Summative (Performance-Based Assessment)

Summative Assessment (Performanced-Based)
Summative Assessment - is an appraisal of learning at the end of an instructional unit

or at a specific point in time. It compares student knowledge or skills against standards
or benchmarks. Summative assessment evaluates the mastery of learning whereas its
counterpart, formative assessment, measures progress and functions as a diagnostic
tool to help specific students. Generally, summative assessment gauges how a
particular population responds to an intervention rather than focusing on an individual. It
often aggregates data across students to act as an independent yardstick that allows
teachers, administrators, and parents to judge the effectiveness of the materials,
curriculum, and instruction used to meet national, state, or local standards. Summative
assessment includes midterm exams, final project, papers, teacher-designed tests,
standardized tests, and high-stakes tests.
Summative assessment is a commonplace tool used by teachers and school

administrators. It ranges from a simple teacher-constructed end-of-lesson exam to
standardized tests that determine graduation from high school and entry into college. If
used for the purposes for which it was designed, summative assessment plays an
important role in education. When used appropriately, it can deliver objective data to
support a teacher’s professional judgment, to make high-stakes decisions, and as a tool
for acquiring the needed information for adjustments in curriculum and instruction that
will ultimately improve the education process. When used incorrectly or for
accountability purposes, summative assessment can take valuable instruction time
away from students and increase teacher and student stress without producing notable
results.
Types of Summative Assessment

Educators generally rely on two forms of summative assessment: teacher constructed
(informal) and standardized (systematic).
1. Teacher Constructed (Informal)
Teacher-constructed assessment, the most common and frequently applied type of

summative assessment, is derived from teachers’ daily interactions and observations of
how students behave and perform in school. Since schools began, teachers have
depended predominantly on informal assessment, which today includes teacher-
constructed tests and quizzes, grades, and portfolios, and relies heavily on a teacher’s
professional judgment. Teachers inevitably form judgments, often accurate, about
students and their performance (Barnett, 1988; Spencer, Detrich, & Slocum, 2012).
Although many of these judgments help teachers understand where students stand in
mastering a lesson, a meaningful percentage result in false understandings and
conclusions. To be effective, a teacher-constructed assessment must deliver vital
information needed for the teacher to make accurate conclusions about each student’s
performance in a content area and to feel confident that performance is linked to
instruction. Ensuring that a teacher-constructed instrument is reliable and valid is
central to the assessment design process.
Research suggests that the main weaknesses of informal assessment relate to validity
and reliability (AERA, 1999; Mertler, 1999). That is why it is crucial for teachers to adopt
assessment procedures that are valid indicators of a student’s performance (appraise
what the assessment claims to) and that the assessment is reliable (provides
information that can be replicated).
Validity is a measure of how well an instrument gauges the relevant skills of a student.
The research literature identifies three basic types of validity: construct, criterion, and
content. Students are best served when the teacher focuses on content validity, that is,
making sure the content being tested is actually the content that was taught (Popham,
2014). Content validity requires no statistical calculations whereas both construct
validity and criterion validity require knowledge of statistics and thus are not well suited
to classroom teachers (Allen & Yen, 2002).
Reliability is key in the development of any teacher-constructed assessment because

teachers must be assured that repeated testing of a student using the same
assessment will produce consistent results (AERA, 1999; Brennan, 2006; McMillan &
Schumacher, 1997; Popham, 2014). Two independent assessors or the same assessor
should achieve similar score in a test-retest format. A reliable assessment gives the
teacher confidence that the instrument provides a good depiction of a student’s skills or
knowledge.
Reliability and validity may sometimes be at odds. For example, a test may be reliable
for an English language learner but it may not a valid measure of the skills of a student
whose primary language is not English. Ultimately, speedy feedback of student
performance after an assessment enhances the value of all forms of assessment. To
maximize the positive impact, both student and teacher should be provided with
detailed and specific information on a student’s achievement. Timely comments and
explanations from teachers can clarify how a student performed are essential
components of quality instruction and performance improvement. This information tells
students where they stand with regard to the teacher’s expectations. Timely feedback is
also essential for teachers (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005). Otherwise, teachers remain in the
dark about the effectiveness of their instructional strategies and methods. Research
suggests that testing without feedback is likely to produce disappointing results, and
the quantity and quality of the research supports including feedback as an integral part
of assessment (Başol, 2003).
Designing Teacher-Constructed Assessments
The essential question to ask when developing an informal teacher- constructed

