Consider the real-world constraints

The learning disaster created by the pandemic is now showing up in assessment data (see, for example, stories here and here and here). Educators are facing an enormous challenge to recover lost ground with students, who are at risk of becoming the ‘COVID generation’ for decades. Whether assessment should be on the docket for redesign as schools emerge from a pandemic is questionable. Poor ventilation in schools, the lack of teacher training on how to deliver remote lessons, and the lack of a digital infrastructure that hampered learning for many lork Dw-income students seem like issues that should be teed up first. Changing how assessment is done will make the pandemic challenge even greater, which educators may find unappealing.

But if we do want to consider ways to improve assessment, then we should recognize that the current assessment system, relying heavily on standardized large-scale tests, fits within many constraints. It’s an efficient solution to the difficult problem of how to fairly evaluate what students have learned in differing classrooms, schools, and districts. The tests have a scientifically sound structure and they can be purchased at a reasonable cost. One might find flaws with the current assessment system, but then one needs to put forward an alternate solution that also fits the constraints, just as buyers looking to purchase a new car should compare alternatives that fit within their budget.

Changes to the current assessment system that William Penuel contemplates focus on having students do more activities and projects, and having these activities and projects be assessed (and proposed) through a neutral cultural lens. These are reasonable “what if” considerations, but let’s consider the constraints.