Reflecting on Learner Assessments and Their Validity in the Presence of Emerging Evidence from Neuroscience

Abstract

We can now get purposefully directed in the way we assess our learners in light of the emergence of evidence from the field of neuroscience. Why higher-order learning or abstract concepts need to be the focus in assessment is elaborated using the knowledge of semantic and episodic memories. With most of our learning identified to be implicit, why we should make use of the constructivist theory in assessing learners becomes quite evident. Why we need to deviate from setting assessment on the basis of veridical decision making and the need incline towards adaptive decision making become evident when we understand that most of our life decisions are adaptive in nature and human beings naturally possess creative instincts. When assessments are used to direct learners to use the frontal lobes, the organ of civilisation, more, the requirement of more carefully designing the timing component of assessment arises. After all, it is important to understand that enhancing learner consciousness and wisdom is key when we understand the prime goal of education is to enhance human development of learners so as to enable them to be better problem solvers.

Validity, Lasting Outcomes and Fairness of Learner Assessment from the Perspective of Educational Neuroscience

“…We reiterate that in Kolb's experiential learning cycle (Kolb, 1983), abstract conceptualisation is considered as the most important stage in learning (Watagodakumbura, 2016;Zull, 2002). It is the stage of a learning process in which learners spend time absorbing abstract concepts deeply, relating them to as many contexts as possible (Watagodakumbura, 2015a;2015b). This premise of highlighting abstract concepts in both learning as well as assessment can now be validated by the evidence available in neuroscience.…”

“…The term higher-order learning is used to highlight that we create new connections among neural networks to create new knowledge when we learn. In other words, human brains are better or naturally inclined in adaptive decision making while computers are better in veridical decision making; that is, human brains can adapt to new situations in an entirely novel manner while computers can only find an existing or predefined solution (Watagodakumbura, 2015a;2015b). In adaptive decision making, you usually take many inputs into consideration and come to an optimised solution rather than a hundred percent correct solution.…”

“…Further, these open-ended questions inherently are based on testing the understanding of abstract concepts rather than specific details; this is because specific details generally yield from a veridical decision-making process (Watagodakumbura, 2015a;2015b). We are essentially avoiding here associative recall type questions and incline towards recognition tests.…”

“…That is, we should direct our learners to use frontal cortex as much as possible through our assessment activities. Thus, when we as educators set our assessments focusing understanding of abstract concepts and ask open-ended questions for learners to thrive, we are directing our learners to enhance consciousness and develop wisdom, higher human features achievable in the process of human evolution (Watagodakumbura, 2015a;2015b). That is, we put learners on a path to a higher level of human development or self-actualisation ( (Maslow, 1968(Maslow, , 1993Dabrowski, 1970Dabrowski, , 1977 so that they could see the reality better, like having many open eyes, and become better or more optimal problem solvers.…”

Principles of Curriculum Design and Construction Based on the Concepts of Educational Neuroscience

“…In a curriculum design process, one of the most important tasks is preparing appropriate assessment components (Watagodakumbura, 2015b(Watagodakumbura, , 2015d. Learners, in general, associate with a curriculum from the perspective of assessment tasks used.…”