Formative Assessment. Alright, we can work with that!
What's the big difference between these two? Well, whether it's objective or performance, testing is going to be both stressful and invaluable (concerning its affective value for future learning) to the student. Summative testing is simply a gauge of what the student has gained, what they are capable of in that precise moment of time. Really, it's meaningless. Testing is useful for statistics and placement but has absolutely no intrinsic value concerning the process of education itself. It has no feedback, no helpfulness, no teaching.
So, why do we stress summative testing so much? Simply for the utilitarian idea that permits students to be accepted into a different program or compared before being hired? What about educational purposes? Why do we frivolously waste positive classroom time to this worthless effort?
Formative assessment. Ahh, these words are such comfort in comparison! Testing isn't even bad in and of itself. However, it must be used well, in order to teach the student for her or his future, so that they can learn from their mistakes and better themselves throughout the education process. Doesn't this make a lot more sense for the teacher to use? In this form of assessment, the student will always be showing what they are learning, but they will also always receive constructive criticism and useful feedback. It will direct their learning, study skills, and focus, while also helping the teacher to adapt his or her teaching methods.
In summation, summative assessment sucks, and I'd like to inform you that formative assessment is much more meaningful to both the student and the teacher, so let's think about our actions before we just blindly follow the system and its superficial expectations, eh?
No comments:
Post a Comment