Advertisement

Student Assessment in a Civil Society

  • Charles F. Webber
  • Shelleyann ScottEmail author
Part of the The Enabling Power of Assessment book series (EPAS, volume 2)

Abstract

A rigorous public education system is crucial in supporting and nurturing a strong civil society and assessment is a key component of teaching and learning within any education system; however, assessment is also one of the most contentious and politicised dimensions within societies. Assessment data at all levels of an education system informs decision making, policy and practices, as well as individual student achievement and careers. The importance of assessment therefore cannot be debated but there must be appropriate and sound debate regarding assessment issues with stakeholders working together to balance the needs of students with the other purposes and uses of assessment information. When stakeholders constructively engage with each other for the advancement of teaching, learning and assessment they demonstrate multidimensional perspectives, thereby strengthening the fabric of a civil society. Conversely, when partisan politics prevails and unidimensional thinking abounds – displaying limited role conceptualisations thereby restricting opportunities to improve their educational systems – it places at risk the robustness of a civil society and reinforces stagnation and the maintenance of the status quo. Hence, a tenet of a democratic civil society is the preservation of respectful, open dialogue among divergent voices with the aim of producing a better educational system for all young people within that society.

Keywords

Civil society Democracy Assessment Leading assessment Multidimensional perspectives Unidimensional perspectives Politics Stakeholders Tensions and opportunities Assessment within teaching and learning 

References

  1. Aitken, N., Webber, C. F., Lupart, J. L., & Scott, S. (2011). Assessment in Alberta: Six areas of concern. Educational Forum, 75(3), 192–209. doi: 10.1080/00131725.2011.576803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alberta Education. (2008). General information bulletin: Introduction to the achievement testing program 2008. Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/media/946688/02-achgib-2008-09_%20introduction%20&%20revisions.pdf
  3. Beets, P. A. D. (2012). Strengthening morality and ethics in educational assessment through “Ubuntu” in South Africa. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(2), 68–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2011.00796.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bolt, S. (2011). Making consistent judgements. A professional development program based on using teacher judgement to assess student attainment of systemic achievement targets. Educational Forum, 75(2), 157–172. doi: 10.1080/00131725.2011.552694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boudett, K., City, E., & Murnane, R. (Eds.). (2005). Data wise: A step by step guide to using assessment results to improve teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cowie, B., Jones, A., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2011). Re-engaging students in science: Issues of assessment, funds of knowledge and sites for learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 347–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Danylewcyz, M., & Prentice, A. (1986). Teachers’ work: Changing patterns and perceptions in the emerging school systems of nineteenth- and early twentieth century Canada. Labour/Le Travail, 17, 58–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davies, T. (2006). Creative teaching and learning in Europe: Promoting a new paradigm. Curriculum Journal, 17(1), 37–57. doi: 10.1080/09585170600682574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Delaney, A. M. (2009). Institutional researchers’ expanding roles: Policy, planning, program evaluation, assessment and new research methodologies. New Directions for Institutional Research, 143, 29–41. doi: 10.1002/ir.303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Earl, L. M., & Katz, S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Crown in Right of Manitoba, Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth. Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth, School Programs Division. Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/wncp/rethinking_assess_mb.pdf
  11. Elmore, R. F. (2005). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fukuyama, F. (2001). Social capital, civil society and development. Third World Quarterly, 22(1), 7–20. doi: 10.1080/01436590020022547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Halstead, J. M. (2007). In place of a conclusion: The common school and the melting pot. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(4), 829–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heldsinger, S. (2012). Using a measurement paradigm to guide classroom assessment processes. In C. F. Webber & J. L. Lupart (Eds.), Leading student assessment (pp. 241–262). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Inbar-Lourie, O., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (2009). Exploring classroom assessment practices: The case of teachers of English as a foreign language. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 16(2), 185–204. doi: 10.1080/09695940903075958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Inter-Agency Commission. (1990). Meeting basic learning needs: A vision for the 1990s. New York: UNICEF House. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000975/097552e.pdf
  17. Kligman, G. (1990). Reclaiming the public: A reflection on creating civil society in Romania. East European Politics and Societies, 4, 393–438. doi: 10.1177/0888325490004003002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Laguardia, A., & Pearl, A. (2009). Necessary educational reform for the 21st century: The future of public schools in our democracy. Urban Review, 41(4), 352–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lewthwaite, B., & Renaud, R. (2009). Pilimmaksarniq: Working together for the common good in science curriculum development and delivery in Nunavut. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 9(3), 154–172. doi: 10.1080/14926150903118334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lund, D. (2003). Facing the challenges: Student antiracist activists counter backlash and stereotyping. Teaching Education, 14(3), 265–278. doi: 10.1080/1047621032000135177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Macfarlane, E. (2008). Terms of entitlement: Is there a distinctly Canadian “rights talk”? Canadian Journal of Political Science, 41(2), 303–328. doi: 10.1017/S0008423908080451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nixon, V. (2006). Egerton Ryerson and the old master copy as an instrument of public education. Journal of Canadian Art History, 27, 94–113.Google Scholar
  23. Pearce, C. D. (1988). Egerton Ryerson’s Canadian liberalism. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 21(4), 771–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pettit, J. L. (1997). “To Christianize and civilize”: Native industrial schools in Canada. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.Google Scholar
  25. Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  26. Reeves, D. (2002). The daily disciplines of leadership: How to improve student achievement, staff motivation, and personal organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Rogers, W. T. (1991). Educational assessment in Canada: Evolution or extinction? The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 37(2), 179–192.Google Scholar
  28. Shaker, P., & Grimmett, P. (2004). Public schools as public good: A question of values. Education Canada, 44(3), 29–31.Google Scholar
  29. Shamah, H. D., & MacTavish, K. (2009). Rural research brief: Making room for place-based knowledge in rural classrooms. The Rural Educator, 30(2), 1–4.Google Scholar
  30. Tupa, M., & McFadden, L. (2009). District, know thyself. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(8), 563–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. UNESCO. (1997). Learning: The treasure within. UNESCO report for education for the 21st century. Berlin, Germany: German UNESCO Commission.Google Scholar
  32. Webber, C. F., Aitken, N., Lupart, J. L., & Scott, S. (2009). The Alberta student assessment study: Final report. Edmonton, AB, Canada: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
  33. Webber, C. F., Lupart, J. L., & Scott, S. (2012). The ecology of student assessment. In C. F. Webber & J. L. Lupart (Eds.), Leading student assessment (pp. 283–296). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wolf, M. K., & Leon, S. (2009). An investigation of the language demands in content assessments for English language learners. Educational Assessment, 14(3–4), 139–159. doi: 10.1080/10627190903425883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wyatt-Smith, C., Klenowski, V., & Gunn, S. (2010). The centrality of teachers’ judgement practice in assessment: A study of standards in moderation. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(1), 59–75. doi: 10.1080/09695940903565610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zamudio, M., Rios, F., & Jaime, A. M. (2008). Thinking critically about difference: Analytical tools for the 21st century. Equity and Excellence in Education, 41(2), 215–229. doi: 10.1080/10665680801957378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Continuing Education and ExtensionMount Royal UniversityCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.Werklund School of EducationUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations