By Nicholas Forde
In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, the ISF Academy in Hong Kong embarked upon the Assessment as Responsive Teaching (ART) Project. This emerged from a Professional Learning Community (PLC) on Assessment for Learning. The project was led by a group of passionate secondary school middle leaders committed to enhancing learning and improving student wellbeing. It also tackled head on traditional attitudes towards summative assessment, and grading in general. Nicholas Forde outlines how a PLC model with ‘leadership from the middle’ can act as a driver of change within a school community.
The context of overassessment
Within Hong Kong, many high-performing schools are considering ways of addressing stress and wellbeing concerns that stem from over assessment. At the heart of this is the high status given to examinations and assessment of learning within society at large. This is also coupled with a highly influential tutoring industry, which claims to help students ‘win at the start line.’ For teachers and parents alike, our understanding of the purpose of assessment will have been shaped powerfully by our own experiences in school. This may have included an emphasis on grades, different types of ranking, and a scarcity of helpful feedback about how to improve.
Emerging ideas from a Professional Learning Community: early adopters
This set the scene for an ‘Assessment for Learning’ PLC at the ISF Academy. Its goal was to differentiate between assessment and reporting/grading and promote better feedback and responsive teaching and learning. If all stakeholders (students, teachers and parents) could move away from the status implied by grading and reporting, to focusing on the next steps in learning, this would improve learning and promote wellbeing. As early adopters, all members of the PLC completed the ‘Assessment Essentials’ and ‘Assessment Lead’ online courses offered by Evidence-Based Education. This gave them access to the latest research on the four pillars of assessment. The courses then formed the backbone of our approach to achieving better assessment literacy.
Scaling up our approach: the Assessment as Responsive Teaching (ART) project
The original PLC was driven by a group of committed middle leaders. They made recommendations to senior leadership for a whole school focus for the following academic year. The Assessment as Responsive Teaching (ART) Project scaled up our approach across the whole secondary school. With COVID-19 pandemic restrictions still in full force, all teaching staff and senior leadership completed online courses during the academic year. Teachers were supported by ‘Assessment leads’, middle leaders all of whom had been part of the initial PLC. This allowed for facilitated discussion and common planning on the four pillars of assessment. It also kept the momentum going with our strategic priorities despite the pandemic.
A common language, purpose and focus for action planning
Assessment as responsive teaching was our strategic focus for the next academic year. It also became the focus for learning visits, peer observations and team action plans. Building on the facilitated online courses, we found that there was more consistent talk about assessment and feedback as we worked towards the use of a common language. A teacher commented on how the language of assessment started to cut through, in the same way to a school implementing IB for the first time.
Moving from assessment of learning to feedback on learning and progress
Following this, we felt confident to move away from individual graded assessments in day-to-day teaching. This was a symbolic milestone. It signified a whole school shift in practice from grading to a cycle of ongoing feedback about progress on learning. Now all grade 6-8 teachers provide only verbal and written feedback on day-to-day assessments without reference to achievement levels. The Middle Years Programme (MYP) rubrics show only narrative descriptors of achievement. grade 9-10 teachers can also choose to use the same approach with their classes. In the medium term, students still receive achievement grades on two written reports each year. As a school in Hong Kong, we recognize the practical reality and parental expectation of reporting terminal grades. This might be seen as a barrier to the ultimate success of assessment literacy, however, in our context, tackling day-to-day assessment and grading was the most important in alleviating the stress for students about ‘where they were’. Now, students are given specific verbal and written feedback about where they are, as well as practical steps about how they can improve.
The parent and student perspective
Some parents and students felt that we had suddenly ‘gone gradeless’. Students claimed that they were more stressed because the feedback on day-to-day assessments was not specific enough. This signified the strength of attachment to the status of grading. Connecting students and parents with MYP rubrics to gauge current and future progress was helpful. A key message was that no student should be in the dark about their current progress, but neither should they feel anxiety that day-to-day assessment is high stakes.
A work in progress, staying the course
Nearly four years on from the initial PLC, the subsequent ART project has provided a strong foundation of understanding and ongoing practice across the whole secondary school. Crucially, middle leadership guided us on the appropriate entry point and pace for tackling assessment literacy. Without this, implementation might have been less effective.
- All newly hired teachers complete the online Assessment Essentials course as part of their professional learning
- A mini course on the four pillars of assessment is offered to parents
- Student and parent voice surveys have been completed to assess impact and identify further parent education needs
Tips for making the most of the PLC model
Professional Learning Communities are an excellent way of encouraging collaboration. Teachers can explore issues of interest and take on leadership and research in a supportive environment.
- Provide clear parameters and terms of reference: number of meetings; membership; feedback mechanism
- Provide the time and space on the calendar for PLC meetings to take place
- Seek to understand and research your own unique school context rather than explore what has worked elsewhere
- Make clear the links between the PLC focus and the school action plan
Nicholas Forde is the Principal of Secondary School at The ISF Academy, Hong Kong. You can connect with him via email.
