William Cope
May Thet Khine Nyein
Obie Ellmoos.png "Nathan Luise")
Nathan Luise
Olive SabiitiAssessment for Learning MOOC’s Updates
Standards-Based and Alternative Practices of Assessment (Admin Update 3)
Standards-based assessment allows the possibility that everyone in a certain level of education or in the same class can succeed. For the underlying principles, see:
Criterion referenced, norm-referenced and self-referenced assessments have fundamentally different logics and social purposes. In the following image from Chapter 10 of our New Learning book, we attempt to characterize the different logics. But what are the different social assumptions?
Comment: What are the social assumptions of each kind of assessment? What are the consequences for learners? For better and/or for worse, in each case?
Make an Update: Find an example of an alternative form of assessment. Describe and analyze it.
Example of an Alternative Form of Assessment
I chose Portfolio Assessment , Portfolio assessment is an alternative form of assessment that involves the systematic collection of students’ work over time to demonstrate learning progress, skills, and achievements. Instead of relying on a single test or examination, a portfolio includes multiple artifacts such as written assignments, projects, reflections, journals, presentations, and creative outputs. These artifacts are usually aligned with specific learning objectives and may include student self-reflections explaining what was learned and how improvement occurred. Portfolios can be used in various educational settings, including basic education, higher education, and alternative learning systems, and may be presented in physical or digital formats (e-portfolios).
How It Works
Students compile their work throughout a course or learning period. Teachers provide criteria or rubrics to guide what should be included and how it will be evaluated. Periodic feedback is given, allowing learners to revise and improve their work. At the end of the term, the portfolio is assessed holistically based on criteria such as content mastery, skill development, effort, reflection, and growth over time.
Analysis: Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
One major strength of portfolio assessment is that it provides a comprehensive picture of student learning. It values the learning process, not just the final product, making it particularly effective for assessing higher-order thinking skills, creativity, and real-world application of knowledge. Portfolio assessment also promotes metacognition, as students reflect on their learning experiences and identify their strengths and areas for improvement. Additionally, it supports learner diversity by allowing students to demonstrate understanding in multiple ways, which is especially beneficial for learners who may struggle with traditional written exams.
Weaknesses
Despite its advantages, portfolio assessment has limitations. It can be time-consuming for both teachers and students to compile, review, and evaluate portfolios thoroughly. Ensuring consistency and objectivity in grading can also be challenging, particularly without clear rubrics. Moreover, some students may lack the self-regulation skills needed to manage long-term portfolio tasks effectively, requiring additional teacher support.
Conclusion
Portfolio assessment is a valuable alternative to traditional testing because it emphasizes authentic learning, continuous improvement, and learner reflection. While it requires careful planning and clear evaluation criteria, its benefits in supporting meaningful and inclusive assessment make it a powerful tool in modern education.
________________________________________
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.
Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60–63.
SOCIAL ASSUMPTIONS TOWARDS LEARNING ASSESSMENT
Different kinds of assessment carry certain social assumptions, and these assumptions affect how students see themselves and how others see them. Standardized tests assume that all learners can be measured fairly using the same test, at the same time, under the same conditions. This can help identify students who are meeting national standards, but it can also create pressure and make students feel judged only by their score. For some learners, this builds confidence when they perform well; for others, it can lower self-esteem and make them believe they are “not smart,” even if they have strengths that the test does not measure.
Classroom tests assume that learning should follow what the teacher teaches and that students should show their understanding in written or practical tasks. This can help learners feel more supported because the assessment is closer to what they practiced. However, it may still disadvantage students who struggle with writing but understand the concepts, or those who need more time to think.
Performance tasks and projects assume that students learn best through doing, creating, and applying knowledge in real-world situations. These tasks can boost confidence, creativity, and teamwork because students can show what they know in many different ways. But they can also be challenging for learners who have limited resources, less experience, or who are shy during group work. Sometimes, students with stronger communication skills may appear more capable than those who actually understand the science better but struggle to express it.
Formative assessments—like exit tickets, short reflections, or quick tasks—assume that learning is a continuous process where mistakes are part of improvement. These assessments usually help students grow because they receive feedback instead of a score. They reduce pressure and encourage learners to ask questions. But if not used carefully, students might see them as “extra work” or may not take them seriously.
