Assessment,
Teaching and Theories of Learning
The
alignment of assessment with learning, teaching and content knowledge is a
basis of claims for the validity of assessment, but the relationship is not
straightforward and cannot be taken for granted. Indeed, there are plenty of
examples of assessment practices that have only tenuous or partial relationship
with current understanding of learning within particular domain. Much
assessment practice was found on the content and method of psychology,
especially that deals with mental traits and their measurement. Nowadays,
psychological, social-psychological, sociological and epistemological
dimensions are all needed to be taken into consideration at some level in the
framing of assessment practice. In reality, the differences of approaches are
unlikely to be so stark and teachers often blend approaches.
The theoretical
foundation of learning and assessment practice
The theory of multiple intelligence is not theory of
learning, strictly speaking, but a theory of mental traits. Bearing these
cautions in mind the following account summarizes, in a schematic and
necessarily brief way, the key associated with each of the three families of
learning theories. First, how learning take place (the process an environment
for learning) and second, how achievement (the product of learning) is
construed.
i)
Behaviourist Theories of Learning
According to these theories, the environment for learning
is the determining factor. Learning is viewed as the conditioned response to
external stimuli. Rewards and punishments, or at least the withholding of
rewards, are powerful ways of forming or extinguishing habits. These theories
also take the view that complex wholes are assembled out of parts, so learning
can best be accomplished when complex performances are deconstructed and when
each element is practised, reinforced and subsequently built upon. These
theories have no concept of mind, intelligence and ego. From this perspective, achievement in learning
is often equated with the accumulation of skills and the memorization of
information (facts) in a given domain, demonstrated in the formation of habits
that allow speedy performance. Implications for teaching construe the teacher’s
role as being to train people to respond to instruction correctly and rapidly.
Besides that, implications for assessment are that progress is measured through
unseen timed tests with items taken form progressive levels in a skill hierarchy.
ii)
Cognitive, Constructivist Theories of Learning
Learning according to these theories, requires the active
engagement of learners and is determined by what goes on in people’s heads. As
the reference to ‘cognition’ makes clear, these theories are interested in
‘mind’ as a function of ‘brain’. A particular focus is on how people construct
meaning and make sense of the world organizing structures, concepts and
principles in schema (mental models). Prior knowledge is regarded as a powerful
determinant of a student’s capacity to learn new material. So that, from this
perspective, achievement is framed in terms of understanding in relation to
conceptual structures and competence in processing strategies. Furthermore,
cognitivist theories are complex and differentiated and it is difficult to
summarize their overall implications. However, in essence, the role of the
teacher is to help ‘novices’ to acquire ‘expert’ understanding of conceptual
structures and processing strategies to solve problems by symbolic manipulation
with ‘less search’.
iii)
Social-cultural, situated and Activity Theories of Learning
According to this perspective, learning occurs is an
interaction between the individual and the social environment. Thinking is
conducted through actions that alter the situation and the situation changes
the thinking; the two constantly interact. Especially, important is the notion
that learning is a mediated activity in which cultural artefacts have a crucial
role. Thus learning is by definition a social and collaborative activity in
which people develop their thinking together. Group work is not an optional
extra. Learning involves participation and what is learned is not necessarily
the property of an individual but shared within the social group, hence the
concept of ‘distributed cognition’ in which collective knowledge of the group,
community or organization is regarded as greater than the sum of the knowledge
of individuals. Then, the outcomes of learning that are most valued are engaged
participation in ways that other find appropriate. So that, these theories
provide interesting descriptions and explanation learning in communities of
practice but the newer ones are not yet well worked out in terms of their
implications for teaching and assessment. Moreover, if a key goal of learning
is to build learning identities then students’ own self-assessments must be
central. For the conclusion, clearly, more work needs to be done to develop
approaches to assessment coherent with a sosio-cultural perspective on
learning.
It would seem, therefore, that
alignment between assessment practice and learning theory is something to be
connected. Thus, behaviourist approaches
seem to work perfectly well when the focus is on the development of some basic
skills or habitual behaviours. In the other hand, cognitivist approaches seem
to be best when deep understanding of conceptual structures within subject
domains is the desired outcome. Most importantly, the constructivist approach
in both theory and practice has taken on board the importance of the social
dimension of learning: hence the increasing use of the term ‘social
constructivism’. In the end, however, decisions about which assessment
practices are most appropriate should flow from educational judgements a s
preferred learning outcomes. This forces us to engage with questions of value.
