignment of objectives, content and assessment. ‘Alignment is evident when the articulation among learning objectives, content, instructional design, instructor expertise, technological affordances, and assessment strategies is as clear as possible’ (Reeves quoted in Keppel and Carless, 2006, p.181). The tasks should promote the kind of learning dispositions required of graduates and should mirror real-world applications of the subject matter. In addition, the tasks should aim to spread attention across a period of study, not lead to short-term bursts of sustained study for an end of module assignment; or in the case of examinations the memorising of material which is soon forgotten. As Macdonald suggests, ‘the design of assessment is critical in determining the direction of student effort’ (quoted in Keppel and Carless, 2006, p.182). Other characteristics of ‘assessment tasks as learning tasks’ include: a relationship between assessment tasks and real-world tasks; cooperative rather than competitive tasks, for example, through group work or project-based learning; and some degree of student choice in assessment tasks so as to facilitate student motivation and engagement.

Principle 2: Assessment should involve students actively in engaging with criteria, quality, their own and/or peers’ performance
Students should be involved in assessment so that they develop a better understanding of learning goals and engage more actively with criteria and standards. Within this strand (students’ involvement), it is included drafting criteria (Orsmond et al. cited in Carless, 2007); engaging with quality exemplars (Sadler cited in Carless, 2007); peer feedback (Liu & Carless cited in Carless, 2007) or peer assessment (Falchikov cited in Carless, 2007); and the development of self-evaluation skills or ‘evaluative expertise’ amongst students (Sadler cited in Carless, 2007). Through these activities, it is hoped that both the standards required and the transparency of the whole assessment processes can be enhanced.

Principle 3: Feedback should be timely and forward-looking so as to support current and future student learning
Students need to receive appropriate feedback which they can use to ‘feedforward’ into future work. Feedback in itself may not promote learning, unless students engage with it and act upon it (Gibbs & Simpson cited in Carless, 2007). Moreover, feedback should be less final and judgemental (Boud cited in Keppel and Carless, 2006) and more interactive and forward-looking (Carless cited in Keppel and Carless, 2006). Timeliness and promoting student engagement with feedback are thus key aspects. Although it is anticipated that the tutor would often provide feedback, peers can also be usefully deployed as givers of feedback (Falchikov cited in Carless, 2007).



References:
Carless, D. (2007). 'Learning-oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications.' Innovations in Education and Teaching International 44.1, pp. 57–66.

Keppel, M. and Carless, D. (2006). Learning-oriented assessment: a technology-based case study. Assessment in Education, 13.2, pp. 179-191.