Assessment at HIS

I have a confession to make: in my early years, I was an enthusiastic test-taker, test creator and test administrator. Since I, myself, was good at taking tests,  I made all kinds of ridiculous assumptions like: everyone enjoys taking tests; tests really measure what they are supposed to; if you don’t do well on tests, a) you are not working hard enough or b) you aren’t smart enough. I really believed that testing helps people improve by telling them what they are doing wrong; it worked for me, so why wouldn't it work for everyone? The idea of tests being used to compare schools and teachers, thereby creating a culture of test-driven teaching did not occur to me; for me tests were all about helping children learn and improve.

As a young teacher teaching primary school, I enjoyed designing tests, and administering them. Marking not so much... but I did love compiling all the results and building up records of test results that one could show to parents. Since my first job was teaching non-English-speaking Cree and Inuit children, I was fairly quickly doused with some cold realities, and had most of my assumptions overturned. I found out that most children don’t enjoy tests – a tiny proportion might, but a much larger group finds them extremely stressful, boring, or if they don’t do well (according to their standards), devastating to their self-esteem. Years of seeing children work very hard, but still do badly on tests, blew away my assumptions, - dismissing more than half the children as “not smart enough” just didn’t work. Going over tests and correcting them with the children, seemed to benefit the few who made just a few mistakes, but lost the majority who quickly became discouraged when confronted with many errors. I came to see that at the primary level at least, the negative emotional side effects of testing outweighed any benefits.

Later on teaching in a secondary school in Nigeria, I was exposed to yet more realities of an exam-based curriculum.  At the time, (early 80’s) Nigeria was following the Cambridge curriculum, complete with final school-leaving exams all set in Britain, with no worry about making them culturally appropriate or taking into account the fact that most students were exposed to English for the first time in secondary school. Our teaching was completely bound by the syllabus, and I got a good lesson in “teaching to the test”  and the human toll of this "high stakes" testing. It all seemed very futile when we realized that only about 2% of our students were destined to pass the exams; for those that passed the stakes were very high indeed (entrance to university, international scholarships). For the huge majority who failed, their options were much more limited - second tier colleges (including teachers college) or more commonly an end to formal education.

When I came to HIS I was overjoyed to find that formal tests were not part of the philosophy. This does not mean no assessment; on the contrary, keeping detailed notes on children, selecting representative samples of their work to keep in their portfolios, checking off their accomplishments on the extensive benchmarks which have been developed over the years, and frequent meetings with parents ensures that children’s progress is well monitored.  Curriculum meetings with parents familiarize them with the skill benchmarks for each level, as well as the topics to be covered. Fairs, and other presentations provide opportunities for all to see how the children have integrated what they have learned. As the children approach Middle School, feedback on their work becomes more formalized in the form of written comments, rubrics and exposure to occasional tests and quizzes. Infrequent Math tests are introduced, and the process of reviewing work, and strategies for effective test taking are seen as important as the test itself.  When students get to Middle School, testing is one part of the overall evaluation. Since the majority of our students enter high schools where testing is a large part of the curriculum, these tests are seen as essential preparation for the “real world”. All the tests given at HIS are designed by the teachers and based on the material covered as well as the benchmarks for the particular level.

After about 8 years at HIS, years in which its assessment procedures were  strengthened and formalized, I took an unpaid sabbatical leave for the school year 2001-02. During that time, I worked part-time in an English junior school, where I was introduced to a system so dependent on standardized testing that its effects were felt everywhere. Before we arrived, we were advised to check the League Tables (charts that report the average student scores on standardized tests for each school) to find a "good" school for our 15 year old daughter. After choosing an average Comprehensive school for her, we were startled to find that based on her age, she would be spending the entire year revising (reviewing and studying) for the "GCSE" exams - apparently all the new material and actual teaching had happened the year before. Then when I started teaching, I was immediately surrounded by anxious teachers, worried about the impact the results of the next round of standardized tests would have on themselves and their students. The Headteacher was worried about the funding implications for the school if their results should slip, or not improve enough. But the biggest effect of all this testing was the impact on the children themselves. My job was to teach two groups of children, both of whom had "failed" the Key Stage 2 (for 7 year olds) exams the year before. The first group consisted of 12 8 year olds, who had failed the literacy portion, largely because their reading skills were low. A small number of these children had some severe learning problems, but the majority were normal, bright 8 year olds who had taken a little longer than average to learn to read. It was easy to see the impact this streaming had had on their self-esteem and desire to learn. (exerpt from diaries)

