North of England Education Conference Sheffield 16 - 18
January 2013
SymposiumFriday 18 January 10.30 – 11.45
Exploring metaphors to clarify Exploring metaphors to clarify cognitive understandings and cognitive understandings and
perceptions of assessmentperceptions of assessmentMatsdorf, Sen and TarasMatsdorf, Sen and Taras
Symposium Paper 1
Mapping metaphors to clarify Mapping metaphors to clarify cognitive understandings and cognitive understandings and
perceptions of assessmentperceptions of assessment
Dr Maddalena TarasDr Maddalena Taras
My ResearchMy Research
1. self-assessment (2001, 2003, 2008a, 2010, 2013)2. theory of assessment links SA, FA, ssa (AfL) (2002, 2005, 2012a, 2012b)3. metaphor: reflects historical/social priorities
(2007a, b)
Research on metaphorMetaphors of Assessment 2007a: AfL anomalies in
theory of processTerminology of Assessment : disparity in
understanding of terminology (2007b, 2008c)Sectarian Divisions (2007c, 2008b, c, 2009, in
review)
Aim: to make you think and
challenge your ideas
Main point of paperMain point of paper
1. Aspects of metaphor and dichotomy2. Definition of assessment functions and
process3. Issues with assessment highlighted by
metaphor a) links summative and formative
assessment b) functions and proce4. How beliefs reflected in metaphors usedThis is reflected in the metaphors used.
Aspects of metaphor and dichotomy
Metaphor controls •thought processes /concepts/realities (Faiclough 1994, Lakoff/Johnson 1980, 2002, Petrie/Oshlag 2002)•link between old and new ideas (Reddy 1979, Lakoff/Johnson 2002, Ortony 1979, 2002)•cognitive straightjacket to new ideas/paradigms (Reddy 1979, Lakoff/Johnson 1980, 2002) •taken as literal truth blocks developments and new choices (Petrie and Oshlag 2002 p581)•include/exclude “silences” new voices offering new stories (Harrison 2004 p175)
Aspects of metaphor and dichotomy
Concepts/theories NOT single systems“Human beings do not function with internally consistent, monolithic conceptual systems” (Lakoff 1987 p305)true even of scientific argumentsBUTWorking towards coherence part of understanding and progress
Aspects of metaphor and dichotomy
Dichotomy/Duality“Within the fourth dimension of excluding and including is the concept of dichotomy. This effectively creates domains of exclusiveness which are either/or, black/white choices” (Stronach 1996)implications for education: tend to think option is right/wrong, black/white. Recognition of different shades of grey a sign of maturity/experience in student learning except we do it ourselves eg Summative/formative dichotomy.
Summative and formative Summative and formative functionsfunctions
A function is the use to which the product of assessment it put. It is a social, political and educational choice which influences the criteria, but not the process.
Definition of AssessmentDefinition of Assessment
“Evaluation is itself a methodological activity which is essentially similar whether we are trying to evaluate coffee machines or teaching machines, plans for a house or plans for a curriculum” (Scriven 1967 p40)
Assessment is a ubiquitous process.
Scriven context of curriculum evaluation, generalisable to all processes
Definition of AssessmentDefinition of Assessment
“Assessment: a judgement justified according to specific weighted set goals, yielding either comparative or numerical ratings.
Necessary to justify (a) the data-gathering instruments or criteria(b) the weightings(c) the selection of goals” (Scriven 1967 p40)Do we all agree?
SA - FA (Taras 2005, SA - FA (Taras 2005, 2010a) 2010a)
SA and FA are processesSA is a judgement according to
criteria and standards (implicit or explicit)
Judgement (SA) provides feedbackUse of feedback is FASA + feedback use = FA
Functions of MetaphorsFunctions of Metaphors
“metaphor plays a very significant role in determining what is real for us” (Lakoff & Johnson 1980. 2012).
