Advertisement

Towards Theorising Assessment as Critical Inquiry

  • Claire Wyatt-Smith
  • Stephanie Gunn

Throughout the past two decades assessment has operated on two fronts. First has been the continuing interest in large-scale, standardised testing, which affords governments and countries data for accountability and reporting purposes. Second has been the increasing interest in assessment within a learning culture (Shepard, 2000). Broadly speaking, this has concentrated on formative assessment for improving learning and has generated a proliferation of phrases seeking to highlight vital connections between assessment and learning (for example, ‘assessment for/as learning’). Each of these fronts can be understood as giving priority to particular assessment activities and contexts. In the case of standardised testing, usually undertaken to generate data for systems’ purposes, the context is necessarily controlled, with variables such as time and place fixed and regulated.

Keywords

Assessment Practice Critical Inquiry Assessment Task Educational Assessment Teacher Judgment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cooksey, R. W., Freebody, P., & Wyatt-Smith, C. M. (2007). Assessment as judgment-in-context: Analysing how teachers evaluate students’ writing. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(5), 401–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cumming, J. J., & Maxwell, G. (1999). Contexualising authentic assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 6(2), 177–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cumming, J. J., & Wyatt-Smith, C. M. (2001). Literacy and curriculum: Success in senior schooling. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  4. Cumming, J. J., Wyatt-Smith, C. M., Ryan, J., & Doig, S. M. 1998. The literacy-curriculum interface: The literacy demands of the curriculum in post-compulsory schooling. Final Report. Brisbane: Centre for Literacy Education Research, Griffith University, and Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  5. Daugherty, R. (1997). Consistency in teachers’ assessments: Defining the problem, finding the answers. British Journal of Curriculum and Assessment, 8(1), 32–38.Google Scholar
  6. Dawkins, P. (2007). Federalist paper 2: The future of schooling in Australia. Victoria, Australia: The Council for The Australian Federation.Google Scholar
  7. Department of Education and the Arts. (2006). Literacy the key to learning: Framework for action 2006–2008. Queensland: Author.Google Scholar
  8. Delandshere, G. (2002). Assessment as inquiry. Teachers’ College Record, 104(7), 1461–1484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Freebody, P. (2006). Knowledge, skill and disposition in the organisation of senior schooling. A discussion paper prepared for the Queensland Studies Authority. Queensland, Australia: Queensland Studies Authority.Google Scholar
  10. Freebody, P., Ludwig, C. M., & Gunn, S. (1995). Everyday literacy practices in and out of schools in low socio-economic urban communities. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training.Google Scholar
  11. Gill, J. H. (1993). Learning to learn: Towards a philosophy of education. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  13. Harlen, W. 2004. Can assessment by teachers be a dependable option for summative purposes? Paper presented at General Teaching Council for England Conference, 29 November, 2004, London.Google Scholar
  14. Harlen, W. (2005). Teachers summative practices and assessment for learning tensions and synergies. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 207–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harris, C. J., McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Marx, R. W., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Usable assessments for teaching science content and inquiry standards. Peers Matter, Washington, D.C: National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  16. James, M. (1998). Using assessment for school improvement. Oxford: Heinemann Educational.Google Scholar
  17. Lincoln, M., & Neville, M. 2006. Middle phase of learning cluster project 2006: Final report. Retrieved July 30, 2008, from <http://education.qld.gov.au/curriculum/middle/docs/mpl-cluster-final.pdf>.
  18. Matters, G. (2006). Assessment approaches in Queensland senior science syllabuses. A report to the Queensland Studies Authority. Brisbane: ACER.Google Scholar
  19. Maxwell, G. (2001). Moderation of assessments in vocational education and training. Queensland: Department of Employment and Training.Google Scholar
  20. Maxwell, G. 2006. Quality management of school-based assessments: Moderation of teacher judgments. Paper presented at the 32nd IAEA Conference, Singapore.Google Scholar
  21. Maxwell, G. (2007). Implications for moderation of proposed changes to senior secondary school syllabuses. Paper commissioned by the Queensland Studies Authority. Brisbane: Queensland Studies Authority.Google Scholar
  22. McClay, J. K. (2002). Hidden ‘treasure’: New genres, new media and the teaching of writing. English in Education, 36(1), 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from Programme for International Student Assessment 2003. Paris: Author.Google Scholar
  24. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2006). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow’s world. Google Scholar
  25. Phelps, L. (1989). Images of student writing: the deep structure of teacher response. In C. M. Anson (Ed.), Writing and response: Theory, practice, and research. Urbana, IL: NCTE.Google Scholar
  26. Sadler, D. R. (1987). Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education, 13, 191–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Presidential address, American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 2000.Google Scholar
  30. Smith, C. M. (1989). A study of standards specifications in English. Unpublished masters thesis. Brisbane: University of Queensland.Google Scholar
  31. Stiggins, R. (2004). New assessment beliefs for a new school mission. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 22–28.Google Scholar
  32. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instruction: An overview of the TIMSS video study. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(1), 14–21.Google Scholar
  33. Wilmut, J. (2005). Experiences of summative teacher assessment in the UK. A review conducted for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.Google Scholar
  34. Wilson, M. (Ed.). (2004). Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability. In The 103rd Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education Part 2. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Wyatt-Smith, C. M. 2008. Developing quality assessment opportunities. In C.M. Wyatt-Smith & S. Bridges, Meeting in the middle—Assessment, pedagogy, learning and students at educational disadvantage. Evaluation for The Literacy and Numeracy in the Middle Years of School Initiative Strand A. Retrieved August 8, 2008, from <http://education.qld.gov.au/literacy/docs/deewr-myp-final-report.pdf>.
  36. Wyatt-Smith, C. M., & Bridges, S. 2006. Assessment for learning: An Australian study in middle schooling. International association for Educational Assessment, Singapore, 2006. Retrieved July 30, 2008, from <http://www.iaea2006.seab.gov.sg/conference/download/papers/Assessment%20for%20learning%20-%20An%20Australian%20study%20in%20middle%20schooling.pdf>.
  37. Wyatt-Smith, C. M., & Bridges, S. 2008. Meeting in the middle—Assessment, pedagogy, learning and students at educational disadvantage. Evaluation for The Literacy and Numeracy in the Middle Years of Schooling Initiative Strand A. Retrieved July 30, 2008, from <http://education.qld.gov.au/literacy/docs/deewr-myp-final-report.pdf>.
  38. Wyatt-Smith, C., & Castleton, G. (2005). Examining how teachers judge student writing: An Australian case study. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 131–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wyatt-Smith, C. M., & Cumming, J. J. (2003). Curriculum literacies: Expanding domains of assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, policy and practice, 10(1), 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wyatt-Smith, C. M., & Cumming, J. J. (Special Issue Editors) (2001). Examining the literacy-curriculum relationship. A special edition of Linguistics and Education, 11(3), 295–312.Google Scholar
  41. Wyatt-Smith, C., Castleton, G., & Ryan, J. (2004). New research methodologies for researching new literacies. International Journal of Learning, 11, 421–429.Google Scholar
  42. Wyatt-Smith, C. M., Cumming, J., & Elkins, J. (2005). Redesigning assessment. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education, Mt Gravatt campusGriffith UniversityAustralia
  2. 2.Griffith University in QueenslandAustralia

Personalised recommendations