Guided Response Review Of Peer Posts And Responses 139020

Guided Responsereview Several Of Your Peers Posts And Respond To At

Review several of your peers’ posts and respond to at least two discussing their answers. Respectfully, agree or disagree with your peers thoughts on the advantages or disadvantages to formative and summative assessment. Jessica Roberts I prefer a formative assessment. It gives me feedback while I'm still working through a paper or assignment. I like to know what I have done well and what areas I can improve on.

A formative assessment is feedback given to students so that they can revise before making the final submission on an assignment. A summative assessment can be a test in order to see how much of the information had been retained in order to make changes for future assessments. There are advantages to both assessments because the use of each has a specific target. They both are assessing the material learned. Whether it be a test or during the learning process you are provided feedback in order to understand the things you did not see at first.

I think that formative assessment is easier for both the teacher and the students because of the feedback during the lesson. It allows growth and allows students to master the information before putting their knowledge to the test. Summative assessment does allow you to test the knowledge learned but is it all of the information or just the key information that the teacher has expressed as important? I personally love all types of feedback. I like to see if the information I feel weak about is shown in my work and my strengths are verified.

Paper For Above instruction

Formative and summative assessments are fundamental components of effective educational practices, each serving distinct purposes in measuring student learning and informing instruction. Understanding their differences, benefits, and limitations is critical in designing assessments that enhance student development and achievement.

Formative assessment, often described as "assessment for learning," is a process conducted during instruction, providing ongoing feedback to students and teachers about learning progress. Its primary purpose is to identify areas of weakness and strength, enabling timely adjustments in teaching strategies and student efforts. Examples include quizzes, classroom discussions, written drafts, peer reviews, and observational assessments. These methods facilitate active engagement, promote self-regulation, and support mastery of content prior to final evaluations.

Summative assessment, in contrast, is "assessment of learning" conducted at the conclusion of a learning period. Its goal is to evaluate overall learning outcomes against predetermined standards or benchmarks. Examples include final exams, standardized tests, projects, or term papers. Summative assessments provide a summative measure of student achievement, often influencing final grades and instructional accountability. They serve as indicators for both student competency and curriculum effectiveness.

Advantages of formative assessments include immediate feedback, enhanced student engagement, and personalized instruction. They foster a growth mindset by allowing students to learn from mistakes and improve continuously (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Additionally, formative assessments help identify misconceptions early, preventing them from becoming ingrained and facilitating targeted support (Heritage, 2010). For teachers, formative assessments provide insights into student understanding in real-time, aiding in differentiated instruction (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006).

However, there are limitations; frequent formative assessments may be time-consuming and require significant effort from educators to analyze and respond effectively (Chappuis & Chappuis, 2012). Furthermore, students may perceive formative assessments as less consequential, potentially affecting their motivation and seriousness (Gipps, 1994). It is also possible for formative assessments to be inconsistent if not carefully aligned with learning objectives.

On the other hand, summative assessments offer a comprehensive overview of student achievement at the end of instructional units. They are efficient for assigning grades, certifying competence, and providing useful data for curriculum evaluation (Stiggins, 2005). Their standardized nature ensures consistency and comparability across educational settings, facilitating accountability and accreditation processes. Students often see summative assessments as a clear reflection of their efforts, which can motivate them to consolidate their learning (Birenbaum et al., 1998).

Nevertheless, summative assessments can have drawbacks. They tend to emphasize memorization over understanding, particularly if aligned poorly with instructional activities. High-stakes summative assessments can induce anxiety and discourage a risk-taking approach to learning (Popham, 2008). Additionally, they typically do not allow for remediation or improvement before final judgments are made, potentially penalizing students who perform poorly due to test anxiety or other factors (Nichols & Berliner, 2007).

From a student perspective, preferences for assessment types vary based on individual learning styles, motivation, and perceptions of fairness. Some students favor formative assessments because they feel more engaged throughout the learning process and appreciate opportunities for feedback and growth. Conversely, others prefer summative assessments because they offer a definitive measure of their knowledge, serving as a culmination of their efforts and a potential motivator to prepare thoroughly.

Research indicates that the most effective assessment strategies incorporate both formative and summative components, leveraging their respective strengths. A balanced assessment system provides continuous feedback to guide learning while also delivering summative evaluations that certify mastery (Black & Wiliam, 1999). Implementing formative assessments enhances student motivation, engagement, and deep learning, while summative assessments confirm achievement levels and inform future instructional planning.

In conclusion, understanding the advantages and disadvantages of formative and summative assessments allows educators to design assessments that promote meaningful learning and fair evaluation. While formative assessments foster ongoing growth and self-regulation, summative assessments offer a snapshot of overall achievement. An integrated approach that combines both strategies can optimize educational outcomes, cater to diverse student needs, and support continuous improvement in teaching and learning processes.

References

• Birenbaum, M., Tatsuoka, K. K., Jiao, H., & Tatsuoka, C. (1998). The effects of assessment constraints on students' learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35(4), 319-335.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1999). Towards a theory of formative assessment: Practical steps. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 11(1), 5-31.
• Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2012). How to give effective feedback. Solution Tree Press.
• Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: towards a theory of educational assessment. Routledge.
• Heritage, M. (2010). Formative assessment: Making it happen in the classroom. Corwin Press.
• Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
• Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts everything. Teachers College Record, 109(9), 2396-2434.
• Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 8-14.
• Stiggins, R. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324-328.