reflect social, political stance: choose metaphors closest to our ideals
reflect educational epistemologiesNeed to be aware of consequences and
entailmentsThe individualistic nature of personal
experience adds a compounding factor to the other variables
How assessment beliefs reflected in metaphors
usedMetaphors of AssessmentFrom compulsory sector (CS) Broadfoot 2002, 2008Stobart 2008Wiliam & Black 1996, Black & Wiliam 1998, Black et al 2003From HEBiggs 1998Taras 2007
How assessment beliefs reflected in metaphors
used in CSFA and feedback = informal, ad hoc, (superficial) exchanges in classroom contextSelf-assessment generally limited to standard modelNB CS dual definition FA: 1. learners respond to feedback, update, refine work/learning2. teachers’ responses to update and refine teachingteachers’ responsibilities for control and impact on learners and learning (Black et al 2003)
How assessment beliefs How assessment beliefs reflected in metaphors reflected in metaphors
used in HEused in HElinks peer and self-assessmentsinformal and formal contextschanging potential power and impact of
assessment and feedback process and product
5 models (Taras 2010)FA definitions and discussions place
responsibility on learners with peer and tutor support
Central issues across Central issues across sectorssectors
assessment of work presented as a) against a standard b) being judged on its own terms ie
feedback from implicit, unrevealed criteria and standards
ie EXPLICIT versus IMPLICITHow feedback arrived at impacts on
quality, ethics and communicability of consequences
How are these How are these beliefs/ideas linked to beliefs/ideas linked to
metaphor?metaphor?Metaphors of AssessmentSummative and Formative Assessment
distinctionBlack and Wiliam 1998 review 10 years
assessment research – focus on FA – first review to separate SA and FA
Produces metaphor of two different trees, two tree-trunks (Biggs 1998 p109)
Separate entities, even if same species
Two Trees metaphor of SA & Two Trees metaphor of SA & FAFA
Black & Wiliam 1998a Black & Wiliam 1998a
Separation SA & FA by Black & Wiliam (1998) produces metaphor of
two different trees, two tree-trunks (Biggs 1998 p109)
Separate entities, even if same species
Biggs (1998) Biggs (1998)
critique of Black and Wiliam 1998excluding SA ignores negative effects
of ‘backwash’‘backwash’ stronger than the
positive effects of FA (Biggs 1996)improving learning requires 1. attenuating negative effects of SA2. adding positive effects of FA to
produce positive return for learning
Backside of an elephant Backside of an elephant metaphor Biggs 1998metaphor Biggs 1998
one beast: appendages are mirror imageseach limb must work with other for whole
to workrelationship and links dominate not
differences
Taras 2007aTaras 2007a
1. originally, two sides of coin: differences on either side of coin are distinguishing features
like Biggs focus on similarities, basic sameness
2. Cake (SA) with Icing being FA3. Relationship SA FA cake: i.e.
parts of a whole
Assessment a Cake Assessment a Cake SA + feedback use = FA SA + feedback use = FA
Assessment a Cake: Assessment a Cake: artificial separation SA FAartificial separation SA FA
Dichotomy of SA and FA Dichotomy of SA and FA results in demonisation results in demonisation
of SAof SABroadfoot Broadfoot two main metaphors a) Disease b) Frankensteina) Disease Titles of sections “The Assessment Disease”,
“The Assessment Disease: Treating the Symptoms”, “The Assessment Disease: Finding a Cure?” Broadfoot (2008 p214-8)
SA is “The Assessment Disease” and FA (AfL) is the “Cure” or anti-dote.
Metaphor, like Schon’s - socially deprived areas, provides a solution in entailment.
Broadfoot Broadfoot
b) Frankenstein “we have produced a Frankenstein
that preys on the educational process, reducing large parts of teaching and learning to mindless mechanistic processes sapping the transformative power of education” (Broadfoot 2008 p213)
More derogatory More derogatory examplesexamples
Stobart: tadpoles and frogsStobart: tadpoles and frogstadpole frog-croaking metaphors“Helping a few tadpoles to become frogs has been,
from the Chinese Civil Service selection examinations a thousand years ago through to selective university entrance today, one of the key historical roles of assessment” (Stobart 2008 p13)
“my Principle of Managerial Creep: As assessment purposes multiply, the more managerial the purpose, the more dominant its role” (Stobart 2008 p15)
DystheDysthe
“the tail that wags the dog” (Dysthe 2008 p17)tail: appendage of minor importance i.e.
