ICT PRODUCTS

 

CV

 

DIFFERENTIATED AND CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE ASSESSMENT

 

DIFFERENTIATED ASSESSMENT

 

 Differentiated assessment is an ongoing process through which teachers gather data before during and after instruction using multiple formative and summative tools. To differentiate assessment the teacher must evaluate the learning situation and provide an assessment tool that is right for the individual student based on information gathered with student interest and learning profile in mind. Not every student will respond to traditional assessment methods such as standardized testing. Providing a multitude of assessment option for students to demonstrate what they know and what they need work on will more accurately inform the teacher which students have reached mastery and which have not. In order to continue curriculum planning It takes more than one assessment tool to accurately gauge individual learning.

Differentiated assessment is the way by which teachers  modify and match assessment with the varied characteristics and profile of students in order to meet students individual needs thereby enhancing their learning and boosting their ability to show what they have learned.   

 

Students differ in their previous learning experiences, readiness, learning styles, preferences, academic standing, abilities, strengths and weaknesses, culture, race, and backgrounds.

Teachers use differentiated assessment to match and respond to the varying learning needs of diverse students in a classroom.

By differentiating assessments, teachers help diverse students to successfully demonstrate their competencies in particular ways that are fitting and effective for them. By providing various assessment methods/activities appropriate for particular types of students, the teachers are able to meet the students’ individual needs, thereby helping them to be successful in their learning.

Designing various assessments apt for specific groups of learners provides more opportunities for students to effectively demonstrate what they have learned.

Differentiated assessments also guide teachers on how they can differentiate, modify and improve instruction.

Differentiated assessments can be done by designing and providing various assessment methods and activities that are appropriate for each type of students such that they can effectively learn and demonstrate what they have learned. Differentiated assessments can be done by providing them various options and opportunities to show their learning and proficiency. From a list of Zach Burrus, Dave Messer and Judith Dodge, here are some ways of differentiating assessments:

• Designing tiered activities
• Scaffolding struggling learners
• Challenging advanced learners with more mid-stimulating activities
• Adjusting questions
• Compacting
• Flexible grouping
• Flexible assignments and tasks based on students’ learning styles
• Learning contracts

• Asking students to do:
• Role playing
• Unit collage
• Individual projects
• Visual presentations
• Oral presentations
• Written presentations
• Summaries and reflections
• Lists, charts and graphic organizers
• Group/collaborative activities
• Comic books
• Raps/songs/dances/other performances

More examples of differentiated strategies, taken from the list of Chapman, Gregory and King:

Using/providing assessment tools before instruction like:

• Ponder and Pass
• Signal and Action Response
• Take a Stand
• Knowledge Base Corners or Squaring Off
• Content Boxes
• Content Surveys
• Personal Surveys and Inventories
• Brainstorming
• Colour Clusters
• Gallimaufry Gathering
• ELO (Evening Learning Opportunities)
• Pre-tests
• Standardized Testing Data
• Boxing
• Yes / No Cards
• Graffiti Facts
• Four-Corner Pre-Assessment

Using/providing assessment tools during instruction like:

• Observation
• Anecdotal Assessment
• Clipboard Stickiest
• Card Cruising
• Know it! Show it!
• Response Cards
• High Five
• A Bump in the Road
• Color-Coding
• Sketches From the Mind
• Analysing Student Notes
• Checkpoint Tests
• Daily Grades
• Thumb It
• Face the Fact
• Reaching for the Top
• Speedometer Reading

Using/providing assessment tools after instruction like:

• Effective Questioning: open-ended and reflection questions
• Post-Sharing Celebrations: wrap-around, carousel gala and rhythmic fan-fare
• Likert Scales to Assess Learning, Attitude, and Progress
• Rubrics
• Checklists
• Design Delights
• Assessing With Journals
• Jazzy Journal Assessment
• Graphic Organizers
• Prompts for Assessment
• Assessing With a Blank Page
• Performance Assessment
• Teacher-Made Tests (true-false, multiple choice, fill in the blank, open-ended questions, performance tests, skills tests, problem based)
• Portfolios
• Conversation Circles
• Donut

Using/providing summative assessment tools like:

•  Assessment Cubing
• Choice Boards
• Stations, Centres, and Learning Zones: Exploratory Stations and Structured Stations

Examples of differentiated evaluation

Outdoor examinations

Give students the possibility to take the exam outside. Maybe the green environment gives students some inspiration. One thing is sure: the oxygen level outside is much higher than inside a dusty classroom.

 Cheat sheet

A cheat sheet teaches students to learn in a certain way as well. When students aren’t motivated to learn, a cheat sheet can help. When students are making a sheet cheat, they are actually engaging with the content. This way, students will remember much better (and don’t even need a cheat sheet).

 5-minute talk

In this tip, students get the chance to talk with each other for 5 minutes about the test they just got. That way, students are developing strategies to order the knowledge that was evoked by this brief conversation. Students learn to handle knowledge in a more functional way. Make sure to not just ask reproductive questions, because these make evaluations less effective.

 Various choice options

Create a test with a common part and an optional part A or part B. Use bonus questions or two different choice questions that test the same learning objective. These are both ways to give students a “choice”.

 Not for everyone

Not every pupil must take the test. You’re probably wondering how that would work? The concept is simple: students look at each other’s test and provide feedback. It all starts when students come to the classroom for a test they’ve all learned for. At that moment, you choose about five or six students who do not have to make the test, but form the assessment committee. While the others go to work, the commission makes a check model. In other words: they have to come to an agreement with each other about the right answers, decide whether or not to count something good, and whether alternative answers are possible. In this way they prepare for the real check-up and at meta-level they think about the lesson material.

With every incorrect answer there is an explanation of the committee, and the students get the chance to check with the book if they agree with the judgement. Subsequently, they can discuss matters with the assessment committee in a classical manner, in which the teacher, as moderator, keeps as much as possible in the background. During the year, everyone eventually takes part in the assessment committee.

 Collaboration on tests

A test that encourages collaboration? It’s possible! The two-stage test is an easy way to integrate collaborative learning into an individual written test. In a two-stage test, the student first makes the test individually (part 1), and then makes the test in small groups of four students (part 2). During part 2, the classroom is filled with inspiring and effective discussions in which students actively participate. Through the involvement of students during the exam, the discussions ensure that students learn a lot from each other. Moreover, two-stage testing appears to have a positive effect on learning before, during and after the test.

 Language support

Roughly you can say that a small minority of learning objectives really requires students to write. Within language courses, learning objectives of writing skills are included. Besides that, the importance of written evaluation is kind of relative. Measuring writing skills also quickly interferes with the measurement of students' actual learning objectives. Especially for multilingual students. So, make sure to provide language support (a bilingual dictionary, a glossary, a pre-structured answer). To keep an eye on the actual learning objective, you could also replace the written exam with an oral test.

 Choose a test that counts

Lots of students get a large number of small test. Recognizable? Why not let them choose which ‘small evaluations’ count or not? Each student makes the test. But it’s up to the students to choose when their test actually counts as a mark. Freedom of choice is motivating. Want to do this without your school becoming a pony camp? Make sure to set some ground rules and give your students guidelines that gives them certain criteria. They’ll have to discuss, considering every criteria, which test count and which doesn’t.

Students choose test questions

This one in probably more common than the rest of the examples. Ask students to think up test questions themselves. It is one of the ways in which bright pupils do not simply have to do ‘more of the same’. It also keeps students busy with the learning material.

 Take-home exam

Want to give students the time to find solutions (together) for a (very) difficult problem? With a take home exam, you stimulate students to integrate different subject matter components and process them in a demand-oriented way into a coherent whole.

In order to bring a take-home exam to a successful conclusion, a student must be able to do more than merely reproduce the information. The complexity of the assignment and the expected answer is relatively high in a take-home exam. The student almost always has to look for additional information at home. In any case, he must appeal to his insight into the course, his critical attitude, his ability to analyse and synthesise to solve the assignment.

 A flexible testing policy

Here, students will be responsible for organizing their tasks during the semester. In this testing policy, students must become competent and self-reliant.

Students have:

• to be able to direct studies: make a study choice.
• to be able to organize studies themselves: to develop plans and independent study activities.
• study skills: to reproduce, to acquire, to control, to relate, to repeat, …
• test skills.

to be aware of their own learning style with the strong and weak aspects.

 

DIFFERENTIATION STRATEGIES FOR STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

 

 

1.   Provide multiple opportunities to conference.

Students with special needs require constant opportunities to check in with the teacher as they continue to work through the task. As a result, teachers need to carve out additional time in their daily schedules to make sure that they connect with those students. Additionally, it is also extremely important for teachers to have previously established lifelines so that when students get stuck (and the teacher is unavailable), they have some tools in their toolboxes to help them through this challenge.

2.   Scaffold instruction.

Some students may be able to work independently, while others may need support from their peers or the teacher. This tiered layering of support allows students to work at their level. Because it can be quite challenging for a classroom teacher to meet all the needs of their individual students, it may be helpful to include paraprofessionals, more advanced peers, or parent volunteers in the process.

3.   Use manipulatives and graphic organizers.

Many students with special needs are also concrete thinkers. Thus, they may require concrete solutions to help them engage with the task at hand. Graphic organizers are excellent resources for helping them stay focused, on-task, and motivated. Specifically, graphic organizers are very helpful for students during the writing process. Teachers can use the manipulatives and graphic organizers to differentiate the task through process, but to also keep students organized.

4.   Vary the length of the assignment.

This strategy goes hand in hand with tiering, a differentiation through process strategy. Simply allow students with special needs to write less. Rest assured — this strategy is not designed to simply be easier for these students. Teachers need to be mindful to continuously maintain high expectations for all their students, especially those who are writing less. Through tiered assignments, the content and overall curricular objectives are the same; the only difference is that the product is varied according to each student’s readiness.

5.   Include places to collaborate as well as places for individual work.

Most teachers in PreK-5 have already ditched the straight alphabetical rows, where students are expected to work on the same task in the same way. Instead, teachers now focus on student differences as their basis for planning and instruction. The classroom environment needs to reflect the same principles. Thus, students must be provided with places where they can work collaboratively with their classmates, yet at the same time, these places should not become a source of mere social gatherings.

6.   Ensure processes are in place to set and maintain routines.

Routines are for essential for students with special needs. Whatever arrangement you decide works best for your class, be sure to set clear guidelines for both group and individual work. You must set and maintain clear classroom expectations, and processes must be established to follow through when something (or someone) veers off course. This is not an easy process, and it requires impeccable classroom management techniques.

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE ASSESSMENT

Culturally Responsive Assessment practices measure students potential and not merely what they know (Powell & Rightmyer, 2011).

Culturally Responsive Assessment is assessment that is mindful of the student populations the institution serves, using language that is appropriate for all students when developing learning outcomes, acknowledging students differences in the planning phases of an assessment effort, developing and/or using assessment tools that are appropriate for different students and being intentional in using assessment results to improve learning for all students.

Culturally Responsive Assessment involves involvement throughout the entire process student focussed calls for development of learning outcomes, statements, assessment tools selection or development process, data collection and interpretation and use of results.

Cultural responsiveness is the ability to learn from and relate respectfully with students of different cultures . Culturally responsive assessment provides fairness in all aspects of individual evaluation. It is a collection of approaches each designed to systematically reduce bias within the broader assessment frame work. Assessment is based on an examination of impacts through lenses participants is considered as important factor. In which the culture of the

Teachers can make assessment culturally responsive by providing opportunities for practice tests and allowing student to respond in their native language. Teachers can use a variety of assessments in order to accurately determine the ability levels of culturally and linguistically diverse students. Every effort must be made to ensure that belief system, tests, policies and procedures are fair and provide culturally and linguistically diverse students with opportunities to experience academic success.

ITS IMPORTANCE

Schools today are becoming increasingly diverse and culturally rich. The educational environment is a place where students who are culturally and linguistically diverse are provided the opportunity to learn and grow. Some aspects of the school system provide less than optimal conditions for the diverse group of students.

Obtaining knowledge and skills in appropriate assessment techniques is imperative and ethically necessary. Full and individual assessment results are very vital as these results are used to make important decisions that impacts a students life. Consideration of student factors provides information for the selection of appropriate assessment instruments in the evaluation process. For teachers culturally competent assessment requires the integration of culturally sensitive attitude, knowledge, interview skills, intervention strategies and evaluation practices. The purpose of assessment is to determine appropriate intervention techniques and strategies designed to promote success. Therefore, the value in the evaluation is not limited to identification or classification, it should be extended to inform appropriate instructional interventions, accommodation and instructional programme development.

