One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and yet expecting different results. Recently, I have been thinking about how this adage applies to innovative state assessment systems—those systems states are developing that offer new ways of measuring student proficiency for use in state accountability systems. I have concluded that one of the reasons that successful innovation in state assessment systems has been so rare is that we continue to ask states to implement innovative assessment systems before the state or the system is ready.

The pandemic has surfaced disparities among students with respect to equitable educational access, opportunities, and outcomes in new ways. For example, simple differences in learning environments (e.g., remote, hybrid, in-person) likely result in considerable variation as to where students are starting and ending their learning journeys this year and into next year. This situation creates a heightened awareness of how important it is to collect meaningful information about student progress toward proficiency at the classroom level. Enter the need for classroom assessment literacy. 

In a previous post, we discussed what is the same and what is different about the formative assessment process in a remote or hybrid learning environment in comparison to in-person learning. We concluded that conceptually formative assessment remains the same. Yet, practically there are key differences in how formative assessment is applied in remote contexts because of differences in instructional, student, and environmental characteristics.

As school restarts this fall, many teachers and students are facing different learning environments than the typical back-to-school realities – including when it comes to formative classroom assessment. 

COVID has reshaped teaching and learning in ways that could make a teacher or other educational leader wonder—what’s the same and what’s different about classroom assessment in a remote or hybrid learning environment? 

This is the final post in a series of seven posts on instructing and assessing 21^st Century skills. This post focuses on best practices related to classroom assessment design, grading, and reporting the 21^st Century skills described in this series.

This is the sixth in a series of seven posts on instructing and assessing 21^st Century skills. This post focuses on measurement and assessment challenges that must be overcome in the instruction and assessment of the 21^st Century skills described in this series.

This is the fifth in a series of seven posts on instructing and assessing 21^st Century skills. This post focuses on critical thinking, one of the four critical 21^st Century skills addressed in the series.

This is the second in a series of seven posts on instructing and assessing 21^st Century skills. This post focuses on collaboration, one of the four critical 21^st Century skills addressed in the series.

This is the first in a series of seven weekly posts on instructing and assessing 21^st Century skills. This post provides background on 21^st Century skills, the Center’s recent work in that area, and an overview of the set of seven posts.

Since school closures and remote learning became the norm, I have received emails from school and district leaders relevant to COVID-19 achievement gaps asking some variation of this question: