In my recent post, I promised to reveal the type of through year assessment design I’d like to see. After providing some background and context, I provide a high-level description of my design for a through year assessment system that promotes deeper learning while alleviating many of the problems caused by current assessment designs.

The Center for Assessment is partnering with PBLWorks to provide tools and resources supporting project-based instruction and assessment of 21^st Century skills.

I titled my 2020 year-end CenterLine post, “Oh, What a Year!” with hopes that we were turning the pandemic corner. There’s no question the widespread availability of vaccines beginning in early spring 2021 gave us all a sense of hope only to have it dashed and renewed multiple times throughout this year following COVID’s ebb and flow.

Validity is the ultimate goal of any system. The concept of validity is relatively straightforward: it means that an instrument, or system, measures what it is purported to measure. Getting valid results in practice is a little more complicated. The validation process is greatly facilitated by, and perhaps even dependent upon, the availability of complete and user-friendly documentation. After all, an ineffective system of documentation can lead to ineffective implementation, which throws into question the validity of the entire system and its outputs.

Professionally and personally, we often have projects or tasks where we define desired goals or outcomes, and sometimes even identify the steps that it will take to get from where we are to where we want to be. However, we often end up frustrated and short of our goal because we have not fully documented the strategy and tactics required to achieve the desired outcome. 

Enter the difference between specifying an outcome for Halloween (i.e., a rad costume), and the strategy and tactics necessary to make it happen. 

“Through year” or “through course” assessment systems are rapidly proliferating as an alternative to the single, end-of-year administration of state accountability tests. There are at least ten states and associated assessment companies in various stages of exploration, design, and/or development of these systems.

This post is a summary of the main ideas from a symposium focused on educators’ assessment literacy presented at the 2021 NCME Classroom Assessment Conference. Slides from the session are available here. 

I and many others were concerned that the uncertainty with interpreting Spring 2021 state summative test scores because of all the “noise” associated with the pandemic would blur any signal we were trying to hear from the data. Unfortunately, that signal is so loud that we can’t miss it. In spite of any uncertainty, we have more than enough information to pull the policy alarm!

“Assessment practices do far more than provide information; they shape people’s understanding about what is important to learn, what learning is, and who learners are” (Moss, 2008, p. 254).