As we approach finals, we all begin asking ourselves what
do we still need to cover, what can we get in before the end, and what will be
on our "final/midterm." We have heard a lot about formative
assessment over the years as it is one of the most popular education fads
currently (and very effective), but we often don't pause to think about our own
philosophy behind summative assessment. And, yet, the traditional summative
assessment, often known as a test, is under threat from more new trends such as
performance assessment, project-based learning, and the maker movement. With
this in mind, I wonder if the traditional test can survive much longer in our
education world, which is beginning to transform to meet the needs of 21st
century life.
Teaching AP courses, I am always torn over giving tests
that reflect the format students will see in May, yet I also note the stress
students experience with such. I hear the complaints of students who claim they
studied so much for a test of mine but didn't do well in addition to
myself sitting in awe of students who claim they winged one of my tests but did
amazing overall. Is there something wrong with giving an assessment that the
results of such can be determined by things like the quality of day a student
may be having or a student's ability to "test well?" We all have
students like this which forces us to consider to what extent do we know with
any degree of confidence what our students know/can do as a result of
traditional tests. Many of us have bemoaned the dreadful graduation exam when
it was given in the past, yet we must ask ourselves how much do our own tests
differ from that medieval practice of forcing students to play Jeopardy under
supervised silence sitting in straight rows with a strictly enforced policy of
no cellphones. For the most part, I cannot recall anything in my grown-up life
thus far that is similar in style. I am sure many of us would say our tests are
much different than the grad exam, therefore: what qualities do we add to the
concept of the traditional test that enhances it beyond the old grad exam
model? Part of me thinks testing is a waste of time from activities that can
demonstrate more of both what students know and what they can do with what they
know. Yet, another part of me wonders if the traditional test can be
constructed in such a manner to assess higher-order thinking, promote learning
as it the test is taken, and be engaging. With these thoughts and questions in
mind, we must ask:
1) Is the traditional test irrelevant and, therefore,
should be killed off in the 21st century?
2) If yes, what should take its place? And, how is this
an improvement over traditional tests?
3) If no, how can we design traditional tests more
relevant in a 21st century world?
---Dr. Blake Busbin