WAYS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

1. Teacher should contemplate the kind of testing environment.

2. Teacher should assess the relation of students prior experiences.

3. Teacher must keep the students level of language proficiency in mind.

4. Teacher should determine students prior opportunities to learn skill.

5. Teacher must implement accommodations like dictionary use, extended time etc. if needed.

6. Teachers should not use one assessment, rather use many authentic assessment.

7. Teacher must balance assessment with regular instruction.

8. Teacher must be sure to provide specific and frequent feedback.

9. In the assessment process both the students and parents should be involved.

Not all students are natural-born test takers. Any educator who has spent even a small amount of time in classrooms knows this - much in the way that different students have different learning styles. Most times, teachers can account for this in their classrooms based on the students they serve. Even if the teachers do not adjust the tests or assignments from one year to the next, their general demographic remains the same from one year to the next based on location.

An inner city math teacher, for example, could tweak his tests with word problems that best relate to the students entering his classroom and not use obscure references that make the material seem even more disconnected from the real life of the students. A science teacher at an elite prep school could do the same, using references that strike a chord with the students who walk through the door and grounding the material.

State wide assessments don't have that level of customization. They are created for one set of students and then applied to the rest. A student who feels isolated from the material in front of her will not be as successful in answering the questions, plain and simple. English as a second language learners, for example, may not perform as well on assessment tests as their peers. Standardized assessments make many assumptions about those who are taking them and to the detriment of the students. For assessments to be effective, the student answering the questions should always be considered.

So what sorts of cultural differences should be considered when assessments are created?

• Socioeconomic status. Students from homes where one or both parents have a college education tend to have more advanced linguistic capabilities and accomplishing school tasks comes more easily than students from economically disadvantaged homes. This is not to say that test questions should be easier or in any way "dumbed down" based on the income of a family in question, but assessments should be carefully written with these factors in mind. Perhaps there is a reason beyond basic comprehension that white students from middle and high-class homes tend to perform better on standardized tests. Perhaps it is not the actual material that they have more effectively mastered, but the actual tests that have put them at an advantage. If every student had the chance to take a test that played on his socioeconomic strengths and avoided pitfalls that made that student feel isolated from the material, perhaps we would see a drastic change in test scores. Considering the socioeconomic status of students is a very important part of the assessment process that needs to be addressed for all students to succeed.

• What is spoken at home should play into the type of assessment students receive. Students who speak English as a second language, even fluently, should have the option to take their assessments in whatever language makes them the most comfortable. There should never be a debate about whether a student knows "enough" of the English language to perform well on an assessment. If there is even a question, the student should be given the test in his native language or at least asked for the preference. If we are truly trying to gauge what these students know, we should not force them to battle the language barrier to present that knowledge. Students should be allowed to request tests in whatever language makes them the most comfortable - no questions asked, and no hoops to jump through.

• Learning style. This one is a little more complicated to implement and possibly a pipe dream at this point in the assessment reform process. BUT a perfect assessment system would allow students to answers questions in such a way that complemented their personalities and learning styles. Teachers could help determine this through their observations of the students. The trick would be to ensure that all the material was equally difficult and that the students were placed with the right test based on their true learning style. A student who did well in traditional test taking, for example, may perform worse in a testing environment that was tailored to visual or hands-on learners. This type of assessing would need some trial and error to get right but could end up yielding big results in student test success. It's something that would need a lot more research and testing before implementation, but I believe it is worth the effort to reach a point of truly fair and accurate assessments.

One of the largest arguments against standardized assessments is that they are just that - standardized. To give a full picture of what students are learning, assessments need to be customized to fit those students' life circumstances and personalities. It is contradictory to say that American public schools embrace students from all backgrounds, and at all learning levels, and with every personality type but then to test one model student that is not an accurate representation of any of them.

This doesn't further our educational pursuits, and it certainly does not further the academic success of the students who take the tests. Blanket assessments are not even an accurate representation of a teacher's strengths. By trying to accommodate the masses, assessments have left behind the individuals and the result is a system of testing that does nothing to help anyone in the process and contributes little to what we truly know about actual student progress.

