Using Testing as a Learning Tool.
Testing is not simply used to ‘check’ the learner’s memory but to ‘strengthen’ it.
Tudor Grange Academies Trust Expectations:
Outstanding (1) A
Good (2) B
Requires improvement (3) C
Inadequate (4) D
How does the teacher plan and utilise low stake testing as a learning tool and organise varied testing milestones effectively within the learning journey?
Clarity of Instruction Precision of teacher’s instruction regarding low stake testing.
Contextualisation of Test Ability to aid learners’ appreciation of the validity of test TO SUPPORT JUDGEMENT SEE LEARNERS RESPONSES TO QUESTION 1/2 ON LEARNERS’ FEEDBACK SHEET Suitable Style/Form and Organisation of Low Stake Testing Within the Learning Journey. Appropriate nature of low stake testing effectively shaped by - subject material - nature of the learners - previous assessment knowledge - the current learning need i.e. knowledge retrieval/ consolidation/explorati on/evaluation/elaborat ion Planning low stake testing at the appropriate points within the learning journey. TO SUPPORT JUDGEMENT SEE LEARNERS RESPONSES TO QUESTION 3/4 ON LEARNERS’ FEEDBACK SHEET
The teacher has effectively planned this personalised learning journey prior to the lesson and discusses low stake testing in an engaging and precise manner and within an appropriate period of time. Learners feel motivated and encouraged to meet the required demands. Each task is broken down with clarity and the varying demands are clear from the verbal explanation. Learners have a clear understanding of how each task will be assessed and as result produce work that is enhanced by this knowledge.
The teacher has a clear understanding of why they have selected the particular low stake tests and this is evident in both their plan and their explanation during the course of the lesson. The learners are engaged in the verbal introduction and as a result are clear regarding the varying task expectations. Where appropriate the teacher breaks down the tasks according to the nature of the assessment demands. This clear introduction arms learners with the ability to approach each test according to the assessment demands.
The teacher instils a true appreciation of the validity of the tasks explaining in detail how the ‘style’ of testing will benefit the needs of the learners. When questioned learners are able to articulate the benefits of the different testing strategies and demonstrate an appreciation of how each low stake testing enhances their learning.
The teacher touches upon the reasons why this style of testing is appropriate at this point in the learning journey. Learners have a sense of why they are being asked to master the required skill and the benefits of this style of testing and are able to articulate this with some degree of clarity.
The teacher is highly effective in planning and using continuous and varied low stake testing milestones to support the learning of the skill, and the eventual undertaking of formative and common assessments. The low stake tests are expertly positioned and prescribed according to whether the teacher requires the learners to retrieve, consolidate, explore, evaluate or expand their knowledge or skill set. Where appropriate visual reinforcements are used in highly effective ways to enable students to retain what the low stake tests are asking of them. Where appropriate kinesthetic, and auditory resources are also used to enhance learners understanding of the low stake tests and their purpose. Learners are totally immersed in the low stake tests as they are highly engaging and pitched appropriately so that they connect with the learning they has already been carried out. The learners stretch themselves to meet the demands of the aspirational tests, viewing them as an opportunity to not only demonstrates their learning but to embed and further explore that learning.
The teacher plans and uses a range of low stake testing milestones to support the learning of the skill. The sequence of low stake tests effectively leads to the undertaking of formative and common assessments. The teacher also carefully predicts where the low stake testing should be within the learning journey. While they accurately locate the test within the learning journey they are less perceptive when deciding what type of test is required. There is evidence of visual, kinesthetic, and auditory resources to enhance learners understanding of the low stake test and its purpose. As a result learners are engaged in the low stake tests and can appreciate how it connects with the learning they have been carrying out. They are less successful at being able to appreciate why a particular type of test has been set. The learners do attempt the varying testing experiences valuing them as an opportunity to demonstrate their learning to date.
There is some evidence that the teacher has considered and planned the use of low stake testing prior to the lesson however this is hampered by the teacher’s lack of knowledge regarding the assessment criteria and the learner’s ability to process new knowledge. This lack of understanding is apparent in the teacher’s instructions. This filters through to the students understanding. They attempt to respond but do so reliant on simplistic recall knowledge. The teacher does not discuss why this particular testing method is being used. Learners offer an unsophisticated response when asked why they are mastering the required skill. They are unable to articulate the benefits of the particular testing tool. The teacher uses low stake testing milestones to check knowledge however they tend to be monotonous and dull. There seems to be a limited connection between the tests and this disordered nature does not support the completion of the formative and common assessments. The teacher does not accurately predict the where the low stake testing should be within the learning journey. There are lost opportunities to utilize visual, kinesthetic, and auditory resources to enhance the learners understanding of the low stake test and its purpose. As a result learners are partially engaged in the low stake tests. They opt for tests that do not stretch them and opt out of those that do. They have no appreciation of how the test connects with the learning they have been carrying out.
There is no evidence that the teacher has considered the use of low stake testing prior to the lesson. It is presented in disengaging way. As a result learners are not motivated to complete the required tasks. The teacher’s knowledge of how the test will be assessed is limited. Learners’ knowledge is limited also. They are unable to communicate how and why they are responding to a particular low stake test. Learners do not have a sense of why they are being asked to learn in this way.
There is no evidence that the teacher has considered the low stake test prior to the lesson. There is either no application of low stake testing or random application within the learning journey. There is no link between the sequence of low stake tests and they do not support the completion of formative and common assessments. There is no evidence of visual, kinesthetic, and auditory resources to enhance learners understanding of the low stake test and its purpose. Learners are sporadically engaged in the low stake tests and have no appreciation of how they connect with the learning that has been carried out. Due to the teacher’s lack of clarity they cannot appreciate why a particular type of test has been set.
What does the teacher do in order to ensure there is a positive and productive learning climate during the testing phase? Support Support/intervention during low stake testing
Once instructions have been clearly given and the teacher offers complete clarity regarding what the outcome should look like the teacher accurately judges initial progress. They make constructive decisions regarding the level of support required. If engagement with the task is slow or numerous questions
After the teacher has provided clarity regarding how to approach the test and what the final outcome should look like they make sound decisions regarding the level of support required during the application process. They actively move around the classroom making
The teacher explains how the learner should attempt the low stake testing milestone however this is laboured and ill timed. Learners begin to lose focus. As a result the teacher is then in demand to clarify instructions. They
The teacher offers the learners laborious but ambiguous instructions regarding the purpose of the test and then ‘leaves’ the learners to attempt the task. The teacher offers no further assistance irrespective of
TO SUPPORT JUDGEMENT SEE LEARNERS RESPONSES TO QUESTION 8 ON LEARNERS’ FEEDBACK SHEET
Acknowledgement of the Learners’ Response to the Low Stake Test The teacher’s ability to recognise and utilize a learner’s verbal/written response to a planned low stake test. TO SUPPORT JUDGEMENT SEE LEARNERS RESPONSES TO QUESTION 9/10 ON LEARNERS’ FEEDBACK SHEET
are asked the teacher stops and addresses these mis-conceptions with the whole group. During the application process the teacher intuitively takes on a support role. They do not simply ‘hand over’ to the learners but understand that they are still an integral part of the learning process. The teacher actively moves around the classroom making accurate judgements regarding the learners’ needs and offers the appropriate level of assistance – clarifying instructions, bolstering confidence, exploring the extension of ideas etc. Learners have total clarity regarding the role of the teacher during the completion of the low stake test and use the teacher confidently, when necessary, to support their learning. The learners thrive in climate of confidence and self-belief and therefore do not ‘over rely’ on the teacher demonstrating an independent approach to the testing milestone. Management of verbal responses- The teacher expertly manages verbal responses naturally recognising the strengths of specific responses and encouraging learners to explain their thinking. They also sensitively handle incorrect responses praising the learner for their active participation and if appropriate helping the learner to unpick their misconceptions within the public forum so that all benefit from the learner’s adapted thinking process. The teacher successfully nurtures a culture of ‘desirable difficulty.’ Learners have absolute confidence that their response will be valued and utilized to enhance learning they feel absolutely safe to participate regardless of their level of understanding. This is evidence that learners appreciate the value of ‘struggle’ Management of written responses- The teacher carefully uses examples of learners’ work to inspire and motivate others to produce their best possible piece of work. Their deconstruction of the example is well defined and precise. The teacher draws out elements that meet the demands of the assessment criteria, they comment on the cognitive processes involved and they also highlight how the learner has used the low stake test to enhance their learning. This results in learners having absolute clarity regarding how they are assessed, how the learner has structured their response and ultimately how this style of testing benefits their learning need. This level of understanding leads to learners producing follow up work that demonstrates significant progress.
judgements regarding the learners’ needs and offer assistance accordingly – clarifying instructions, bolstering confidence, exploring the extension of ideas etc. Learners have a positive relationship with the teacher and where appropriate do ask for support during the completion of the low stake test. They can, at times, be over-reliant due to growing rather than established selfconfidence however this is managed effectively by the teacher. It is obvious that the learners enjoy working in a positive and engaging climate.
make impractical decisions regarding when to address this with the whole class and when to offer individual clarification. While they do actively move around the room poor judgements are made regarding the level of support required. Learners have limited understanding regarding how to proceed and spend significant periods of time waiting for clarity learning time is lost and some learners become frustrated and disengaged.
obvious disengagement from the task. The teacher remains inactive at the front of the class and there is no evidence of movement around the classroom to offer the appropriate level of assistance – at best occasional guidance is offered from the ‘teacher’s desk’ however this is generalised and over simplified. Learners work in climate where fear is high and confidence is low. They do not ask the teacher for support during the completion of the low stake test due to apprehension and high levels of self-consciousness. This results in disengagement and poor behaviour for learning.
