Abstract
The nature and quality of the outcomes of learning are central to any discussion of the learner’s experience, from whichever perspective that experience is considered. For those outcomes to be assessed it is also necessary to articulate in some way the constructs on which such judgments are based. The relationship between the intended outcomes of learning and the outcomes as evidenced through assessment is typically conceptualized in terms of the alignment of assessment to curriculum or of congruence between them. In principle, for the assessment of outcomes to be valid the inferences drawn from the evidence of learning should be in line with the intended learning outcomes. The project that is reported here suggests that the relationship between assessment and curriculum is more multi-dimensional and multi-level than the terms “alignment” or “congruence” would imply. Five case studies were chosen to illuminate the relationship of assessment to curriculum in different educational contexts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education (2005). Assessment in 14-19 mathematics. London: Royal Society.
Assessment Reform Group (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 Principles. Cambridge: University School of Education.
Assessment Reform Group (2006). The role of teachers in the assessment of learning. London: University Institute of Education.
Baker., E. (2005). Aligning curriculum, standards and assessments. In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), Measurement and research in the accountability era (pp. 315–335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bathmaker, A. M. (2003). Learners and learning in GNVQs, PhD thesis. Coventry: University of Warwick.
Beck, M. D. (2007). Review and other views: ‘alignment’ as a psychometric issue. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 127–135.
Biesta, G., & Davies, J. (2006). Going to college: aspirations and experiences of vocational education students. Paper from the ESRC TLRP Project, Transforming Learning Cultures in FE. Exeter: University of Exeter.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university (3rd ed.). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Hodgen, J., & Serret, N. (2006a). Strengthening teacher assessment practices, learning and evidence. Paper presented at the 2006 BERA Conference, Cardiff: a report of findings from the first stage of the King’s-Oxfordshire Summative Assessment Project (KOSAP).
Black, P., Harrison, C., Hodgen, J., & Serret, N. (2007). Riding the interface: an exploration of the issues that beset teachers when they strive for assessment systems that are rigorous and formative. Paper presented at the 2007 BERA conference, London: 2nd report of findings from the King’s-Oxfordshire Summative Assessment Project (KOSAP).
Black, P., McCormick, R., James, M., & Pedder, D. (2006b). Learning how to learn and assessment for learning: A theoretical inquiry. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 119–132.
Boaler, J. (1997). Experiencing school mathematics: Teaching styles, sex and setting. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Crooks, T., Kane, M., & Cohen, A. (1996). Threats to the valid use of assessment. Assessment in Education, 3(3), 265–285.
Daugherty, R., Black, P., Ecclestone., K., James, M., & Newton, P. (2008). Alternative perspectives on learning outcomes: Challenges for assessment. The Curriculum Journal, 19(4), 243–254.
Davies, J., & Biesta, G. (2007). Coming to college or getting out of school? The experience of vocational learning of 14- to 16-year-olds in a further education college. Research Papers in Education, 22(1), 23–41.
Deakin Crick, R., Broadfoot, P., & Claxton, G. (2004). Developing an effective lifelong learning inventory: The ELLI project. Assessment in Education, 11(3), 247–272.
Ecclestone, K. (2002). Learning autonomy in post-compulsory education: The politics and practice of formative assessment. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning in a comfort zone: Cultural and social capital in outcome-based assessment regimes. Assessment in Education, 11(1), 30–47.
Ecclestone, K., & Pryor, J. (2003). ‘Learning careers’ or ‘assessment careers’?: The impact of assessment systems on learning. British Educational Research Journal, 29(4), 471–488.
Eraut, M. (2007a). Feedback and formative assessment in the workplace, expanded version of a paper for an AERA symposium (2006) on formative assessment in professional education.
Eraut, M. (2007b). How do we represent lifelong professional learning?, expanded version of a paper given to an EARLI SIG meeting.
Ernest, P. (2000). Why teach mathematics? In S. Bramall & J. White (Eds.), Why learn maths? (pp. 1–14). London: University Institute of Education.
European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (2008). The shift to learning outcomes. Conceptual, political and practical developments in Europe. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Accessed July 27, 2010, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/etv/Upload/Information_resources/Bookshop/494/4079_en.pdf
Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (1989). A systems approach to education testing. Educational Researcher, 18(9), 27–32.