As they exist today, standardized assessments are ineffective, misleading and not helpful to public school culture. By adjusting these tests to meet the individual needs of the students taking them, the assessments would at least stand a chance of mattering in the lives of the students who take them.

It may be impossible to tailor each test to the needs of the student who will take it, but as technology improves, I believe the tools will exist to make this at least partially a reality. Consider an assessment future where teachers can type in a few short answers about a student and then receive a customized test based on the responses. We have the technology through our smartphones that tell us right down to the grocery store aisle what is for sale - surely there is a developer out there who can do the same targeting for test making. We should be able to create the tests that will most benefit our students and give educators the most accurate picture of what is being learned and comprehended.

As assessment makers become more technologically sophisticated, so too should the tests. States should demand these types of options of their test makers in the best interest of their students. There is no reason not to pursue more advanced forms of test delivery that take the backgrounds and learning styles of students into account. At this point, that type of test reform is necessary to understand what is being taught and learned in our K-12 classrooms.

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE ASSESSMENT

 

 

Culturally Responsive Assessment practices measure students potential and not merely what they know (Powell & Rightmyer, 2011).

 

Culturally Responsive Assessment is assessment that is mindful of the student populations the institution serves, using language that is appropriate for all students when developing learning outcomes, acknowledging students differences in the planning phases of an assessment effort, developing and/or using assessment tools that are appropriate for different students and being intentional in using assessment results to improve learning for all students.

Culturally Responsive Assessment involves involvement throughout the entire process student focussed calls for development of learning outcomes, statements, assessment tools selection or development process, data collection and interpretation and use of results.

 

Cultural responsiveness is the ability to learn from and relate respectfully with students of different cultures . Culturally responsive assessment provides fairness in all aspects of individual evaluation. It  is a collection of approaches each designed to systematically reduce bias within the broader assessment frame work. Assessment is based on an examination of impacts through lenses participants is considered as important factor. In which the culture of the

 

Teachers can make assessment culturally responsive by providing opportunities for practice tests and allowing student to respond in their native language. Teachers can use a variety of assessments in order to accurately determine the ability levels of culturally and linguistically diverse students. Every effort must be made to ensure that belief system, tests, policies and procedures are fair and provide culturally and linguistically diverse students with opportunities to experience academic success.

 

ITS IMPORTANCE

Schools today are becoming increasingly diverse and culturally rich. The educational environment is a place where students who are culturally and linguistically diverse are provided the opportunity to learn and grow. Some aspects of the school system provide less than optimal conditions for the diverse group of students.

 

Obtaining knowledge and skills in appropriate assessment techniques is imperative and ethically necessary. Full and individual assessment results are very vital as these results are used to make important decisions that impacts a students life. Consideration of student factors provides information for the selection of appropriate assessment instruments in the evaluation process. For teachers culturally competent assessment requires the integration of culturally sensitive attitude, knowledge, interview skills, intervention strategies and evaluation practices. The purpose of assessment is to determine appropriate intervention techniques and strategies designed to promote success. Therefore, the value in the evaluation is not limited to identification or classification, it should be extended to inform appropriate instructional interventions, accommodation and instructional programme development.

 

WAYS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

1.     Teacher should contemplate the kind of testing environment.

2.      Teacher should assess the relation of students prior experiences.

3.     Teacher must keep the students level of language proficiency in mind.

4.     Teacher should determine students prior opportunities to learn skill.

5.     Teacher must implement accommodations like dictionary use, extended time etc. if needed.

6.     Teachers should not use one assessment, rather use many authentic assessment.

7.     Teacher must balance assessment with regular instruction.

8.     Teacher must be sure to provide specific and frequent feedback.

9.     In the assessment process both the students and parents should be involved.

 

 

Not all students are natural-born test takers. Any educator who has spent even a small amount of time in classrooms knows this - much in the way that different students have different learning styles. Most times, teachers can account for this in their classrooms based on the students they serve. Even if the teachers do not adjust the tests or assignments from one year to the next, their general demographic remains the same from one year to the next based on location.

