Assessment is crucial in teaching for all subjects and courses, both in practical and theory work. The first assessment is used to confirm that students are enrolled in the appropriate course. Ongoing differentiated formative assessments are conducted during the learning process, culminating in a summative assessment that typically results in a grade or pass.
Assessment in teaching is crucial and using VACSR can ensure that all elements are addressed. VACSR stands for Validity, which ensures that the course content is covered. Petty (2005) explains that the validity of an assessment depends on whether it accurately measures the knowledge or skills it is designed to assess. For instance, asking students to list the procedure to spray a car panel may not be as valid as observing them actually performing the task in the workshop, demonstrating proper procedure and techniques and ending up with a finished sprayed panel.
Validity is concerned with the use of appropriate language for the level of students’ achievement. For instance, using level 4-5 wording in a level 3 course would not be valid. Fairness is a key aspect of VACSR and is intertwined with validity. It would be unjust to assess learners with questions they don’t comprehend, even if they excel in the subject matter.
The concept of authenticity goes beyond simply questioning if the work is done by the learner themselves. As Petty (2005) suggests, when measuring a student’s ability to design, it would not be realistic to give them a design problem to solve in a short amount of time, as that is not how designers work (p502). This statement highlights the crossover between authenticity and VACSR, as long as all elements are covered. Assessments like essay writing and homework can be difficult to assess for authenticity. While tools like paperrater.com can help identify plagiarism, they cannot determine if someone else has written an essay on behalf of the learner. Understanding the learner’s writing style and capabilities can assist in determining authenticity. Sufficiency is determined by the amount of evidence and frequency of assessment.
Using differentiated assessment to the greatest extent possible is the most equitable and effective approach for all learners to reach their maximum potential. This is called formative feedback, which plays a crucial role in ensuring the adequacy of assessment. Reliability can be challenging to attain, especially when evaluating essays, as it often comes down to the judgment of individual markers or teachers. Petty asserts that “assessment is only reliable if the criteria are well defined” (Petty2005p480). Establishing clear criteria establishes benchmarks that help teachers in diverse learning environments assign equal grades to students of similar abilities. Without defined criteria or a marking scheme, it would be nearly impossible to achieve fairness and consistency in grading for everyone.
Assessment must always be up to date, taking into account current laws, legislation, and curriculum changes. In the car body repair industry, where techniques and equipment are constantly evolving, colleges and training centers need to adapt their assessment criteria to stay current. It would be unfair to penalize students for not following outdated practices if the assessment criteria have not been updated to reflect modern methods.
For the car body repair workshop, I designed an assessment activity for level 1 college students. It was my first time creating an assessment. The learners were paired up and tasked with examining a freshly painted car to identify any flaws. Their objective was to discuss the cause of each flaw and propose a solution to fix it. They had to determine the suitable abrasive paper grade for removing each defect. Afterward, each pair recorded their discoveries on a whiteboard, noting down the flaw, its cause, and the solution for rectification.
I was pleased with the idea of bringing a freshly painted car from my workshop because none of the students had been involved in working on this specific car. Therefore, they were not aware of any faults with it, which provided a fair assessment for all of them. This assessment was indeed valid since the work on the car had just been completed at a body shop where the students would potentially work if they successfully completed their course. According to Tummons (2007), a valid assessment encompasses the entire course, utilizes appropriate real-life techniques, is most suitable for the subject or vocational area, and helps predict the learner’s future performance (Tummons, 2007, p38).
Using a real life resource like this made it easy to meet my aims: assessing if learners could identify correct grades of abrasive paper to use on different paint defections. The students enjoyed searching for paint defections, which helped with managing the assessment. Although this activity was authentic in showing the knowledge of students in pairs, it was difficult to determine which individuals contributed the most. Having students work in pairs was necessary to encourage learning from each other in a discussion. Ultimately, assessment is about improving learning, so sometimes sacrifices must be made. This also highlights the challenges of proving authenticity in both practical and theoretical contexts. To assess students, I used a freshly painted car, which was as current as possible. Prior to the assessment, I incorporated a learning activity using the latest dry sanding abrasive paper to ensure the students were equipped with the most up-to-date methods for removing defections.
It was clear that the sufficiency of the task required individual assessment of students on different cars. Repeating the activity multiple times would increase its sufficiency, and allowing time between assessments would provide a more accurate measure of learners’ progress. The reliability of the assessment could be questioned due to the absence of a marking criteria. Various factors, such as different grades of abrasive paper and individual working styles, could contribute to different defects and uneven grading by different teachers. To establish fair and reliable criteria, it would be beneficial to conduct the activity 2-3 times.