A standardized test is an exam where all test-takers answer the same questions under the same conditions and are scored in a consistent way, allowing for the comparison of performance across individuals or groups. These tests are used in various educational stages, from elementary school to college admissions and graduate programs, and typically feature multiple-choice, true/false, or essay questions. Examples include the National Achievement Test (NAT), PISA, and College Admission Test.
Standardized test- its like a one-size fits all assessment, students are categorized or rank based on what they have learned (testing for knowledge). It fails to measure creativity, critical thinking, and other important skills. It does not define the full potential of students.
Formative Assessment- It is an ongoing assessment in which the teacher gives feedback and adjust the lesson based on students understanding of the lesson.
Summative Assessment- Learning can be effectively measured at intervals; provides a final accounting of achievement. Certifies competency, provides closure, informs stakeholders (parents, colleges), allows for reflection on overall learning. However, it doesn't guide future learning, can reveal only the tip of the iceberg (e.g., test day performance).
In assessing students, we can use Performance Task like roleplaying, creating poems and songs, video presentation and other group activities. It supports and promotes 21st century skills like collaboration and communication with others. However, it can be hard to assess as teachers may show prejudice towards the students, thus it is essential to use rubrics when having performance tasks.
Social Assumptions and Consequences of Different Kinds of Assessment
The classroom assessment is never a neutral act. It is a social ritual, laden with unspoken assumptions about knowledge, ability, and merit. Traditional standardized testing, for instance, operates on a social assumption of objectivity and comparability. It assumes that a single, decontextualized snapshot can fairly rank individuals across diverse populations, promoting a meritocratic ideal where the best rise to the top. For learners, the consequences are profound: it can streamline pathways for high scorers, offering clear, if narrow, proof of competence. Yet, for worse, it reduces complex learning to a handful of answers, exacerbating anxiety, privileging those from cultures familiar with the test's hidden codes, and often punishing creative or divergent thought (Madaus & O'Dwyer, 1999). The message to the learner is clear: what matters is your isolated performance on this specific task, not your process, collaboration, or unique insight.
In contrast, continuous coursework and portfolio assessment assume that learning is a process best judged over time and in context. They value effort, revision, and depth. This can be empowering, allowing learners to showcase growth and take ownership of their work. However, for worse, it can create a relentless pressure of constant judgment, disproportionately burdening those without the resources—time, technology, quiet space—to perfect ongoing work. The social assumption here leans toward a protestant work ethic, where consistent diligence is both the means and the evidence of learning.
Social Assumptions and Consequences of Different Kinds of Assessment
Based on what I have research, Different assessments carry certain social assumptions about what learning “should” look like. Standardized tests assume that all learners can be measured fairly using the same tasks and conditions. This can encourage broad accountability and comparability, but it may also disadvantage students whose backgrounds, languages, or learning styles do not match the test’s design.
Classroom or performance-based assessments assume that learning is diverse, contextual, and best understood through real work. These can empower learners, highlight creativity, and support deeper understanding. However, they may also introduce subjectivity and depend heavily on teacher judgment, which can lead to inconsistent grading.
Standards-based assessment assumes that learning can be measured against clear, fixed progressions or standards that define essential knowledge and skills for all students. Alternative assessments, such as performance tasks, portfolios, and self-assessments, are based on social assumptions that learning is complex, contextual, and multidimensional. standards-based assessments assume uniform learning goals and objective measurement, benefiting clarity and fairness but risking rigidity and inequality. Alternative assessments assume learning as a holistic, contextual process, fostering engagement and inclusivity but facing challenges in reliability and scalability. Student portfolios serve as an alternative form of assessment where learners compile a collection of their work samples, such as essays, projects, artwork, reflections, and revisions, over time to demonstrate progress, skills, and achievements in a subject or skill area. In practice, portfolios often include artifacts like writing samples, multimedia creations, peer feedback, self-reflections, and evidence of growth, such as drafts showing iterative improvements.
Standardized tests assume that all learners have equal access to resources, instruction, and preparation, and that knowledge and skills can be measured objectively through uniform tasks. For learners, this can provide clear benchmarks and motivate mastery of specific skills; however, it may disadvantage students from diverse cultural or socio-economic backgrounds, encourage teaching to the test, and create stress or anxiety.
