Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

Task 4: Professional Teacher Assessment Identity

Aligning with the views of Readman and Allen (2013), the planning of assessment is just
as important as the planning of teaching. This refers to planning assessment that is
authentic, fair and aligned to learning outcomes. The correlation between assessment
and learning shows how, if properly planned and implemented, they can work together
to enhance student outcomes. Understanding by Design is a planning framework that
compliments these beliefs as it places assessment first so that planned learning
experiences develop a deeper understanding of the overarching idea (Wiggins &
McTighe, 2011). I value the incorporation of authentic, relevant and varied assessment
so that students may become engaged, motivated and persistent learners. I aspire for
students to see assessment as a tool to help them learn, and hence develop a level of
resilience towards receiving constructive feedback and results.

Assessment
Assessment can impact students desire to learn faster and more permanently than any
other means of pedagogy (Readman & Allen, 2013). This is because assessment directly
influences attitude, understanding and achievement of learning outcomes. Assessment
is either used as a tool to monitor or evaluate student learning (Readman & Allen,
2013). When used as a tool for monitoring progress, assessment is said to be formative
(Lyons, Ford & Slee, 2014). Formative assessment takes place during the unit of work or
lesson and hence its purpose is for learning (Lyons, Ford & Slee, 2014). Assessment has
greater value if it is through the learning process as adjustments can be made to future
activities and pedagogy, and task feedback can be given to further enhance students
understanding (Dinham, 2011). Students are also encouraged to monitor their progress
and are motivated through the processing feedback received (Dinham, 2011). It is this
opportunity to improve teaching and learning that fuels my motivation for including
formative assessment. The opportunity for feedback and judgement at a time when it
can influence further teaching pedagogy also provides evidence for the Australian
Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [hereafter AITSL] standards 5.2, 5.3 and
5.4 (AITSL, 2014).

When assessment is used for the purpose of evaluation it is said to be a summative
assessment. This occurs at the end of a lesson, unit of work or term as an assessment of
learning (Lyons, Ford & Slee, 2014). Summative assessment therefore influences
teaching by moulding the learning that needs to happen in the lead up to the final
evaluation. An Understanding by Design planning framework ensures the learning
experiences align with the intended outcomes. This is achieved through a three-stage
process whereby the desired result is identified, acceptable evidence of this result being
achieved is determined and then learning experiences are planned to develop the
identified outcome (Margetts & Woolfolk, 2013). Although summative assessment
doesnt provide feed forward for further learning it does provide essential
information for record keeping and reports (Lyons, Ford & Slee, 2014). This ensures
teachers can meet AITSL standard 5.5, which requires teachers to report on student
achievement (AITSL, 2014).

A balance between formative and summative types of assessment is favourable
(Readman & Allen, 2013). This is because they are used for different purposes, provide
different information and are implemented at different points throughout the learning

Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

process. This balance also ensures evidence can be provided with regard to AITSL
standards 5.1, which require the demonstration of varied approaches to assessment
(AITSL, 2014).

Goals for assessment and evaluation
There are two main goals I aim to achieve in my approach to assessment and evaluation.
My first goal is to ensure students have a healthy attitude towards assessment.
Complimenting this goal is the aim that I can model and translate a positive attitude
through my actions and speech. As well as my acknowledgement of the five nonnegotiables (Readman & Allen, 2013), there are a number of principles I follow towards
achieving this goal. Clearly stating outcomes and my expectations for assessment
ensures students are on the same page as the person (myself) evaluating their
achievement of these outcomes. This ensures the perception of assessment is fair and
the task clear and achievable (Readman & Allen, 2013). Students will work towards and
meet whatever expectation is set, which is why I aim to consistently communicate a
high expectation of all students (Margetts & Woolfolk, 2013). To positively implement
this expectation a supportive student-teacher relationship is essential and hence
something I strive to establish with each individual student (Morrison & Allen, 2007).

According to Maria Montessori, assigning authentic assessment tasks encourages
intrinsic motivation as students see the relevance of learning. Thus authentic
assessment is another important principle towards a healthy attitude. Intrinsic
motivation involves students taking an interest in their work without the need for
incentives or punishment (Margetts & Woolfolk, 2013). This inner desire to learn helps
shape a positive attitude towards the task and the idea of assessment as a whole.
Another important strategy towards a healthy attitude is the development of resilience.
Resilience is integral to child development and being able to achieve success beyond
school (Colby, 2011). This is because resilience gives individuals the strength to take on
challenges and cope with frustration and failure (Colby, 2011). This is particularly
important in their perception of assessment and ability to see failure as a learning curve
rather than a complete disaster. Therefore by establishing a healthy attitude towards
assessment through the incorporation of authentic tasks and clearly articulated
outcomes, students can develop the resilience to take on constructive feedback and
further their learning.

This complements the second goal I have with regard to assessment and evaluation,
which is to use it as a tool for ongoing learning. The fundamental principle in achieving
this goal is providing high-quality feedback throughout the learning process so that
assessment is educative (SCSA, 2014). Readman and Allen (2013) noted how
constructive feedback and comments greatly reduce in value when a numerical mark is
given. I therefore aim to implement formative assessments, as the purpose is for
ongoing teaching and learning as opposed to grading and ranking. When providing
feedback it is important that critiques are based on criteria and do not seem like
personal attacks, that comments are developed constructively and that students are
encouraged and supported to critically assess and reflect on their own work (Readman
& Allen, 2013). This requires the incorporation of the four levels of feedback, task,
processing, self-regulation and self (Dinham, 2011). This encourages students to see
assessment as a helpful tool towards learning rather than a judgement of their worth.

Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

Teacher identity principles and values
To label my developing teacher identity I would describe myself as an authoritative
figure. An authoritative teacher genuinely cares for their students and gives them a
degree of autonomy within clearly communicated expectations (Whitton, Barker,
Nosworthy, Sinclair and Nanlohy, 2010). As a result students tend to develop greater
competency and a positive relationship can be established between teacher and
students (Whitton et al., 2010). This teaching style compliments the principles and
values I hold towards assessment and the holistic development of children.

Maria Montessori introduced a child centred approach many years ago that challenged
traditional beliefs of classroom structure and teaching. Having experienced first-hand
this child-centred environment there are many aspects that resonate with my teaching
identity. Montessori emphasised the importance of recognising student interests and
encouraged the incorporation of authentic learning experiences (Kalantzis & Cope,
2016). This compliments the principle that assessment should be authentic in order to
promote motivation, engagement and relevance and aligns with my personal values
(Readman & Allen, 2013). The ongoing record keeping through small group lessons is
one example that aligns with the School Curriculum and Standards Authoritys
[hereafter SCSA] principle that assessment is integral to teaching and learning (SCSA,
2014). During my placement in an upper primary Montessori classroom I witnessed
numerous small group lessons delivered daily that allowed the teacher to closely
observe student progress and understanding. Record sheets were created for each small
group lesson whereby progress is monitored in three stages, as seen in Appendix A. The
ability for the teacher to work in small group situations enables them to gauge where
each student is at and make accurate observations of their progress. This informs the
future mini lessons that are delivered and determines when students are ready to
attend particular lessons. Thus this illustrates how formative assessment can be
integrated as a tool to track student progress and tailor future learning to individual
needs.

When planning for assessment Readman and Allen (2013) have identified five nonnegotiables that resonate with my professional identity of assessment. Firstly they
describe feedback as being integral to assessment. This includes teachers providing
constructive feedback on students progress as well as students being self-reflective
and critical on areas to improve (Readmand & Allen, 2013). Second is transparency,
meaning assessment is ethically fair in relation to preparation, difficulty and
accessibility (Readman & Allen, 2013). Ideally assessment is challenging, as challenging
assessment deepens learning. Piaget describes these challenges as causing a state of
disequilibrium (Margetts & Woolfolk, 2013). This forces individuals to reconfigure their
existing schemas and develop more informed and accurate understandings (Margetts &
Woolfolk, 2013). For this to occur and for assessment to remain fair, adjustments may
be made for individual students (Readman & Allen, 2013). Consideration of these
ethical implications demonstrates an understanding of AITSL standard 7.1 and supports
the School Curriculum and Standards Authority assessment principle 3 (AITSL, 2014;
SCSA, 2014).

Another non-negotiable is constructive alignment. This refers to the assessment
aligning with the articulated learning outcomes and preceding pedagogy. This supports
my goal to develop resilience and is best achieved through an Understanding by Design

Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

framework as mentioned earlier. Authenticity is another non-negotiable identified by
Readman and Allen (2013). Authenticity ensures there is a clear link between real-life
and the assessment type or content. This supports my value of students being engaged
and motivated and aligns with the formative assessment explained in the Montessori
learning environment.

The final non-negotiable is student engagement. Assessment that enhances student
engagement with learning will elicit greater understanding and results than any
classroom activity can (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002). This is because engagement
enhances motivation and motivation encapsulates students attitude, resilience,
persistence and desire to learn.

Conclusion
Thus my teaching identity towards assessment is grounded in the belief that
assessment is a practical classroom activity that can be used to enhance student
learning. Through the development of healthy attitudes, resilience and student teacher
relationships, assessment can motivate students, compliment learning, and justify
achievement of AITSL standards. This is achieved through an Understanding by Design
approach to planning to ensure assessment and pedagogy reach the pre-determined
learning outcomes.


Word Count: 1543

Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

Reference

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL]. (2014). Australian
professional standards for teachers. Retrieved from
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-forteachers/standards/list

Dinham, S. (2011). Feedback on feedback. Teacher, 191, 20-23. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=10
8325815918206;res=IELAPA

Kalantzis, M., Cope, B., Chan, E., & Dalley-Trim, L. (2016). Literacies. Melbourne, VIC:

Cambridge University Press.

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic
success. School psychology review, 31(3), 313-327. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/219653569?OpenU
rlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=10382

Lyons, G., Ford, M., & Slee, J. (2014). Classroom management. Melbourne, VIC: Cengage

Learning.

Margetts, K., & Woolfolk, A. (2013). Educational psychology: teachers, teaching and

educational psychology. French Forest, NSW:Pearson Australia.

Readman, K., & Allen, B. (2013). Practical planning and assessment. South Melbourne,

VIC: Oxford University Press.

School Curriculum and Standards Authority [SCSA]. (2014). Assessment principles and
reflective questions. Retrieved from http://k10outline.wa.edu.au/home/assess
ment/principles-and-reflective-questions

Whitton, D., Barker, K., Nosworthy, M., Sinclair, C. & Nanlohy, P. (2010). Learning for

teaching: teaching for learning. Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning.

Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). The understanding by design guide to creating high-
quality units. Retrieved from
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/lib/curtin/reader.acti
on?docID=698904

Cail_Shenae_17753689_Task4

Appendix A

Student
names
written
here