The initial assessment I conducted involved identifying body panels. This task was part of the learner’s portfolio and required individual completion. In the college workshop, there was an old car with numbers affixed to different panels, including the door, wing, and flitch panel. Each student received their own worksheet listing 12 named panels. They had to individually record the number corresponding to the respective car panel on their worksheets. I discovered that this assessment was uncomplicated and comprehensible for the learners.
I reviewed the learners’ worksheets and advised them to check their answers by thoroughly examining the car. Some learners were disappointed because, due to it being a portfolio assessment, I couldn’t indicate which answers were wrong. The worksheets were created by the organization responsible for granting qualifications, but it was up to the teacher to fill in the details about the specific body panels, thus establishing the level of difficulty. The purpose of the assessment was to assess the students’ understanding of car body panels, and it successfully accomplished that objective, rendering it a valid assessment.
The learners were observed carrying out a task to ensure authenticity. I believed that using a newer car would enhance the currency. The old rover in the college workshop would no longer be appropriate in the workplace. Familiarizing students with the modern structure of cars through a newer car would aid their progression. The worksheets adequately assessed students, with approximately 85% of the class achieving 100% accuracy. Enhancing the difficulty by including less common parts to identify would be simple to modify. The results from the first worksheet could be used to establish the next assessment criteria for this activity. The most positive aspect of this assessment was its reliability, as only 1 correct answer was present within numbers 1-12, making it quick and straightforward to grade.
In my recent reading for DTLLS, I discovered that dyslexia is not related to intelligence. This information was very reassuring for Arthur, a student I have been providing feedback to. Initially, Arthur believed he was one of the few individuals with dyslexia and felt embarrassed about it. However, I informed him that dyslexia is actually quite common and that many teachers also have it. This conversation had a positive impact on Arthur as he became more open about his dyslexia and even spoke about it with a smile. This experience highlighted the importance of highlighting the positives in areas where students may feel worried or unhappy about themselves. As Petty (2005) states, “feedback while you learn has more effect on student’s achievement than any other single factor” (Petty2005p480). Reflecting on this situation, the only thing I would have done differently is providing this feedback sooner.
According to Rogers, it is important to provide immediate feedback in learning because mistakes need to be corrected quickly before they become permanent errors, similar to quick drying-paint. Providing this feedback allowed me to establish communication with the learner and gain their trust. Arthur had no hesitation in informing me of any difficulties during lessons, which enabled me to provide extra guidance and assistance when needed. Drawing from my own schooling experience years ago, dyslexia was not addressed adequately unlike in recent times. Petty supports this notion by stating that over 50% of those in prison are functionally illiterate, often due to undiagnosed or neglected dyslexia (Petty2005,p503).
As a new teacher, I greatly value feedback and seek to receive as much as possible. It was during my PTLLS course that I first recognized the importance of feedback. This revelation occurred after a negative experience during a five-minute practice teach session, which was meant to prepare me for an assessed micro teach. I knew that I had not performed well, and both my teacher and peers confirmed this through their feedback. Initially, this criticism left me feeling discouraged and tempted to give up on my teacher training. However, I later realized that despite being negative, the feedback was actually constructive and ultimately assisted me in preparing for my micro teach. It was only in the weeks following the micro teach that I fully appreciated the value of this feedback.
After incorporating previous feedback, my micro teach was successful and well-planned. The feedback I received from my peers provided me with a range of perspectives and the confidence to pursue the DTLLS course. Many of my peers mentioned strengths such as my strong subject knowledge and engaging teaching style. The areas for improvement identified in the feedback will help me enhance my future teaching sessions. Without this feedback, I may not have noticed and corrected mistakes, such as the audio volume in the video not being loud enough for those at the back.
Giving verbal feedback promptly is important, but it can sometimes be forgotten. Therefore, it is recommended to provide constructive written feedback as well. I found written feedback to be very beneficial, particularly when it came from a diverse group of peers. Researching online can also be helpful. According to adult.com, getting feedback regularly from different classmates, including both slower and brighter individuals, is important to ensure understanding. Sometimes, it may require reading two pages of information to find one small quote that can make a significant difference. This entire experience demonstrated to me the crucial role of feedback, not only in providing guidance and correcting mistakes but also in boosting learners’ confidence, which can be all they need to make progress.
Bibliography
- Adult.com online http://712educators.about.com/od/teachingstrategies/a/veterantips.htm
- Petty G [2009] Teaching today 4th edition Nelson thorns
- Roggers J (2013) DTLLS Hand-out Waltham forest college
- Tummons J (2007) Assessing learning in the lifelong learning sector 2nd edition
