goals and purposes, and broader environment in which a practice takes place. Knowledge and skill are not neutral, but are socially constructed (Chappell, Rhodes, Solomon, Tennant & Yates (2003), thus it is important that a strong degree of reflexivity is required, along with a degree of self-reflection, in order to make the transition into new identities (Hinchcliffe, 2013). Reflexivity is an important aspect of lifelong learning and can be described as “the capacity to develop critical awareness of the assumptions that underlie practices” (Edwards, Ranson & Strain, 2002, p. 533). Thus learning (and assessment) is recognised, as more than the learning of knowledge, skills and attitudes; it is recognised as the “transformation of understanding, identity and agency” (p. 532). What we assess is what we value (Knight, 1995). If we assess only knowledge and skill and not the aspects of lifelong learning discussed in this section (e.g. reflexivity, social capabilities, management capabilities, analytical capabilities, critical awareness, developing sense of agency, etc.) then our message to learners is that these aspects are not important. Yet, as Singh (2015) notes, “selfawareness – who we are and how to use our talents – is a precondition for ‘deployability’ and ‘employability’” (p. 8). Deployability is the potential to continuously develop our general capability to enhance our contribution and participation in society (ibid). When we look at aspects of the changing nature of work, the message is that assessment needs to be holistic, and that it needs to reflect the complexities of work. We need to teach and assess the “essence” of what we want our graduates to “be”. Additionally assessment needs to include “learning to learn” capabilities to position learners to transit between and across settings and circumstances. Sustainable assessment is clearly important in developing learners’ ability to meet future unknowns and make realistic judgements about standards of performance. 2.2 Shifting the lens on assessment Building on our brief “definition” of assessment in Chapter 1, here we take the opportunity to delve further into what constitutes assessment and what informs different perspectives of assessment. Fitting with the discussion in section 2.4, we take a practice-based approach to assessment. Understanding assessment as a measure of learning comes from the psychometric tradition. It results in a focus on assessment of learning (summative assessment) at the end of a programme, course, or activity where the results are used for purposes of certification. Certification is one important purpose of assessment. However a focus on assessment of learning is problematic for a number of reasons, including that it can result in assessing what is not intended, as Harlen (2007) points out: Teachers can be very effective in training students to pass tests even when the students do not have the understanding or higher order thinking skills that the tests are intended to measure. (p. 2) Given the complexity of meeting future needs in the changing world of work, thinking of assessment as a “measure” of learning does not sit well with assessment for learning and sustainable assessment. Rather, it is more appropriate to consider assessment as a process of making judgements, not necessarily always by the teacher/assessor. Judgements are made against criteria or intended outcomes that are transparent to all involved in making judgements and giving feedback. The struggle is then the process of interpretation of what initially appears as precise but that precision evaporates as teachers/assessors, learners and workplace supervisors engage in unpacking what it means. Rather
and institutional rules and/or conventions, and the affects of norms and normativisation processes. Schatski sums this up by describing practices as “a nexus of doings and sayings” (2012, p. 15).
25
