IPP: Week 5 - Looking, Searching, Thinking

Week Five/Six: Proof!

• What do we need to prove? And to whom?  What do we need to be able to present as valid data when you are held accountable for your student’s learning? How does this change according to the learning environment where you teach? Or will teach?  Look up assessment or other evidence (data) strategies that are currently in place for your public school, professional learning communities, museum education, charter schools, or individual entities in art education such as Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate.  

• Post a short (300 word-ish) reasoning for what you chose to investigate and why!

Please post a 300(ish) word thread post that will tell about the assessment strategies that you would like to investigate further.  There is not an Artists Journal requirement this week, but please feel free to use that format if you wish!

I have a couple of ideas of what I want to look into, but not sure how far to go with the research. I am interested in investigating a way that we can make the assessments more meaningful for both students and teachers. I think there is a place for standardized questions (perhaps in a summative) that cover procedural knowledge and / or content knowledge (Vocabulary). However, I think we fall short when we don't assess students on their thinking processes and when we don't ask them to reflect on what they have learned. We need to use assessment as a tool for learning and to make class more meaningful.

Here is what I am thinking, I want to look into what our district currently expects, more info on the process used for the National Board process, and reflection strategies for learning. I'm hoping I can dig into more strategies to use to implement this type of assessment.

At the end of week 5, here is where I am at with the above:

Assessment Investigation

    I’m a little stymied in my investigation because of my position as the district Fine Arts curriculum content leader. Over the last 5 years, I have had to do a lot of investigation into our current modes of assessment so that I can understand it enough to lead out PD in it as well as lead teams through the writing of assessments.  I am pretty aware of what our district requires, at least at the secondary level. However, that being said, I would like to see a transformation occur. I am not very familiar at all with how elementary has been asked to assess. So I am interested in beginning a two-pronged investigation. First, I would like to see what has been laid out and required of the elementary art classes. Second, I would like to investigate how we could transform the secondary process to be more authentic and meaningful to our content. Perhaps this will lead to a transformation of the elementary requirements too. 

     At the secondary level, every high school course is required to give a common summative assessment (Final Exam) each semester. The common assessment is common district wide (between 3 high schools, 16 teachers) but in certain situations is common only school wide. There is a division of parts, 60% is supposed to be selected response, while 40% is supposed to be a performance event. 80% of the over all test should be exactly the same with teachers being able to add questions of their own to tailor the assessment to their instruction. However, the independent teacher questions can not equal more than 20% of the total number of questions on the test. 

     The high school formatives are common only school wide, and driven by the PLC’s. Each PLC is supposed to determine two formatives to give a semester. What I have noticed is that more often than not, the formatives are treated like mini-summatives, measuring student performance versus being a tool to inform instruction. And, unfortunately, are created under the motivation of “getting it done in name only” and for the sake of the ease of the teacher. Very rarely do the PLC teams take stock of what is needed in their instruction, and instead view this PLC requirement as a burden. When I was a full time teacher, I found this the most frustrating part of the PLC process. To me formatives were the best way to get a pulse of my students’ learning and it was infuriating to have to do them the same way, at the same time, as my colleagues who could be at a very different point in their teaching (and who, honestly, taught quite differently than I did.)

    At the middle school level, teachers were also asked to give a common summative assessment (but not a final exam since ms doesn’t give finals) each term (depending on course it was either quarter or semester) and two common formatives per course. Because electives were not given PLC time to meet together on a regular or consistent basis, very few teachers gave the assessments or collected data. No accountability + no intrinsic value = low / no implementation or MEANINGLESS ASSESSMENT. 

    In elementary, I am learning that they use a scoring rubric with a 4-3-2-1 scale. That is, they were, until the classroom teachers started implementing common core and switched to a 3-2-1 scale for report cards. The numbers correlate to 3 = on track, 2 = progressing, 1 = not on track. So, now specials will also be using the 3-2-1 scale for grades K - 2 (using common core) and 4-3-2-1 for grades 3 -5 until they switch over to CCSS. I wonder other than grading projects, how the elementary teachers assess art. 

     Sort of a random thought in connection to all this investigation of how we assess - why doesn’t what we teach really build or connect skills? I’m thinking specifically of the Intro to Art class we teach as our foundational course, but it really applies to all the courses and the grade level expectations from the state. The standards don’t really build in a particular course, but build upon skills learned in previous years. So, how do we teach in such a way that asks students to develop through out the year, as opposed to unit by unit? I think in order to do this, the standards need to change (with more of a focus on making meaning and skills that aren’t even addressed in the current set of GLE’s). How can we go deeper in certain areas, with opportunities to develop, address, assess, readdress, and re-assess? I would love to see a way for the summative assessments to give students a way to connect what they have learned to what they will need to use their new skills for in the future. Is that possible or is that hoping for too much? Is it possible to answer the question, “When am I ever going to need this?” through an assessment?

Replies:
WOW!! A huge undertaking, but one I am quite sure you will take on.. head on!! Fhew, after reading all of that, I cannot wait for you to start reading the next book!! You might love it!!

If I were you, I believe I would start my investigation with what standards are taught at what level. Then, I would get out a huge piece of paper, and mind map out the standards, the assessments, and the outcomes (artworks), and then connect, add, subtract, change, etc... I appreciate that you added that sometimes all of the "Have TO's" can end up somewhat meaningless. If the whole point of assessment is to help students become reflective and metaconginitive, then I would focus on making the assessments link and link and link to what they have already completed. You have a very expansive view of assessment!! Yayy!! Your goal is very big, and since we only have a week for this task, maybe you could start with something small and then add to it later?? I don't want to you overwhelmed!!


-Livey...
and
A summative that recalls, professes, and "hopes" is totally do-able! Maybe that wil be your laser focus?? IDK...

IPP: Week 4 - One Page Portfolio

Create a One Page Portfolio of your images that you have collected, and write about your learning thus far!  Share and respond.

I have been reading a lot of good stuff in the chapters and articles assigned for class. Although I knew some of the information already from trying to be proactive in my role as Fine Arts content leader (who wants an arts leader who doesn't know about how this stuff relates to our field?) I am really appreciating the time to bring some of my disparate thoughts together. I especially like the opportunity to make art that captures a snapshot of my feelings and impressions of the readings. It seems to tap into another one of my learning styles that I don't often get to use. And it synthesizes my learning for me to an extent. They say creating metaphor is a great way to remember things (aka: learn) and I find myself creating metaphors in my art that highlights what I am taking away from the reading. 

In responding to my peers writings, the theme of reflection is coming up again and again (so is the topic of frustration with what is expected, but let's skew positive, shall we?). I think this might be the key to our assessment quandary. (I feel a journal entry coming on...) If we can get students to reflect and show their thinking either through artwork, writing, speaking, demonstration or a combination of these isn't that the best way to demonstrate their learning? If we can back up what we are looking for through rubrics (turning the qualitative into quantitative) that are clearly communicated, up front, why would this not be an accepted form of assessment? And won't it be more meaningful in the end?

IPP: Week 3 - The Historical Future of Assessment in Art Ed

The Historical Future Of Assessment in Art Education

• Read: Gruber and Hobbs “Historical Analysis of Assessment in Art Education”. Art Education. Nov. 2002
• Create one Artist’s Journal Page reacting to the authors call for action in the area of assessments in Art Education.  What do you think we need to do to improve assessment in Art Education?  What COULD the future of Assessment in Art Education look like? 

 What should we do to improve assessment in Art Education? My musings come from many angles and hopefully do not contradict each other. I realize that I no longer view assessment from behind the teacher's desk but also see it now from a parent's point of view (with my son starting school and having a veil dropped between home and school). I also have a unique "balcony" point of view from my Content Leader job where I am getting to see into many different teacher's classrooms with insight into the way they assess (or don't) and how they use assessment through the PLC process. It seems like first we need to be sure that art teachers are given some training in types of assessment so that they can as the facilitators of learning, create assessments that are specific and meaningful to their content. This needs to come first in undergrad or certification training. But what to do as times change and priorities change for those that have been in the field a long time? It taps into another question of how do we get teachers to desire to be life long learners not just in their content but also their profession of pedagogy? We need to stop accepting that all content areas are the same (and that is what makes them wonderful and valuable!) That we have commonalities and things to learn from each other, but differences also that makes what we do have value to life beyond the school years. 

We as art teachers need to embrace assessment, make it meaningful to how we operate as creative minds and artists, and look at the way learning artists could use it to grow. It needs to stop being approached as something "someone" else is making us do, and we need to look at how we can use it to improve instruction, learning, and development within our students. And be brave enough to stand up and speak out - and change - if something isn't working. We need to stop playing the system and design the system that works for our area. It needs to be looking at process, and reflective, and collaborative, and flexible. It needs to have the students' voice and it needs to be a reflection of what they know, not what they can regurgitate. It needs to mark a passage in their development and not be an end. It needs to map out what is learned and what still needs to be explored.

• Read: Sabol “Seismic Shifts in the Education Landscape: What Do They Mean for Arts Education and Arts Education Policy”
• Use One Artist’s Journal Page to react to the reading. Some guiding questions may be: How should student assessment and teacher assessment be related? What do the statistics about assessment in art illuminate to you? How can you blend 21^st century skills with new possibilities for art education?
• 
  

    How should student and teacher assessment be related? I think that student performance on assessment should not be related to teacher assessment at all, but rather a teacher should be assessed on how s/he uses assessment to structure / develop / guide learning for students. The teacher should be evaluated on how the tool of assessment is used within the craft of the profession.  

   I was surprised that the secondary stats didn't mention the use of selected response (multiple choice) assessments at all, yet were used in elementary. We have mandatory multiple choice finals that must be given in all classes at the HS level. The stats also illuminate for me that there are schools out there using portfolio for assessment, more than I originally thought. I was wondering how the rubrics stood alone as a category. I use rubrics to assess performance events and with its inclusion with the other categories, it seemed out of place.

   I think the idea of teaching art with meaning, allowing for more choice (and teaching through fewer "recipes") and investigation, incorporating design thinking, and changing the way we approach digital media will allow us as art teachers to embrace new possibilities for 21st century art learning.