Fredriksson, U., & Hoskins, B. (2007). Indicators of learning to learn, paper presented to ASLO project seminar, London, March 2007. Accessed July 27, 2010, from http://www.tlrp.org/themes/seminar/daugherty/index.html
Fuller, A., & Unwin, M. (2003). Learning as apprentices in the contemporary UK workplace: Creating and managing expansive and restrictive participation. Journal of Education and Work, 16(4), 407–426.
Gardner, J. (Ed.) (2006). Assessment and learning. London: Sage.
Harlen, W. (Ed.) (1994). Enhancing quality in assessment. London: Paul Chapman.
Harlen, W. (2007). Assessment of learning. London: Sage.
Hounsell, D. (2007). Towards more sustainable feedback to students. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment in higher education, learning for the longer term (pp. 101–113). London: Routledge.
Hounsell, D., & Anderson, C. (2008). Ways of thinking and practising in biology and history: Disciplinary aspects of teaching and learning environments. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Teaching and learning in higher education: Within and across the disciplines. London: Routledge.
Hounsell, D., Blair, S., Falchikov, N., Hounsell, J., Huxham, M., Klampfleitner, M., et al. (2007). Innovative assessment across the disciplines: An analytical review of the literature (Review Report and Database). York: Higher Education Academy.
James, M., & Brown, S. (2005). Grasping the nettle: Preliminary analysis and some enduring issues surrounding the improvement of learning outcomes. The Curriculum Journal, 16(1), 7–30.
James, M., McCormick, R., Black, P., Carmichael, P., Drummond, M. -J., Fox, A., et al. (2007). Improving learning how to learn – classrooms, schools and networks. London: Routledge.
Linn, R. (2005). Issues in the design of accountability systems. In J. Herman & E. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement: 104th yearbook of the national society for the study of education (pp. 78–98). Chicago: NSSE.
McCormick, R. (2007). Learning to learn: reflections on assessment, curriculum and pedagogy, paper presented to ASLO project seminar, London, March 2007. Accessed July 27, 2010, from http://www.tlrp.org/themes/seminar/daugherty/index.html
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 13–103). New York; London: Macmillan & American Council for Education.
Messick, S. (1995). Validity in psychological assessments. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.
Middendorf, J., & Pace, D. (2004). Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking. In D. Pace & J. Middendorf (Eds.), Decoding the disciplines: Helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking (New directions for teaching and learning, 98) (pp. 1–12). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, C., & Watson, A. (2002). The interpretative nature of teachers’ assessment of mathematics: Issues of equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(2), 78–110.
Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., Blank, R., & Zeidner, T. (2007). Alignment as a teacher variable. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 27–51.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2006). News release. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. Accessed July 16, 2007, from http://qca.org.uk/qca_9678.aspx
Schoenfeld, A. (2001). Reflections on an impoverished education. In L. A. Steen (Ed.), Mathematics and democracy: The case for quantitative literacy (pp. 49–54). Princeton, NJ: National Council on Education and the Disciplines.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Stanton, G. (1998). Patterns of development. In S. Tomlinson (Ed.), Education 14-19: Critical perspectives. London: Athlone Press.
Stobart, G. (2008). Testing times: The uses and abuses of assessment. London: Routledge.
Torrance, H., Colley, H., Garratt, D., Jarvis, J., Piper, H., Ecclestone, K., et al. (2005). The impact of different modes of assessment on achievement and progress in the learning and skills sector. Learning and Skills Development Agency. Accessed July 16, 2007, from http://https://www.lsda.org.uk/cims/order.aspx?code=052284&src=XOWEB
Wake, G. (2005). Functional Mathematics: more than ‘Back to Basics’. Nuffield Review of 14-19 Education and Training: Aims, Learning and Curriculum Series, Discussion Paper 17. London: Nuffield Foundation.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the input from those who presented keynote papers at the ASLO seminars – Jeremy Hodgen, Ulf Fredriksson, Michael Eraut, Dai Hounsell, Kathryn Ecclestone – and for the contributions from all participants in the seminar series. Full reports of each seminar and the names of participants can be found on the project’s website at: http://www.tlrp.org/themes/seminar/daugherty/index.html. The authors also wish to acknowledge the contribution of the other members of the Assessment Reform Group – John Gardner, Wynne Harlen, Louise Hayward and Gordon Stobart – who have been involved in the ASLO project from the outset and whose ideas have helped shape this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Daugherty, R., Black, P., Ecclestone, K., James, M., Newton, P. (2011). Assessment of Significant Learning Outcomes. In: Berry, R., Adamson, B. (eds) Assessment Reform in Education. Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0729-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0729-0_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0728-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0729-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)