Britain underwent an educational revolution in the 1980's under Margaret Thatcher, a revolution which reversed the "child-centred" education that had spawned Theme Studies,  and which culminated in the Education Reform Act of 1988. The drive for more accountability led to an increased reliance on standardized testing which became the stick for educators charged with raising standards. A similar process happened in North America - over the past 25 years, the "steroidal school reform movement" described by Andy Hargreaves (the 4th Way) has seen the stakes of standardized tests rise to a point where

How we can operate in a world without report cards or tests? How do you get the children to work without the reward of marks or grades? These are questions frequently asked by both parents and educators from other systems. The answer can be found in the HIS motto “Learning and Loving it” - the strength of the theme approach is that curiosity and excitement about learning is built in, modelled by the teachers and expected of the students. Each child is expected to do their best work, and is held to a high standard...but it is a standard unique to each child, made possible by the teachers’ in-depth knowledge of her/his abilities. Small classes ensure that teachers get to know each child and their strengths well. Children are also encouraged to know their own limits and strengths, and to get satisfaction from knowing their work is the best they can do. Comparing themselves with others is discouraged; the emphasis is on  constructive criticism and honest feedback, from both peers and teachers. External rewards such as grades pale in comparison to the praise children receive from their parents, teachers and peers for a job well done at Fair, or in class. Read Alouds, when children prepare and read a passage from a book they are reading, are a good example of  this type of feedback. It is not uncommon to hear a comment from a child listening to a reader such as, “I think you chose a good book, but you should have practiced a bit more - there were a lot of difficult words.” When a child or teacher identifies a weakness or a difficulty, strategies are put in place to help the child surmount it. Usually it can be done through grouping the child with others at a similar level. Sometimes extra practice work is given; occasionally a child will get extra help outside the classroom. 

 "Certain uses of achievement test results are termed "high stakes" if they carry serious consequences for students or for educators. Schools may be judged according to the school-wide average scores of their students. High school-wide scores may bring public praise or financial rewards; low scores may bring public embarrassment or heavy sanctions." (American Educational Research Association, Position Statement 2000) at that time only existed in other places, and had been eliminated in Ontario. Provincial Grade 13 exams had disappeared the year before I would have had to take them (1969?), and even when they were in existence, I don't remember high schools being compared on the basis of their student's results. 

How do we know that our students are performing as well as students in other school systems? Anecdotal evidence coming from children who have left the school tells us that our students often excel in other systems, and have an advantage in that they are motivated learners, who can take a leadership role when tackling group projects. Solid research skills, honed through years of theme studies, are utilized as students tackle essays and other independent projects. Nonetheless, there are times when it is useful to have an objective measure of our students’ basic skills. Hence, yearly graded spelling and reading assessments are done with each child, and this information is used to help the teachers decide who needs extra help, or some extension.




In 2011, teachers decided that it would also be useful to have an objective writing assessment tool that would inform our teaching, (and reassure ourselves that our teaching of writing was on track). Two separate writing tasks were developed; one for the upper elementary (Olds and Elders) and one for the lower elementary (Youngs and Middles).We worked over several days with experts to develop a rubric to use in evaluating samples of children’s writing, and then, with graded writing samples from other jurisdictions, the levels were calibrated to give an idea of where on the writing continuum students were. For example, the upper elementary rubric was divided into: Ideas, Organization, Voice, Word Choice, Sentence Fluency, Punctuation and Spelling. By rating  a piece of writing in each category on a scale from 1 - 6, we were able to refine our feedback to both students and parents. Each piece is rated independently by at least two teachers, which allows us to check our perceptions against those of our peers. When reporting to the students and their parents, the emphasis is always on what the children do well, the progress made since the last assessment, and what they need to work on next. Because each assessment requires at least a day and 5-6 teachers, it is done sparingly. However, the process of developing the rubric has been extremely valuable, for the teachers and the students.

When I started teaching, I believed absolutely in the virtue of tests as a means of measuring children’s progress. I was well started was on the road to seeing tests as an end in themselves. Now,  I think that the development and refinement of assessment   should be about improving tools to aid teachers in doing what they do best – encouraging children to love learning, and to bring their curiosity and critical thinking to every task they undertake, and to create work that is their very best.