Learning analytics and digital assessments assume that learners regularly engage with digital platforms, that the data collected accurately reflects learning and effort, and that all learners have equal access to technology and the internet. These assessments can provide personalized learning paths, instant feedback, and early identification of areas needing support. On the downside, digital inequities can disadvantage some learners, overemphasis on metrics may narrow the understanding of learning, and privacy concerns may arise from data tracking.
Standardized tests assume that all learners have equal access to resources, instruction, and preparation, and that knowledge and skills can be measured objectively through uniform tasks. For learners, this can provide clear benchmarks and motivate mastery of specific skills; however, it may disadvantage students from diverse cultural or socio-economic backgrounds, encourage teaching to the test, and create stress or anxiety.
Learning analytics and digital assessments assume that learners regularly engage with digital platforms, that the data collected accurately reflects learning and effort, and that all learners have equal access to technology and the internet. These assessments can provide personalized learning paths, instant feedback, and early identification of areas needing support. On the downside, digital inequities can disadvantage some learners, overemphasis on metrics may narrow the understanding of learning, and privacy concerns may arise from data tracking.
Example of an Alternative Assessment: Portfolio Assessment
Description
Portfolio assessment involves collecting a curated set of a student’s work over a period of time to demonstrate learning progress, skill mastery, and personal growth. Unlike traditional tests that capture performance at one moment, portfolios include multiple artifacts—essays, projects, artwork, journals, research notes, or multimedia products—showing the learner’s development. Many portfolio systems also require students to write reflections explaining why they selected each piece and what it reveals about their learning.
Analysis
Portfolio assessment provides a richer, more comprehensive portrayal of student learning than standardized tests. Because it documents progress across weeks or months, it captures both process and product, enabling teachers to evaluate complex skills such as critical thinking, creativity, communication, and problem-solving (Paulson, Paulson & Meyer, 1991). It also minimizes the stress associated with high-stakes testing and allows multiple opportunities for revision and self-improvement.
A key strength of portfolios is the way they promote metacognition. When students reflect on their own work, they develop greater awareness of their strengths, challenges, and strategies for improvement (Paris & Ayres, 1994). This reflective practice supports deeper learning and encourages students to take ownership of their academic growth.
However, portfolio assessment also presents challenges. Scoring can be subjective unless teachers use clear and well-designed rubrics (Herman, Aschbacher & Winters, 1992). It also requires considerable time—for both students assembling the portfolio and teachers reviewing it. Additionally, learners who lack organizational skills or guidance may struggle to select appropriate artifacts. Despite these limitations, portfolios remain one of the most effective alternative assessments for capturing authentic, meaningful learning.
References
Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Paris, S. G., & Ayres, L. R. (1994). Becoming reflective students and teachers: With portfolios and authentic assessment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60–63.
Every assessment is more than a tool; it is a social decision about what we value. As recent community discussions highlight, we can view these choices through three metaphors: the Ruler, the Mirror, and the Gallery.
The Ruler (Standardized Testing) rests on the assumption of meritocratic uniformity—the belief that intelligence is fixed and best measured by a single, objective yardstick. As noted by community member Gab Abogado, this provides crucial data for accountability (like the NAT in the Philippines), allowing systems to identify gaps. However, the consequence is often exclusion; it favors those with resources and forces schools to teach to the test, narrowing the curriculum and penalizing students for poverty rather than lack of ability.
The Mirror (Formative Assessment) operates on the assumption that learning is contextual and fluid. It trusts the teacher to judge growth based on daily interaction rather than a single number. While this humanizes education and reduces anxiety, it carries the risk of subjectivity. As Carmen Sotero warns, without external checks, this can lead to grade inflation, giving students a false sense of competence that crumbles under high-stakes pressure.
Finally, The Gallery (Alternative Assessment) assumes diverse intelligences. By using portfolios or projects, it values creation over recall, allowing students who struggle with written tests to shine. However, as Joyce Manantan points out, this is resource-heavy. In the Philippine context of large class sizes, the assumption that teachers have the time to deeply evaluate 50 distinct portfolios can lead to burnout and superficial grading. Ultimately, a healthy system cannot choose just one; it must use the Ruler for policy, the Mirror for growth, and the Gallery for inclusion.