How Can Assessment Support Learning? A Response to Wilson and Shepard, Penuel, and Pellegrino

Classroom Assessment: Continuing the Discussion

“…The commentators make several points about these themes, and help bring important perspectives to the challenge for assessment. Wiliam (), for example, points out that “reverse engineering” items from existing achievement tests to create better assessments and instruction is not a sound road to success. This is an observation that I heartily agree with—and, in fact, is one of the reasons for proposing the Bear Assessment System (BAS—as described in my article) as a “from scratch” method of doing the opposite, engineering large‐scale assessment starting from sound classroom assessment and instruction.…”

“…Beyond that, administrators and policy experts, who are committed to change, and who are savvy at designing implementation plans that work, are needed. Of course, this is asking a lot; Wiliam () notes the two focus articles as giving “a highly attractive vision…[but, the] radical nature of the vision means that its realization will require a great deal.” And Marion () ponders that they are “so aspirational in fact, I question how either of these visions can be implemented at scale.” I agree that the ideas are innovative and tremendously challenging, but without some vision of where we want to take our education system, and the assessments that are an integral part of it, we will never know whether we are moving in the right direction. My own experience is that teachers who have engaged deeply with the approach I described (such as those in the Assessing Data Modeling (ADM) project described in my article) have found the experience both effective in their classrooms and professionally rewarding.…”

Classroom Assessment Principles to Support Learning and Avoid the Harms of Testing

“…Our commentators endorse or at least accede to the idea that sociocultural theory is the more compelling research‐based theory of learning. As noted by Wiliam (), a sociocultural perspective allows for “issues of motivation, interest, and identity to be integrated within a coherent theoretical framework” (p. 42); and this framing sits well with understandings of formative assessment as a process (Heritage, ).…”

“…In this short rejoinder we respond to the commentaries provided by Susan Brookhart (), Margaret Heritage (), Scott Marion (), and Dylan Wiliam (). There were no major disagreements between ourselves and the four respondents, but this may be because they were selected for their expertise regarding classroom learning as well as large‐scale assessment.…”

“…More needs to be said regarding Wiliam's () response, however, because we appear to be at odds with him about the implications of sociocultural theory for issues of student engagement, curriculum, disciplinary learning, authenticity, and learning transfer. As we reiterate in a later section, we strongly agree that curriculum development is essential to the co‐design of instructional and assessment activities.…”