Student assessment takes on many forms in the classroom but no matter what type of assessment we use, it is important that the results be examined and studied to determine what student learning has occurred and what actions should take place next. Effective examination of results is made possible through the design of the assessment and careful correlation to standards, intentional evaluation of results and pre-determined actions based on levels of mastery. 

Before an effective examination of results can occur, the design of the assessment piece must ensure that desired knowledge and skills are being assessed. An assessment does not have to be a test or quiz. It could be a written paragraph, oral question and answer, group conversation, answers written on white boards or anything that will allows a teacher to evaluate an individual student’s understanding of a specific standard or skill. Assessments should be short and concise; checking only those standards that have been determined to be essential. In the formative stage, these assessments are used to determine which students are ready to move on and which will need more work on each standard assessed. Most of these formative assessments will cover only a small subset of the standards in a unit of study. Before an assessment is administered, both teachers and students must be clear on what will constitute mastery on each standard being assessed. The assessment should be formatted in such a way so as to minimize guessing, give students a way to demonstrate knowledge from indvidual perspectives and ensure each student will be able to show his or her individual level of mastery. A well designed assessment, designed around specific standards with clearly defined levels of mastery, is the basis for effective examination of the results after the assessment.

Depending on the content, results of the assessment could be evaluated on a simple rubric or perhaps even for right or wrong. This should be determined prior to administration of the assessment and again levels of mastery need to be taken into consideration. For example, a social studies assessment might consist of two questions requiring written responses. One question might ask students to discuss key points of a situation, the other might ask them to compare and contrast two different situations. The teacher or team must determine before the assessment what key points should be included in the perfect answer to the first question and what items must be discussed in the comparison for the second question. The assessment is to be evaluated by looking for these points in the students’ responses. The team might find, for example, six points that could be discussed in question one and that student mastery would be determined by looking for at least five of these in an answer. Discussing three or four of these points might be considered approaching mastery, while less than three would indicate that more work was needed on this standard. The same kind of determination would be made for the second question. Having this simple rubric for evaluation and comparison will ensure that results are determined in an objective way and will be the basis for examination of the results.

Once scoring according to a pre-determined rubric has been completed, examination of results can take a much more straightforward approach. If a certain percent of students do not show mastery (or perhaps approach mastery), the teacher might choose to reteach that particular standard to the whole group. For example, the teacher or team might determine before the assessment that if at least 60% of students did not at least approach mastery for the first question (standard) on the assessment, the standard would be taught again. A level of mastery might also be determined that would indicate that the class as a whole should move on and individual instruction or intervention would be given to the ones who did not reach mastery. For example, a pre-determined level might be that if 90% approached mastery or better that the class would move on. In between might required group work that would help those reach mastery that had not demonstrated it on the assessment while the other groups work on enrichment projects. Actual determination of levels reached could be done by simply stacking scored papers in stacks by question and mastery level and counting. A teacher or team could also easily take the stacks of students who did not master a particular question or standard and look just at those answers to determine student misconceptions and required intervention for individual students. Using these assessments as a basis for moving forward or reteaching is far better than simply deciding that an hour or two days is enough time on a standard. Examining the results of short, concise assessments allows teachers to move forward when students are ready as opposed to a timetable.

The process of studying and examining results of formative assessments can result in a far better way of managing classroom time than simply allotting a block of time and hoping learning fits within the block! However, this will only be effectively accomplished if the assessments are well planned, targeted toward standards, and reactions to results are planned in advance. When true formative assessment occurs, student learning increases as time management becomes easier and more effective.