BECOME A MEMBER! Sign up for TIE services now and start your international school career

GORDON ELDRIDGE: LESSONS IN LEARNING

Learning How to Learn: Do our Assessment Practices Help?

By Gordon Eldridge, TIE Columnist
22-Apr-14


In recent years a lot of energy has been invested in researching the concept of “learning to learn” across the nations of Europe. The European Parliament has included “learning to learn” in a policy document, which lists key competencies for lifelong learning and defines it in this way:
“‘Learning to learn’ is the ability to pursue and persist in learning, to organize one’s own learning, including through effective management of time and information, both individually and in groups…”
A number of national curriculum bodies in Europe have attempted to define the competencies that contribute to learning to learn, and research from the Netherlands suggests that these competencies are in fact teachable (Meijer, 2007).
Paul Black and a group of researchers from the United Kingdom have done extensive research on teaching these competencies. They argue that the key concept involved is “learner autonomy,” and that there exist a set of “learning practices” that can help support the development of increasing autonomy in learners (Black et al., 2006).
One important set of practices included under this umbrella is “assessment for learning.” Assessment can be a powerful tool to encourage and support students in becoming more autonomous learners. On the other hand, assessment can also have a decidedly detrimental effect on students’ ability to learn how to learn.
So just what are some of the factors that determine whether our assessment practices will be a help or a hindrance for our students, as they learn how to learn?
Three key elements emerge from the European studies on learning how to learn as being essential to the development of learner autonomy: learning must become intentional, it must become reflective, and it must become collaborative. Appropriate assessment practices can be supportive in all three of these areas.
Intention
Intentional learning requires, among other things, that learners be clear about the goals of learning. These goals can be defined in terms of skills, knowledge, understanding, or dispositions. The most difficult of these to make clear to students are understanding goals. If we believe that the ultimate goal of learning in most subject areas is deep understanding, then research suggests we are often using the wrong assessment practices to get this message across.
Recent studies conducted in Hungary spanning nearly a decade found that teacher-assigned grades correlated strongly with results of tests of factual recall (at least in most subject areas), but extremely weakly with measures of understanding and ability to apply knowledge in context (Csapo, 2007).
Correspondingly, student performance on measures of understanding and application was low, but was higher on tests of straight knowledge. A bridge between recall and understanding is the idea of “meaning making,“ one of seven research-based dimensions of effective learning outlined by a group of UK researchers associated with the ELLI (Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory) project.
“Meaning making” involves the propensity for learners to make meaning by actively searching for links to what they already know (Crick, 2007). Assessment of factual recall has its place, but when assessment tasks rarely move beyond this, learners are likely to see knowledge as the ultimate goal of learning and are unlikely to actively attempt the kind of meaning making suggested by the ELLI project.
Instead, the learning itself and the learner’s approach to learning are both likely to become progressively more fragmented. Our assessment practices need to make clear to students what the goals of learning are and what they entail. The question we need to ask ourselves is: To what extent do our assessment practices make the learning goals clear, and to what extent do they help learners understand the importance of making connections and searching for coherent understanding of content?
Reflection
Reflection (and self-awareness) was the second characteristic of effective learning the ELLI researchers identified. At the opposite end of the continuum from a reflective learner is a learner who approaches learning in a completely robotic way.
The secret to moving learners further towards the reflective end of this continuum involves two steps:
1. Students must know what quality looks like, and
2. They must have the ability to recognize gaps between their own work and these examples of quality.
Traditional grading practices often limit the opportunity for learners to develop these skills. They rely too much on grading, and do not provide the tools learners need to be able to reflect on their own learning. These tools and strategies include:
• The provision of exemplars of what “good” looks like,
• Explicit criteria that describe levels of performance,
• Systems for supporting students in developing the skills of peer- and self-assessment, and
• Opportunities for students to set goals and act on the feedback they have received from teachers, peers and through reflection.
We need to ask ourselves the question: To what extent do our assessment practices demonstrate the meaning of quality, and encourage and support learners to reflect on their own work based on this?
Collaboration
The third aspect of learner autonomy involves collaboration. Collaborative learning acknowledges that we often talk ourselves into understanding. Group interactions encourage us to clarify our understanding in order to be able to express it and defend it to others, and to extend and modify our understanding as our ideas are challenged by those of other group members.
The ELLI researchers include a further element in their dimension of collaborative learning—”relationships/interdependence.” According to their research, more effective learners on this dimension are not only able to learn in collaboration with their peers, but are good at balancing social and private learning. They know when each is likely to be more effective.
This kind of balance is what will truly support learner autonomy. With regard to collaboration we need to ask ourselves: To what extent do our assessment practices encourage effective and appropriate collaboration between learners?
Consideration of the three questions outlined here should lead to assessment practices that are more likely to lead to learner autonomy.
Three specific practices that have been validated by research are suggested by Black, McCormick, James, and Pedder:
1. Frame assessment questions/tasks so that they explore key features of learning (e.g. explicitly encourage learners to connect new material to other learning).
2. Give comment-only feedback on work ( i.e. no grade), and require that learners respond to the feedback with re-submissions or with further work. Research suggests that if a grade is included in the feedback, learners tend to ignore the comments and focus only on the grade.
3. Develop self- and peer-assessment as part of the assessment program (2006).
Practices such as these are likely to move our assessment some way towards becoming not only assessment for learning, but also assessment for learning to learn.
References
Black, P., McCormick, R., James, M., and Pedder, D. (2007) “Learning how to learn and assessment for learning: a theoretical inquiry.” Research Papers in Education 21 2, pp. 119-132.
Crick, R. (2007) “Learning how to learn: the dynamic assessment of learning power.” The Curriculum Journal 18 2, pp. 135-153.
Meijer, J. (2007) “Cross-curricular skills testing in The Netherlands.” The Curriculum Journal 18 2, pp. 155-173.
Csapo, B. (2007) “Research into learning to learn through the assessment of quality and organization of learning outcomes.” The Curriculum Journal 18 2, pp. 195 - 210.




Please fill out the form below if you would like to post a comment on this article:








Comments

There are currently no comments posted. Please post one via the form above.

MORE FROM

GORDON ELDRIDGE: LESSONS IN LEARNING

What Are the Elements of an Effective Global Citizenship Curriculum?
By Gordon Eldridge, TIE Columnist
Mar 2021

Designing Curriculum for Global Citizenship
By Gordon Eldridge, TIE Columnist
Dec 2020