Daydreaming or Deep in Thought? Using Formative Assessment to Evaluate Student Participation
By Carolyn Ives
Many instructors will argue that student participation in class is
important. But what's the difference between participation and
engagement? What does good participation or engagement look like? How
can you recognize it? And how can you tell if a student is not engaged?
Typically, instructors see a student who willingly participates as one
who is engaged, and research shows that students who are engaged often
take active roles in their own learning (Weaver and Qi, qtd. in Rogers,
2013, p. 11). However, research also debates whether we can actually see
engagement: there isn't always a clear relationship between mental and
physical engagement. Meaningful engagement may be happening, even when
it isn't visible (Mayer, 2009, qtd. in Rogers, 2013, p. 12).
This is just one of the many challenges that faculty face while trying
to evaluate class participation. Other factors can also make this
difficult:
- Difficulty in assessing engagement or participation by observation alone;
- Attendance issues, particularly in large classes;
- Varied emphasis on participation from course to course;
- Varied types of participation;
- Difficulty of documenting student participation in a reliable way;
- Concern about biases; and
- Concern about unfair penalization of shy or introverted students.
With all these challenges, some instructors opt not to assign grades to
participation at all. In fact, Bean and Peterson (1998, p. 33) note
"assessment and measurement scholars almost universally advise against
grading participation" (Rogers, 2013, p. 11) because of the difficulty
in creating consistent methods of evaluation. Other complicating factors
include the fact that the promise of a higher grade does not
necessarily ensure greater participation, and some forms of
participation are more desirable than others. Some kinds are even
disruptive: students who speak simply in an effort to achieve high
participation grades are not always assets to classroom discussion.
Formative assessment strategies
So, then, how can instructors facilitate student engagement and helpful
participation? There are a few strategies that can help, many of which
you can find discussed in more detail in other Faculty Focus
articles, such as the creation of a supportive classroom environment
that is skilfully facilitated and discussion-based, the creation of
clear expectations around student preparation and student roles in the
classroom, and creating student buy-in (Czekanski and Wolf, 2013, p.
11-12; Weimer and Walvoord, 2013). All of these strategies are helpful,
but the most useful method I have found to evaluate student
participation is the inclusion of formative assessment techniques in my
classes.
Formative assessment may take a variety of forms (such as practice
quizzes, one-minute papers, clearest/muddiest point exercises, various
kinds of group work in the class, etc.), but it provides students with
opportunities to practice skills or test knowledge in a "safe" way. It
usually consists of low-stakes and/or ungraded (or peer- or
self-evaluated) activities, and these can be combined to comprise all or
part of a participation grade. You can make it do double (or triple or
quadruple) duty by allowing the formative assessment activities to
scaffold into your summative assessments, by using formative assessment
activities to provide you with student feedback about how the course is
going, and by using it to create a reflective culture of assessment that
is focused on learning rather than solely on grades.
So how does it work? When I use formative assessment strategies to
assess student participation,
I allocate a certain number of points to each formative assessment
activity; this allocation depends on the percentage I've allocated to
participation in the course and how many assessments I use. For some
activities, I give full points for completion; for others, I actually
grade the activity itself. The formative assessments are all subject to
my regular assignments policies, and students must be in class to
participate in the activities.
My results have been overwhelmingly positive. By no longer relying on
attendance and my observations in class to grade participation, these
formative assessment activities have delivered a number of benefits for
both my students and me:
- They encourage attendance;
- They allow even very shy students to earn participation grades;
- If I design the formative assessment to scaffold into summative evaluation, students see the value of it and are likely to participate in a meaningful way;
- Because most of the formative assessment activities are worth points, students are more likely to take the activities seriously and put forth the effort;
- They allow learners to demonstrate knowledge in multiple ways;
- They provide tangible evidence of student engagement (or not) and learning (or not);
- They encourage students to reflect on their own learning, especially if the formative assessment techniques require any self-evaluation;
- They tell me about how well my students are learning the material, and provide me with feedback about how my course is progressing.
Participation can be a challenge to grade because it often contains many
different elements that instructors need to consider, sometimes on the
fly. Many strategies can help, including the creation of clear
expectations in the form of a rubric, as well as other other classroom
techniques as mentioned. However, of all the options I've tried, I have
found the use of formative assessment my best option for assessing
engagement and participation as it can help to create a culture of
self-reflection and assessment that is focused on learning rather than
on only grades.
References:
Czekanski, Kathleen E. and Zane Robinson Wolf. (2013). Encouraging and evaluating class participation. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 10 (1). Retrieved 7 July 2013 from ERIC database.
Rogers, Susan L. (2013). Calling the question: Do college instructors actually grade participation? College Teaching, 61, 11-22. Retrieved 7 July 2013 from ERIC database.
Weimer, M. and Walvoord, B. (2013). Grading Strategies for the College Classroom. Madison, WI: Magna Publications.
Rogers, Susan L. (2013). Calling the question: Do college instructors actually grade participation? College Teaching, 61, 11-22. Retrieved 7 July 2013 from ERIC database.
Weimer, M. and Walvoord, B. (2013). Grading Strategies for the College Classroom. Madison, WI: Magna Publications.
* Carolyn Ives is the Curriculum Planning and Development Coordinator
at the Centre for the Advancement of Faculty Excellence at MacEwan
University, Canada.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário