Standard 5: Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
5.1: Assess student learning
Demonstrate understanding of assessment strategies, including informal and formal, diagnostic, formative and summative approaches to assess student learning.
5.1: Assess student learning
Demonstrate understanding of assessment strategies, including informal and formal, diagnostic, formative and summative approaches to assess student learning.
Artefact 1: Formative Assessment Using Work Sample Observations of student achievement were made during marking process. In order to make evaluations, I referred to the learning intention and success criteria as outlined in the lesson expectations. During this time, I recognised student success and rewarded it appropriately. By collecting formative assessment data, I was able to plan consecutive lessons that catered for learning needs. |
Artefact 2: Marked Samples of Summative Writing Assessment In order to effectively plan, structure and sequence learning programs, I employed summative assessment strategies. This allowed me to gain information regarding student comprehension and ability which directed future teaching and learning activities. |
|
Artefact 3: Reflection Excerpt from Lesson Observation Reflections on assessment procedures allowed me to challenge pre-conceived notions of data collection. In addition, this process allowed me to develop confidence in administering tests such as: the Schedule for Early Number Assessment (SENA) and Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessment (F&P). |
Reflection
Assessment is an integral part of an effective teaching and learning process; it enables teachers to assess, provide feedback and report on student learning. Veldhuis and Heuvel-Panhuizen (2019) outline that teachers rely on “evidence about student learning to be adaptive to their students’ specific learning needs” (p. 2). Throughout my teaching practicum, I observed the value of summative and formative assessment in providing data to inform lesson planning. Under the guidance of my mentor teachers, I was able to facilitate a range of standardised tests and implement lesson-based assessment tools to provide feedback and report on academic achievement.
During my practicum, formative assessment was a valuable tool that allowed me to offer responsive education and support student learning. In the early stages of my practicum I struggled to allocate time to collecting data during lessons. As a result, my teaching was not catering for the individual needs of students (Schneider & Bodensohn, 2017). In order to ensure best practice, I sought feedback from my mentor teachers and began to incorporate effective and efficient methods of formative assessment. By asking students to use the thumb scale or hold up their work samples, I was able to gather immediate data on student understanding. These non-verbal assessment strategies were most valuable as they required minimal interruptions to the flow of the lesson.
Standard 5.1.1 suggests that graduate teachers must demonstrate an understanding of a range of assessment strategies. Under the guidance of my mentor teachers, I facilitated a range of formal and informal summative assessments that are curriculum based and located within a known standards framework. In particular, I delivered the Schedule for Early Number Assessment (SENA) and Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessment (F&P) in accordance with the school’s annual assessment schedule. In collaboration with my mentor teachers, I utilised the Planning Literacy and Numeracy (PLAN2) online tool to collate and display collected data.
Throughout my teaching practicum, I developed skills in delivering and analysing assessments to evaluate student learning. Despite being confident in assessing students and providing feedback, I will require further support to report on student learning.
During my practicum, formative assessment was a valuable tool that allowed me to offer responsive education and support student learning. In the early stages of my practicum I struggled to allocate time to collecting data during lessons. As a result, my teaching was not catering for the individual needs of students (Schneider & Bodensohn, 2017). In order to ensure best practice, I sought feedback from my mentor teachers and began to incorporate effective and efficient methods of formative assessment. By asking students to use the thumb scale or hold up their work samples, I was able to gather immediate data on student understanding. These non-verbal assessment strategies were most valuable as they required minimal interruptions to the flow of the lesson.
Standard 5.1.1 suggests that graduate teachers must demonstrate an understanding of a range of assessment strategies. Under the guidance of my mentor teachers, I facilitated a range of formal and informal summative assessments that are curriculum based and located within a known standards framework. In particular, I delivered the Schedule for Early Number Assessment (SENA) and Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessment (F&P) in accordance with the school’s annual assessment schedule. In collaboration with my mentor teachers, I utilised the Planning Literacy and Numeracy (PLAN2) online tool to collate and display collected data.
Throughout my teaching practicum, I developed skills in delivering and analysing assessments to evaluate student learning. Despite being confident in assessing students and providing feedback, I will require further support to report on student learning.