assessment denigrated to a minor place“engine of the change process” (Dysthe 2008
p17)theories of learning are primary and assessment
should follow” (Shephard 2000 in (Dysthe 2008 p17)
Surely theories of learning and assessing must be integrated for both to be understood
Dichotomy of SA and FA Dichotomy of SA and FA results in FA (AfL) as a results in FA (AfL) as a
panaceapanaceaBlack et al. 2003Metaphor for FA Two hurdlesThe first hurdle is the location of teachers’ formative
work in the larger context of assessment and testing. (Black et al. 2003 p.123)
The second hurdle is that to fall in love with the idea is
but a start on the long hard road of commitment to the relationship, one in which the numerous and intimate details have to be worked out both at a personal and at an institutional level. ….what is central is the thoughtfulness and the clarity that underpins the commitment. (Black et al. 2003 p.123)
ConclusionsConclusions
Important to understand our metaphors and the consequences for our thinking and practice
ReferencesReferences
BIGGS, J.(1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning: a role for summative assessment? in Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 5(1),103-110.
BLACK, P. & WILIAM, D. (1998) ' Assessment and classroom learning' in Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1) 7-74.
BLACK, P., HARRISON, C., LEE, C., MARSHALL, B. and WILIAM, D. (2003) Assessment for learning. Putting it into practice (Maidenhead, Open University Press)
BROADFOOT, P. (2002) Editorial: Beware the consequences of assessment! Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 9(3), 285-288.
ReferencesReferences
BROADFOOT, P. (2008) Assessment for learners: Assessment literacy and the development of learning power, in Havnes, A. and McDowell, L. (Eds) (2008) Balancing Dilemmas in Assessment and Learning in Contemporary Education New York/London: Routledge pp213-224.
DYSTHE, O. (2008) The challenges of assessment in a new learning culture, in HAVNES, A. & McDOWELL, L. (Eds) (2008) Balancing Dilemmas in Assessment and Learning in Contemporary Education New York/London: Routledge pp213-224.
LAKOFF, G. & JOHNSON, M. (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
SCHON, D.A. (1979) ‘Generative Metaphor: A Perspective on Problem-setting in Social Policy’ in Ortony, A. (1979) (ed) Metaphor and Thought C.U.P.
ReferencesReferences SCRIVEN, M. (1967) The Methodology of Evaluation, in TYLER,
R., GAGNE, R. & SCRIVEN, M. (1967) Perspectives on Curriculum Evaluation (AERA Monograph Series – Curriculum Evaluation) Chicago, Rand McNally & Co.. 39-83.
SFARD, A. (1998) On two metaphors of learning and the dangers of choosing just one, in Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.
STOBART, G. (2008) Testing times: The uses and abuses of assessment, New York/London: Routledge.
TARAS, M (2001) The use of Tutor Feedback and Student Self-assessment in Summative Assessment Tasks: towards transparency for students and for tutors, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6), 606-614.
TARAS, M (2002) Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(6), 501-510.
ReferencesReferencesTARAS, M (2003) To feedback or not to feedback in student self-
assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5) 549-565.
TARAS, M (2005) Assessment – Summative and Formative – some theoretical reflections British Journal of Educational Studies. 53(3) 466-478.
TARAS, M. (2006a) Do Unto Others or Not? Lecturers use expert feedback on research articles, why not likewise undergraduates on assessed work? Assesment & Evaluation n Higher Education 31(3) 363-375.
TARAS, M. (2007a) Machinations of Assessment: Metaphors, Myths and Realities, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 15, 1.
TARAS, M. (2007b) Terminal Terminology: the language of assessment” in, Reiss, M., Hayes, R. and Atkinson, A. (Eds.) Marginality and Difference in Education and Beyond, Trentham Books 1 85856 412 3. pp 52-67.
ReferencesReferencesTARAS, M. (2008a) Issues of power and equity in two models of
self assessment Teaching in Higher Education, 13(1) 81-92.TARAS, M. (2008b) Summative and Formative Assessment:
perceptions and realities Active Learning in HE, 9(2), 172-192.
TARAS, M. (2008c) Assessment: sectarian divisions of terminology and concepts Journal of Further and Higher Education 32(4) 389-397.
TARAS, M. (2009) Summative Assessment: the Missing Link for Formative Assessment Journal of Further & Higher Education 33(1) 57–69
TIGHT, M. (2004) Research into higher education: an a-theoretical community of practice? Higher Education Research & Development, 23(4), 395-411.
WILIAM, D & BLACK, P, (1996) Meanings and Consequences: a basis for distinguishing formative and summative functions of assessment? British Educational Research Journal, 22(5), 537-48.
