If I knew exactly what was on the test, I could work to make my instruction fit the timing of the test, but I don’t. That leads to another issue I have with this idea, standarized tests are teacher-created. I’m not saying all formative assessments have to be teacher-created, but I do think assessments are better that way. I also think formative assessments should be focused. I don’t the cumulative nature of standardized tests to fit that idea.

I realize I’m being a downer. I just know the time spent on high-stakes tests could be better spent learning. The amount of time spent taking and analyzing those tests relative to their use is out of whack.

Have to go change the baby. I’m going to post this, even though it’s not fully thought through. Please keep pushing me. I know I seem resistant, but I’m open-minded.

Thanks for the continued thought (to both you and your readers). Your post, and resulting discussion, has lead me to finally getting aroudn to posting about our (British Columbia’s) standardaized tests (the F.S.A.’s) and how we can use (are using) these in a way that is not dissimilar to what you describe. I would be interested in your, or your readers thoughts:

http://principalofthematter.com/?p=127

Cheers,

Frank.

Formative and summative assessments are not determined by their length. They are determined by their nature. A summative assessment is a final assessment to see what a student has learned based on a specific set of standards. Typically, standardized assessments are thought of as summative because the results inform how a student has performed in a given year on a given set of standards, and it also informs, to some degree, how a program or school is performing with their curriculum. Although, that assumption can be terribly flawed. That’s why I wrote this post. To see if we can actually use those data to move us into a formative assessment mindset.

Formative assessments are ongoing checks to see how a student is doing. The difference with a formative assessment is that is typically doesn’t count for a grade, and both students and teachers can do something with the data immediately after receiving it. Like the article above references, students going out on the road with a driving instructor is a type of formative assessment.

So, it’s really how we approach the assessment and what we do with the information it yields that determines if something is formative or summative.

I hope this helps. Feel free to push back or challenge or disagree with any of this.

I could be wrong about (or oversimplifying) that definition, or I could not be aware of standardized tests that fit that definition (or both), though.

Chad- I agree that it does become a lot of testing. However, if we can actually use the data to make decisions that are best for our students, then I think the sacrifice is worth it. Unfortunately, that isn’t always happening in many school districts.

Heather- I think that is a very valid question, and I love Grant Wiggins response to it. At ASCD, he said about the question of teachers saying we don’t have time to assess so much, “If you say you don’t have time for this, you assume that the teaching is more important than the learning. Feedback is the key to reaching goals. Saying there’s no time is to confuse causing learning for mentioning stuff.”

I’m wondering…when it comes to these formatted, standardized tests, is it possible to test too much? And if so, where do we draw the line between too much and just enough?