Feature Stories
Authentic Assessment Considerations
By Cris Guenter, Ed.D.
Graduate Coordinator, Arts Education/Curriculum and Instruction, Department of Education
California State University, Chico
Assessment in art education needs to be well-considered and meaningful for both teacher and student. For decades, art education has offered and supported the reviews of performance in an art skill, an actual product created, and portfolios that showed growth over time or demonstrated competencies at a specific time. All of these approaches are reasonable, valid, and authentic. Authentic assessment involves the direct examination of "student performance on worthy intellectual tasks" (Wiggins, 1990). The key word in this definition is direct. This makes much sense when you consider that art education is building a foundation for creative thinking and divergent problem solving through direct use and application of materials.
The use of technology with art education assignments fits nicely into the use of authentic assessment. Multimedia projects, group assignments, and the use of digital media in creating art call upon students and teachers to use the same type of thinking and problem solving that traditional materials evoke-different tools and mediums, same type of thoughtful head work.
Holistic and analytic rubrics provide the framework for a systematic method in conducting authentic assessments. Careful rubric construction is key in the teaching and learning process. In developing a rubric, one of the key questions that a teacher should ask is, "What is acceptable?" If this question can be answered clearly, then the rubric can begin to take shape. If the teacher cannot define what is acceptable and what is not, then the students will not be clearly informed about the expectations for the given assignment or task.
There are many ways to pursue authentic assessment in art education. First, choose an assessment focus. Consider what it is that you want students to know and be able to do. Sometimes teachers want to assess the end-product that a student has created. For example, did the student demonstrate particular skills or address the style indicated by the assignment? Other times, the teacher may want to assess the developmental process the student goes through. For instance, were selected elements and principles of design considered in the development of this piece? Build in specific questions along the way and have students respond in writing. This helps document the process, develop reflection skills, and support the end product.
Peer reviews provide opportunities for students to gain a deeper understanding of the art assignment through the lens of a colleague. A short quiz that includes a variety of types of questions can be interesting, fun for the student, and address different learning styles. Teachers should take their own quizzes before giving them to students. Also, having students actually construct quiz questions is an engaging way to review content or come to closure on specific content. If your students have previous experience with rubrics, consider having them develop the rubric for a project. While wrapping up specific art or art history content, ask students to develop a rubric that shows what they think was covered in the lesson or assignment.
The intended goals of authentic assessment are to provide clear expectations for the students, a systematic and consistent review by teachers, and understandable evidence for teachers, students, and parents. More information about assessment and portfolio approaches along with worksheets for teachers and students can be found in the booklet, Portfolio & Assessment Techniques.
References:
Guenter, C. (2005). Portfolio & Assessment Techniques. Woodland Hills, CA: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill. (ISBN 0-07-86001-4)
Mueller, Jon. (2006) "What is Authentic Assessment?" Authentic Assessment Toolbox. 2006. December 31, 2007.
Wiggins, Grant. (1990) "The Case for Authentic Assessment." ERIC Digest. 2003. ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests Measurement and Evaluation, Washington, D.C., American Institutes for Research, Washington, D.C. December 31, 2007.
Performance Assessment
By Roberta M. Newcomer, Ph.D.
Current Chair of the Ohio Music Education Association's Curriculum and
Assessment Committee, Former Music and Drama/Theatre Education Consultant for
the Ohio Department of Education, Recipient of the Ohio Governor's Award for Art, 1991,
Member of States Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standard
What is Performance Assessment?
When music teachers hear the phrase "performance assessment," the tendency is to think of a choir or band performing for an adjudicator who will make a judgment and provide a rating for the group's performance. In the world of education, performance assessment refers to an activity that requires students to construct a response, create a product, or perform a demonstration. Thus, as music teachers, we need to stretch our definition to include performance-based tasks in our classrooms as well as performances in auditoriums. The chapter activities in Music! Its Role and Importance in Our Lives provide opportunities for students to demonstrate their understanding of the concepts presented in the chapter. This student learning can be determined using performance assessment.
How can I develop a Performance Assessment?
- Establish Criteria.
Since performance assessments generally do not yield a single correct answer or solution, evaluations of student products or performances are based on judgments guided by criteria. Criteria describe what observable characteristics, traits, or dimensions to look for. So the first step is to determine what are the most important qualities that you want to see or hear in the performance. - Choose a Performance Assessment Tool.
Checklists, rating scales, and rubrics are tools used in performance assessment. A checklist of desired characteristics is the simplest form and the quickest to administer, but it does not indicate quality achieved. A rating scale is a continuum with numerical value for each criterion and/or overall performance. While a rating scale indicates strongest and weakest dimensions of the performance, it does not give definitions of the criteria. A rubric provides information regarding quality because it describes student performance at various levels of proficiency. It has a particular format that provides a set of criteria, a performance scale, and descriptions of characteristics for each level that discriminate among different degrees of quality. Rubrics can be enhanced by providing "anchors," which are performances that demonstrate each level of performance.
There are two types of rubrics: analytic and holistic. An analytic rubric presents each criterion separately and, during a performance, each criterion is judged separately. Teachers assess how well students meet each specific criterion within an overall performance. Analytic rubrics, sometimes called "coaching rubrics," are helpful to use as students are working towards a performance. Feedback from an analytic rubric helps students understand what characteristic they need to improve. A holistic rubric contains all the criteria together at each level instead of separately as in an analytic rubric. It helps teachers make a judgment of how well the students have performed on an entire task or performance, so it is usually used to assess a culminating performance (a summative assessment).
Guidelines for Writing a Rubric
Format: Establish an even number of levels of performance with a minimum of four, which develop from least proficient to the most proficient. Clearly indicate the expected level of performance for all students, then place the top level of performance one level above the expected level. Be sure that the rubric has more levels below the expected level to assist in providing instructional feedback toward the expected level. Each level should be labeled with positive descriptive words that encourage success, such as "outstanding," "proficient," "improving," and "beginning."
Criteria: Choose a limited number of criteria and provide detailed descriptions of each criterion for each level. The descriptions should use parallel wording across all levels. Be as specific and detailed as possible in the descriptions. Use language that clearly separates the levels of performance, yet keeps an equal distance between the levels. Below the rubric, provide an explanation for "Not Scorable," such as "did not perform."
See the Following Sample Rubric
Musical Performance: Sample Analytic Rubric
| Rhythmic Accuracy | Use of Dynamics | Energy, Focus and Confidence | Ensemble Technique | |
| Exemplary | Played/Sang the correct rhythms throughout the performance. | Sensitive use of dynamics; enhanced the meaning of the music. | Performed with a riveting amount of energy, focus and confidence. | Played/Sang together as an ensemble with no difficulty. |
| Satisfactory (Level of achievement for ALL) | Played/Sang the correct rhythms during almost all of the performance. | Appropriate use of dynamics; helped to convey the meaning of the music. | Performed with sufficient amount of energy, focus and confidence. | Played/Sang together as an ensemble with little difficulty. |
| Progressing | Played/Sang the correct rhythms during most of the performance, but with some noticeable errors. | Limited use of dynamics; gave a sense of the meaning of the music. | Performed with some energy, focus and confidence, or with occasional lapses. | Played/Sang together as an ensemble with some noticeable difficulty. |
| Showing Some Progress | Played/Sang the correct rhythms during some of the performance, but with many noticeable errors. | Inappropriate use of dynamics; detracted from the meaning of the music. | Performed with an insufficient amount of energy, focus and confidence and/or with many lapses. | Played/Sang together as an ensemble with a great deal of obvious difficulty. |
Not scorable: Did not participate.