An inner city math teacher, for example, could tweak his tests with word problems that best relate to the students entering his classroom and not use obscure references that make the material seem even more disconnected from the real life of the students. A science teacher at an elite prep school could do the same, using references that strike a chord with the students who walk through the door and grounding the material.

State wide assessments don't have that level of customization. They are created for one set of students and then applied to the rest. A student who feels isolated from the material in front of her will not be as successful in answering the questions, plain and simple. English as a second language learners, for example, may not perform as well on assessment tests as their peers. Standardized assessments make many assumptions about those who are taking them and to the detriment of the students. For assessments to be effective, the student answering the questions should always be considered.

So what sorts of cultural differences should be considered when assessments are created?

• Socioeconomic status. Students from homes where one or both parents have a college education tend to have more advanced linguistic capabilities and accomplishing school tasks comes more easily than students from economically disadvantaged homes. This is not to say that test questions should be easier or in any way "dumbed down" based on the income of a family in question, but assessments should be carefully written with these factors in mind. Perhaps there is a reason beyond basic comprehension that white students from middle and high-class homes tend to perform better on standardized tests. Perhaps it is not the actual material that they have more effectively mastered, but the actual tests that have put them at an advantage. If every student had the chance to take a test that played on his socioeconomic strengths and avoided pitfalls that made that student feel isolated from the material, perhaps we would see a drastic change in test scores. Considering the socioeconomic status of students is a very important part of the assessment process that needs to be addressed for all students to succeed.
• What is spoken at home should play into the type of assessment students receive. Students who speak English as a second language, even fluently, should have the option to take their assessments in whatever language makes them the most comfortable. There should never be a debate about whether a student knows "enough" of the English language to perform well on an assessment. If there is even a question, the student should be given the test in his native language or at least asked for the preference. If we are truly trying to gauge what these students know, we should not force them to battle the language barrier to present that knowledge. Students should be allowed to request tests in whatever language makes them the most comfortable - no questions asked, and no hoops to jump through.
• Learning style. This one is a little more complicated to implement and possibly a pipe dream at this point in the assessment reform process. BUT a perfect assessment system would allow students to answers questions in such a way that complemented their personalities and learning styles. Teachers could help determine this through their observations of the students. The trick would be to ensure that all the material was equally difficult and that the students were placed with the right test based on their true learning style. A student who did well in traditional test taking, for example, may perform worse in a testing environment that was tailored to visual or hands-on learners. This type of assessing would need some trial and error to get right but could end up yielding big results in student test success. It's something that would need a lot more research and testing before implementation, but I believe it is worth the effort to reach a point of truly fair and accurate assessments.

One of the largest arguments against standardized assessments is that they are just that - standardized. To give a full picture of what students are learning, assessments need to be customized to fit those students' life circumstances and personalities. It is contradictory to say that American public schools embrace students from all backgrounds, and at all learning levels, and with every personality type but then to test one model student that is not an accurate representation of any of them.

This doesn't further our educational pursuits, and it certainly does not further the academic success of the students who take the tests. Blanket assessments are not even an accurate representation of a teacher's strengths. By trying to accommodate the masses, assessments have left behind the individuals and the result is a system of testing that does nothing to help anyone in the process and contributes little to what we truly know about actual student progress.

As they exist today, standardized assessments are ineffective, misleading and not helpful to public school culture. By adjusting these tests to meet the individual needs of the students taking them, the assessments would at least stand a chance of mattering in the lives of the students who take them.

It may be impossible to tailor each test to the needs of the student who will take it, but as technology improves, I believe the tools will exist to make this at least partially a reality. Consider an assessment future where teachers can type in a few short answers about a student and then receive a customized test based on the responses. We have the technology through our smartphones that tell us right down to the grocery store aisle what is for sale - surely there is a developer out there who can do the same targeting for test making. We should be able to create the tests that will most benefit our students and give educators the most accurate picture of what is being learned and comprehended.

As assessment makers become more technologically sophisticated, so too should the tests. States should demand these types of options of their test makers in the best interest of their students. There is no reason not to pursue more advanced forms of test delivery that take the backgrounds and learning styles of students into account. At this point, that type of test reform is necessary to understand what is being taught and learned in our K-12 classrooms.

Click here to view my presentation

Click here to view cartoon video