[7] The final purpose of assessment practices in education depends on the theoretical framework of the practitioners and researchers, their assumptions and beliefs about the nature of human mind, the origin of knowledge, and the process of learning.
Placement evaluation, also referred to as pre-assessment, initial assessment, or threshold knowledge test (TKT), is conducted before instruction or intervention to establish a baseline from which individual student growth can be measured.
This type of assessment is used to know what the student's skill level is about the subject, it can also help the teacher to explain the material more efficiently.
In an educational setting, a formative assessment might be a teacher (or peer) or the learner (e.g., through a self-assessment[11][12]), providing feedback on a student's work and would not necessarily be used for grading purposes.
Formative assessments can take the form of diagnostic, standardized tests, quizzes, oral questions, or draft work.
Summative assessments are made to summarize what the students have learned in order to know whether they understand the subject matter well.
[10] One of them is about showing the criteria of the evaluation before the test and another the importance of pre-assessment to know what the skill levels of a student are before giving instructions.
Diagnostic assessment measures a student's current knowledge and skills for the purpose of identifying a suitable program of learning.
A well-defined task is identified and students are asked to create, produce or do something often in settings that involve real-world application of knowledge and skills.
The best-known example of criterion-referenced assessment is the driving test when learner drivers are measured against a range of explicit criteria (such as "Not endangering other road users").
[24] The assessment instrument is authentic when it is contextualized, contains natural language and meaningful, relevant, and interesting topic, and replicates real world experiences.
To receive federal school funding, states had to give these assessments to all students at select grade level.
Proponents of NCLB argue that it offers a tangible method of gauging educational success, holding teachers and schools accountable for failing scores, and closing the achievement gap across class and ethnicity.
Opponents say that no student who has put in four years of seat time should be denied a high school diploma merely for repeatedly failing a test, or even for not knowing the required material.
In an exercise designed to make children comfortable about testing, a Spokane, Washington newspaper published a picture of a monster that feeds on fear.
[40] The published image is purportedly the response of a student who was asked to draw a picture of what she thought of the state assessment.
Other critics, such as Washington State University's Don Orlich, question the use of test items far beyond standard cognitive levels for students' age.
[41] Compared to portfolio assessments, simple multiple-choice tests are much less expensive, less prone to disagreement between scorers, and can be scored quickly enough to be returned before the end of the school year.
Most education officials support criterion-referenced tests (each individual student's score depends solely on whether he answered the questions correctly, regardless of whether his neighbors did better or worse) for making high-stakes decisions.
Traditional assessment practices, however, focus in large part on the individual and fail to account for knowledge-building and learning in context.
[43] The Sudbury model of democratic education schools do not perform and do not offer assessments, evaluations, transcripts, or recommendations.
Students decide for themselves how to measure their progress as self-starting learners as a process of self-evaluation: real lifelong learning and the proper educational assessment for the 21st century, they allege.
The final stage of the thesis process is an oral defense given by the student in which they open the floor for questions, challenges and comments from all Assembly members.
The majority of assessments within the United States have normative standards based on the English-speaking culture, which does not adequately represent ELL populations.
[citation needed] Consequently, it would in many cases be inaccurate and inappropriate to draw conclusions from ELL students' normative scores.
Research shows that the majority of schools do not appropriately modify assessments in order to accommodate students from unique cultural backgrounds.
One issue is that translations can frequently suggest a correct or expected response, changing the difficulty of the assessment item.
[47] When considering an ELL student for special education the assessment team should integrate and interpret all of the information collected in order to ensure a non biased conclusion.
[47] Decisions should take the students unique cultural, linguistic, and experiential backgrounds into consideration, and should not be strictly based on assessment results.
Universal screening results in large increases in traditionally underserved groups (such as Black, Hispanic, poor, female, and ELLs) identified for gifted programs, without the standards for identification being modified in any way.