Management of verbal responses- The teacher positively manages verbal responses highlighting where a response is strong. Incorrect responses are also managed effectively. They thank the learner for their active participation and identify how this response could be improved. The teacher does enable learners to feel they can take risks. Learners do feel appreciated and recognise that their contribution, regardless of their level of understanding, will be well handled. Management of written responses-The teacher is able to recognise and utilise learners’ responses to support others. This is achieved through specific verbal commentary that highlights the successes of the piece according to the assessment criteria. The teacher times the interjections appropriately enabling learners to learn and improve their own work as a result of it. Learners are able to process the teacher’s commentary and articulate how they are assessed and how this style of testing benefits their learning need. As a result learners produce follow up work that indicates improved understanding.
Management of verbal responsesThe teacher does recognise correct verbal responses however nonspecific feedback such as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ is heavily relied on. Incorrect responses tend to be ignored due to a lack of confidence and skill to deal with them. The teacher may thank the learner however quickly moves on without addressing the issues. As a result the learning environment tends to be dominated by those who are confident and there is limited engagement from less confident learners who are not willing to take risks. A limited number of resilient learners do feel appreciated.
Management of verbal responses- The teacher demands verbal responses that are rarely recognised and where they are the feedback is at best nonspecific and at worst detrimental to the learners’ understanding due to the lack of clarity. Very few learners are willing to take part and at frequently the teacher ‘picks’ on learners which leads to awkward silences or simplistic one word answers which the teacher inaccurately and exaggeratedly praises. As a result the learning environment is dominated by the teacher’s voice with little or no room for student exploration. Learners do not respond because they are fearful of the repercussions. Management of written responses-The teacher’s use of learners’ responses is not effective in enabling learners’ to make progress. The majority do not feel valued and dislike their work being used in a public forum. The teacher does not offer specific enough feedback when highlighting students’ work. As a result students make little or no progress during this section of the learning journey.
Management of written responsesThe teacher does acknowledge ‘good’ work. The commentary is positive but not always specific enough. Leaners appreciate being highlighted; however they struggle to fully appreciate how the strengths in the piece link to the marking criteria. They are unable to articulate how this type of testing benefits them as a learner.
Is it evident that the teacher uses low stake testing over time to plan and deliver programmes of further study according to the learner needs? Teacher written feedback/ Learners’ response to the feedback Indication of the influence of low stake testing over time TO SUPPORT JUDGEMENT SEE LEARNERS RESPONSES TO QUESTION 5/6/7 ON LEARNERS’ FEEDBACK SHEET
It is apparent throughout the learner’s book that a clear and consistent learning dialogue has taken place. At every appropriate low stake testing point the teacher offers supportive, personalised feedback that ensures the learner fully understands their own specific progress. The teacher makes highly personalised judgements regarding the next steps in the learner’s journey and selects appropriate low stake testing strategies to move that particular learner forward. The learner is enthused to respond to such clear, coherent feedback by applying the suggested strategies in future work. The follow up dialogue reveals that the teacher effectively tracks how the learner responds to the suggested strategies and assesses the success of their application. The learner’s active response to the suggested strategies and the
A clear learning dialogue is evident in the learner’s book. Appropriate low stake testing milestones are set and appropriate feedback given. The teacher accurately assesses the level of understanding and begins to plan appropriate strategies that will enable the learner to develop further. While the teacher is able to set targets that will aid progression they demonstrate a less precise understanding of the different types of low stake testing that will develop the learner’s understanding. The learner does respond to the follow up strategies with some success however they are less successful at understanding how the particular follow up strategy suggested will benefit their learning. There is evidence that the
There is limited evidence of a learning dialogue. General strengths are identified however an appreciation of how to develop the learner using low stake testing is very limited. Any targets set tend to be shaped by preconceived, fixed ideas about the learner’s ability rather than being directly linked to the work that is being assessed. There is limited evidence that the learner has engaged with the advice however the impact is minimal due to the lack of tracking of progress made
There is no evidence of an effective and coherent learning dialogue. Both the learning experience and resulting feedback are disjointed and disorganised. Highly generalised and over simplified views are provided. If any targets are set they tend to have little or no relevance to the work or learner that is being assessed. As a result any targets of follow up low stake testing strategies suggested are ineffectual and disregarded by the learner.
frequent tracking ensures the learner makes exceptionally rapid and sustained progress.
teacher tracks progress, assesses the success of the learner’s understanding and plans future teaching accordingly. The exercise book does indicate that the students respond to the suggested strategies enabling good progress to be made.