1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

CfE assessment

Discussion in 'Scotland - curriculum' started by robber red, Mar 14, 2010.

  1. I don't think the NAR was ever intended to be a series of tests you could download or use like the 5-14 assessments. It's supposedly just sharing best practcie about how people are assessing the outcomes - my complaint is the lack of ways to record assessment and also, if that's best practice I dread to think what some of the others look like.
     
  2. Of course it's not. Again, this emphasises my point that the proof of the curriculum is in the assessment of it. Assessment is central to everything you do in the curriculum, it's not something you stick on at the end, and you can't understand a curriculum until you get your head around the assessment of it.
    As you have implied, airy, full implementation of CfE will require a complete rethink of the how-what-why-when-wherefore of assessment. Unfortunately, as with everything else in CfE, it looks like teachers are going to have to do pretty much all of this rethinking.
    In regard to this, did anyone notice the big to-do in BTC5 and related documents about moderation as the key to fit-for-purpose assessment in CfE, and the importance of LAs providing enough time and quality CPD for teachers to share assessment practice, both within staff and clusters, and across the authority, in an ongoing way?
    Coming soon to an LA near you? Don't hold your breath.
     
  3. Totally disagree with you. You can teach a curriculum and then assess it in a multitude of ways. Assessment has to look at the aims and objectives of what is taught and think about how you then best measure success - to say that the curriculum cannot exist without the assessment makes no sense, since 95% of human learning is never assessed.
    Do you think Socrates refused to talk to his students until he had an assessment framework in place?
     
  4. Oh, Ray, thank you for the Socrates example! The Socratic method illustrates my point precisely.
    My point is that assessment is not an add-on, what/how/why you assess has to be part and parcel of what/how/why you teach. Socrates certainly didn't need any NAs to "measure success" either in learning or teaching because his method of asssessment was brilliantly built into his teaching method---every question was a test, and the student's answer gave Socrates immediate feedback on what we now like to call the "next step" in teaching
    And for goodness sake, Ray, of course you can assess a curriculum in a multitude of ways--and with CfE, this is exactly what you have to do! With 5-14, at least as far as the literacy and numeracy went, there was one measure, and one measure only: the NA, which got tacked on to the end to see if the learner had attained the all-important level---as if children's learning were some sort of one-dimensional entity that can be measured with a glorified ticky-box.
    My point is that meaningful assessment is integral to the curriculum. This is why I say you can't understand the curriculum until you get your head around the assessment of it. The exemplars over at LTS that show what CfE assessment will look like in primary have many folk scratching their heads, because the assessment methods look pretty much like ordinary classroom projects.
    Which is precisely how they should look, when assessment is integral to the curriculum.
    Has the penny dropped yet?
     
  5. I agree with almost everything you say, instead of this:
    Assessment can only be designed AFTER you have "got your head round the curriculum", since the best ways to assess it must be built from what you want to teach, how you want to teach it and why you want to teach it.
    To say that we can't understand CfE until we see how it is assessed is, yet again, the sterile case of the tail wagging the dog.
    And the penny dropped many years ago with me.
     
  6. But if assessment is for learning (and isn't it?), then assessment is integral to learning, which means that the curriculum and the assessment of it are all of a piece---and often seamlessly so--, as in your helpful example of Socratic dialogues.
    If assessment is part and parcel of a curriculum, it follows logically that you DO have to understand the assessment before you can understand the curriculum as a whole.
    In my view, the big mistake the CfE developers made was to release CfE in dribs and drabs as they did, leaving us all in the dark about the assessment process until the very end. We were encountering CfE the way the blind men encountered the elephant, and we couldn't see the whole picture until every piece was in place. For me, BTC 5 finally brought it all into focus. I couldn't see where CfE was leading until I understood the what/how/why/when of CfE assessment. But clearly, that's just me. Others had it sussed from the get-go.
     

  7. Some of the new summarised CfE materials are being discussed on the new Engage for Education website. You can view and comment on the new streamlined materials for learning and assessment. http://bit.ly/9YyAx2 http://bit.ly/9YyAx2
    <font face="Times New Roman">Hope this is useful.
    </font>
    <font size="3">Maria Campbell, Community Manager </font>www.engageforeducation.org
     
  8. Flyonthewall75

    Flyonthewall75 New commenter

    So, the curriculum framework is designed to meet the needs of all learners from 3 - 18.
    The learner is at the centre and literacy, numeracy, health & wellbeing are skills for learning, for life and for work.
    The outcomes and experiences are intended to develop confident individuals, effective contributors, successful learners and responsible citizens.
    The values are wisdom, justice, compassion and integrity with an emphasis on inclusion.
    Interdisciplinary learning, personal achievement, engaging, collaborative and active work with challenging goals, timely and accurate feedback, clear learning intentions, success criteria and personal learning plans are important.
    The curriculum is to be coherent from 3-18, providing a broad general education with progression and development. This will require personal support which adheres to the outlined principles for curricular design in order to support the purposes of learning.
    (This all sounds very promising. All that's required now is to find someone to write the curriculum that will turn this challenging framework into a reality.)
    Are you the person who could take on this exciting opportunity?
    Of necessity the job will be part-time because the successful applicant will also be expected to undertake a full time teaching commitment.
    It will also be unpaid because this important initiative is cost neutral.
    Please note the successful applicant will be expected to write the curriculum by August 2010 or sooner.
    Applications, on a postcard, to the Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning.
     

Share This Page