John O. Anderson’s research while affiliated with University of Victoria and other places

The study was an exploratory investigation of the consequences of using a complex test-and-item analysis approach in a large-scale testing situation that historically has used a conventional approach of simple number-right scoring. In contemplating modifications to a complex, high-stakes testing program that has a long history of successful operation, any change in operations would have to be carefully evaluated to ensure that there is a high probability of improvement through change. So if a change from number-right-type scoring to item response theory (IRT) scoring is under consideration, the question arises: Does the increase in complexity and difficulty associated with the use of IRT pay significant dividends in better achievement estimates? In terms of consequences, it did not make much difference which domain score estimate was selected for use: any estimate gives approximately the same results in terms of mean, standard deviation, error of estimation, and correlation to other sources of estimation of student achievement.

Portfolios can serve as a means of collecting information that can be seen as evidence for evaluating the achievement of students in classrooms. The use of portfolios has a long history although their general use in classroom assessment is a recent phenomenon. Portfolios are not widely used in large‐scale assessments; they are a classroom‐based phenomenon in Canadian schools. In this paper, we explore three themes related to portfolio use in the Canadian context. First, we consider examples of policies and procedures as recommended by Ministries of Education to illustrate the range of statements provided. Next, we review surveys of portfolio use and acceptance by teachers and, to a lesser degree, administrators. Finally, we describe and discuss three studies that have begun to investigate the use and interpretation of portfolios.

In this paper, we describe the classroom‐based assessment practices employed in the Province of British Columbia (BC). These practices are examined by interviewing pairs of teachers at the Grade 3 and 4 levels and parallel pairs of teachers from the Grade 6 and 7 levels in approximately two schools in each of ten school districts. The interviews were summarized and then the resultant data examined to look for consistencies of viewpoint among teachers across districts and for commonalties and variations in answer patterns across teachers within districts. Finally, a few recommendations are offered that might be useful in thinking further about the principles and practice of classroom‐based assessment.

Assessment practices used in elementary school classrooms in British Columbia (Canada) were explored through a survey that also considered the perspectives of the people directly affected by assessment: students, parents, teachers, and administrators. Data were collected through focus group interviews with each of the 4 respondent groups from 10 school districts. Each group consisted of three to eight participants. The study clarifies characteristics of classroom assessment and shows that a number of issues should be addressed. Observation and the review of work samples are the main kinds of information collection procedures used in the schools studied, and narrative reports are the main form of formal communication with parents. The purpose of assessment is locating the student within the instructional program, to devise and implement appropriate learning strategies for the child, to inform the child and parents of progress, and also to fulfill the reporting requirements of the school and district. While teachers often saw shortcomings in the grading process, parents and students were more likely to see grades as more accurate than other forms of reporting. Aspects of assessment practice that could be improved include a need for more explicit description of the learning and development pathways and a more concrete explanation of the evaluation process. An appendix contains the focus group questions. (SLD)