assessment is this: Does the assessment consistently assess what the teacher
intended to be evaluated based on the material being taught? Best practices in
assessment suggest that teachers start answering this question by incorporating
assessment design into the instructional design process. Assessments are best
generated at the same time as lesson plans. Although teaching to the test has acquired
negative overtones, it is precisely what all student assessment is meant to accomplish.
Teachers cannot and should not assess every item they teach, but it is important that
they identify and prioritize the critical lesson elements for inclusion in a summary
assessment.
Instruction and assessment are meant to complement one another. When this occurs it
helps teachers, policymakers, administrators, and parents know what students are
capable of doing at specific stages in the education process. A good match of
assessment with instruction leads to more effective scope and sequencing, enhancing
the acquisition of knowledge and the mastery of skills required for success in
subsequent grades as well as success after graduation from school (Reigeluth, 1999).
The following are guidelines that lead to increased effectiveness of teacher-

constructed assessment (Reynolds, Livingston, Willson, & Willson, 2010; Shillingburg,
2016; Taylor & Nolen, 2005):
1. Clarify the purpose of the assessment and the intended use of its results.
2. Define the domain (content and skills) to be assessed.
3. Match instruction to standards required of each domain.
4. Identify the characteristics of the population to be assessed and consider how
these data might influence the design of the assessment.
5. Ensure that all prerequisite skills required for the lesson have been taught to the
students.
6. Ensure that the assessment evaluates skills compatible with and required for
success in future lessons.
7. Review with the students the purpose of the assessment and the knowledge and
skills to be assessed.
8. Consider possible task formats, timing, and response modes and whether they
are compatible with the assessment as well as how the scores will be used.
9. Outline how validity will be evaluated and measured.
● Methods include matching test questions to lesson plans, lesson objectives, and
standards, and obtaining student feedback after the assessment.
● Content-related evidence often consists of deciding whether the assessment
methods are appropriate, whether the tasks or problems provide an adequate
sample of the student’s performance, and whether the scoring system captures
the performance.’
● When possible, review test items with colleagues and students; revise as
necessary.
10. Review issues of reliability.

● Make sure that the assessment includes enough items and tasks (examples of
performance) to report a reliable score.
● Evaluate the relative weight allotted to each task, to each content category, and
to each skill being assessed.
11. Pilot-test the assessment, then revise as necessary. Are the results consistent
with formative assessments administered on the content being taught?
2. Standardized (Systematic)
Standardized testing is the second major category of summative assessment

commonly used in schools. Students and teachers are very familiar with these
standardized tests, which have become ubiquitous. As a subset of summative
assessment, standardized tests play a pivotal role in ensuring that schools are held to
the same standards and that all students regardless of race or socio-economic
background perform to expectations. Summative assessment provides educators with
the metrics to know what’s working and what’s not.
Standardized tests provide valuable data to be used by educators for school reform and
continuous improvement purposes. Data from these tests can include early indicators
that point to interventions for preventing potential future problems. The data can also
reveal when the system has broken down or highlight exemplary performers that
schools can emulate. Using such data can be invaluable as a systemwide tool (Celio,
2013). Despite the potential value of summative assessment as a tool to monitor and
improve systems, research finds minimal positive impact on student performance when
the tests are used for high-stakes purposes or to hold teachers and schools
accountable (Carnoy & Loeb, 2002; Hanushek & Raymond, 2005). The increased use of
incentives and other accountability measures, which have cost enormous sums,
reduced instruction time, and added stress to teachers, can be linked to only an average
effect size of 0.05 in improvement of student achievement (Yeh, 2007). As previously
noted, formative assessment has been shown to be a much more effective tool in
helping individual students maintain progress toward meeting accepted performance
standards, and the rigor and cost required to design valid and reliable standardized
tests places them outside the realm of tools that teachers can personally design. In the
end, it is important to understand what summative assessment is best suited to
accomplish. When it comes to improving systems, standardized assessment is well
suited for meeting a school’s needs. But for improving an individual student’s
performance, formative assessment is more appropriate.

Summative (Performance-Based Assessment)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Summative (Performance-Based Assessment)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Summative (Performance-Based Assessment)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Summative Assessment (Performanced-Based)

Summative Assessment - is an appraisal of learning at the end of an instructional unit

Summative assessment is a commonplace tool used by teachers and school

Types of Summative Assessment

1. Teacher Constructed (Informal)

Teacher-constructed assessment, the most common and frequently applied type of

Reliability is key in the development of any teacher-constructed assessment because

Designing Teacher-Constructed Assessments

The essential question to ask when developing an informal teacher- constructed

The following are guidelines that lead to increased effectiveness of teacher-

10. Review issues of reliability.

Standardized testing is the second major category of summative assessment

You might also like