Assessment in the future: Building the case for change

Giving the keynote speech at Assessment in the future: building the case for change, Barry Sheerman MP confirmed to the audience of more than 170 teachers and educationalists that his committee would be holding a wide-ranging inquiry into testing and assessment.

“How much is the current assessment regime fit for purpose? At the end of the day we all want a very similar thing - a first-rate education system and learning environment for pupils, which encourages a high quality of teaching and learning,” said Mr Sheerman.

He continued: “I predict that there will be changes. But I need your help. We need you to say what you think.”

Taking place during the summer term, the inquiry will investigate issues such as: why do we have a centrally run system?  What role should exam boards have in testing and assessment?  And does the current regime stifle the scope for creativity in the curriculum? 

Keith Bartley, the GTC’s new Chief Executive, told the conference that the GTC was pleased to endorse the decision to hold an inquiry into assessment, and that the Council was very keen to make a major contribution. He added that GTC would submit views gathered from the conference as part of its initial contribution to the inquiry.

The GTC’s conference - held at Central Hall in Westminster - also came on the same day that the Chief Executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), Ken Boston, raised the alternative of testing a representative sample of primary school children, rather than every child sitting national tests. 

Indeed the subject of assessment was so topical, said GTC Chair Judy Moorhouse, that the conference was fully subscribed the first day it was advertised, with a waiting list that could have filled another conference hall. Opening the day’s proceedings she said: “Assessment is very dear to the GTC’s heart,” highlighting its powerful impact on learning and enjoyment, school life and teachers’ practice.

The GTC has been working to generate the momentum for change, reported Judy, holding more than 20 events on assessment across the country to date, with more planned for the summer. In addition, the Council had advised the Secretary of State that a radical overhaul was needed. “There have been some shifts in Government thinking, but it hasn’t gone far enough,” she said. “There are two clear messages that we want you to take away with you today. The first is that the GTC’s proposals would support pupil learning better than the current regime. The second is that they are built upon the widest consensus in the education community.”

The GTC’s recommendations focus upon three themes, explained GTC policy adviser Kathy Baker. These are assessment for teaching and learning; for information and accountability; and for monitoring national standards. Amongst the GTC’s principles is that the purposes of assessment need to be separated. This would ensure that the use of assessment for accountability no longer results in assessment for developing learning being perceived as taking second place.  

Introducing the first of these themes, Kathy said that since 2002, Council members have argued that more emphasis needs to be placed on teachers’ professional judgement. The current system was used purely for national monitoring and external information, she added, rather than benefiting individual pupils’ needs.

 “Assessment is the bridge between teaching and learning – the only way you can judge whether what has been taught has been learnt,” said the Institute of Education’s Deputy Director, Dylan Wiliam. He praised the GTC’s proposals, saying that they were based upon sound principles and similar to his own. He also argued that consideration would have to be given to how to motivate pupils who were taking low stakes, sample tests.

Calling for a transformation in culture and habits, he argued that: “It’s about changing what you do in the classroom, not how you mark work.” There should be what he called ‘authentic, but broad and deep goals’ that pupils are highly motivated to reach, by teachers who are positioned as coaches, rather than adversaries.
 
Exploring the second theme of information and accountability, two parents - Mary Crowley and Amanda Blinkhorn - were interviewed by Education journalist and former special adviser to the Prime Minister, Fiona Millar. Although league tables had provided a mechanism to tackle schools that were failing, Mary agreed that now it was probably time to scrap them, as they had exhausted their usefulness.

“Parents don’t understand the system,” she added. She had carried out her own mini-survey of parents, uncovering a good deal of hostility, with many not comprehending how the statistics worked. Supporting the GTC’s assessment proposals, she said: “I don’t feel that exams are intrinsically good for you or that they’re in some way character-forming.” She agreed that teachers’ judgment was extremely valuable, saying: “I was always amazed at how well the teacher knew my child and how accurate they were.”
 
However, Amanda stressed that many parents still wanted some form of external information to measure the progress of schools. Asked how to improve the system, she added that parents wanted to be able to trust the information that they’ve been given. “They want something that’s honest that shows the school is accountable.”  

Turning to the third theme, GTC policy adviser for research, Lesley Saunders, said that the GTC did not support the assumption that monitoring national standards could only be achieved by universal testing. Cohort sampling provides a better alternative, the GTC believes. Lesley outlined the key principles that it should be based upon: being fit for purpose; having the least burden possible on teachers and pupils; and having the least possible adverse effect on the curriculum, as it is taught and experienced.

The system would have several advantages, said Lesley, including reducing the burden of testing on pupils and teachers; allowing a wide curriculum to be tested; and being relatively inexpensive. However, teachers would need professional training, development and support before and during its introduction.

Broadly supporting the GTC’s proposals, Director of Assessment, Research Development at Cambridge Assessment, Tim Oates, said that sampling was able to provide results that were more useful for policy formulation. However, he called for what he called ‘a protracted investigation’, saying that there were ‘other radical models out there too’ that needed to be examined. Meanwhile Ian Schagen, Head of Statistics at the National Foundation for Educational Research said that decisions needed to be made about how accurate the data must be, in order to decide the sample size. “If you don’t do it statistically randomly you’ll get biased results,” he warned.

Afterwards delegates had the opportunity to put their questions to a panel of speakers, which included policy advisers, decision-makers, parents, governors and pupils.  Amongst the questions was whether testing restricted the independence of learners.

Summing up the day’s discussions, Council member Tony Neal talked about the 107 tests pupils face during their school life, at a cost of more than £600,000 million.
It was clear that the current system was trying to fulfil contradictory purposes, he said, adding that it impinged negatively on so many positive developments happening in schools. He pointed to research that showed, when parents were weighing the various factors in their choice of school, teaching quality came out top of a list of priorities - while exam results were in 12th place.

As Simon Groarke, head teacher at St Margaret’s Catholic primary school in Glossop, Derbyshire, commented afterwards, “Assessment should inform schools about what they need to improve upon, but we should also celebrate success for the pupils. It should be a tool to help children improve……

“Listening to these ideas, I feel excited about the new initiatives on assessment and that there’s a good future for improving standards and the achievements of pupils.”