6.1 Pedagogical psychological descriptions of categories of learning that directly concern didactic practice
All teachers know that they are continually involved in conscious and sometimes unconscious evaluation. Everyone who has worked with a class or a number of classes for a school term has grouped the learners into different categories. For example, in every grade, there can be a small group of brilliant achievers, a large group of average ability and a number of individuals who will probably fail.
Memorizing and reflecting. When a learner is consciously and purposefully directed to mastering knowledge that he already has acquired in such a way that he can reproduce it, there is mention of memorizing. Memorizing and reflecting are closely related to each other where reflecting means consciously recalling representations, visual images or already existing knowledge.
A learner often carries out memorizing and reflecting by repetition. He repeats again and again in order to have particular contents directly and easily available for use in the further course of subsequent learning activities. In this respect, a learner has definite limits; for example, he cannot evoke the information immediately or in their entirety. However, he also has definite possibilities, e.g., he easily evokes particular experiences or specific details. In classroom practice, the practice lesson or drill work is the form in with both memorizing and reflecting can be realized. The experimental psychologist of learning believes that there is a very clear relationship regarding the quality and scope of the learning results and whether or not the acquired insights and knowledge have been memorized.
Fixating. Because a learning person in a learning situation is addressed by either a general or specific problem, and to the extent that it demands his attention, he is inclined to deal with the problem with greater concentration or intensity. In this sense one thinks that there is fixating if there is learning. Fixating, as a category of learning, is especially visible when the learning person is emotionally (pathically) involved in the problem. This is because then he is inclined to exclude other things or matters from his field of concentration and to attend only to the problem before him. Then achieving consciousness excludes problems, things or matters for particular attention to which achieving consciousness can be directed. It must be understood that fixating is not necessarily profitable or detrimental for learning; it is only peculiar to it in the sense that the learning activity cannot come to a positive result without it.
A concept such as “accentuating” information in learning explains fixating without which a matter such as constituting is not possible.
Analyzing and synthesizing. When learning shows itself in thinking, analyzing and synthesizing are two important aspects of the conscious learning activity. Analyzing and synthesizing are reciprocally related and they also mutually influence each other.
Analyzing a whole that appears to the learning person always depends on the characteristics on which its sub-parts rest. The implication of this is that pure analysis is not merely directed to investigating the parts, elements, or characteristics of the whole, but it also searches for the mutual relationships or connections among the parts, elements or characteristics. In this way, the analysis is carried out not merely to constitute the whole from its parts, but also to restructure the whole. Restructuring, as such, refers to showing new connections (correlations) among the parts, elements or characteristics and in this respect it also is a matter of synthesis. Thus, a synthesis will form a new, meaningful whole from the parts.
Integrating. When a learner studies, there is always an acquisition of knowledge. One sees this in the everyday life world in which a learner’s expressions make us mindful that the knowledge a learner has acquired becomes his own possession, i.e., this knowledge is unique to him.
The conclusion is that there can be no learning if a learner has not made the knowledge his own possession. Integrating, as a category of learning, means that the learning learner has previously acquired amounts of knowledge at his disposal and the newly acquired knowledge is taken up and placed (integrated into) in this already existing whole of knowledge. It is obvious that this integration is not only directed to the intellectual or cognitive aspect of a learner but it simultaneously involves his cognitive and affective aspects. Thus, in this way it influences all of the activities of the achieving consciousness. In this sense, integrating once again emphasizes that the total person of a learner is involved in learning.
Restructuring. The concept restructuring is used to show that in the progress of the course of learning, when the learning person has so changed a concrete visible field or totality of observable data that it now forms a new whole or structure on the basis of abstract insights into the relationships and possibilities that he has shown, there also is learning. To better understand this statement, it is indicated that by an abstract solution to a problem in concrete data, e.g., when a person reads a map in order to visualize the area of the other side of a mountain, the whole image of the observable data is changed into a new structure.
The new structure is formed on the basis of the abstract insight into the matter shown by the learning person. For example, the insight that the map reader has in contour lines makes it possible for him to infer the topography of the area.
Reducing. Reducing, as a category of the learning activity, means that the learning person strips a particular matter of everything that is superfluous or incidental so that it can be reduced to its simplest form. It is important to note that fixating along with analyzing and synthesizing, as categories of learning, are attuned to seeing the essences of the matter. When, a learner strips the matter to its essences, he proceeds to analyze complex matters to their most simple or most essential data. He does this on the basis of deducing the relationships that constitute this structure.
Concentrating. Experience, as well as the findings of the psychology of learning and psychopedagogics, indicates that learning without a doubt is a matter of problem solving. The problem claims a learner to such a degree that he must direct his achieving consciousness in such a way and fixate on the problem so that there is mention of concentrating. Thus, a learner must show a sustained attentiveness regarding the matter or theme of the learning task so that, especially regarding relationships, he mobilizes all of his powers and possibilities of reflecting and thinking with the aim of an adequate solution.
Without concentrating, the course of the learning activity is haphazard. From the nature of the tasks of the formal didactic situation (school situation), a haphazard course of learning is not acceptable.
Actualizing. Actualizing means that the learning person in particular situations recalls contents or knowledge that he previously learned in a haphazard way and uses them to master the data of the new situation. What he previously learned haphazardly he now makes actual for application in the new situation.
For example, in everyday experience one haphazardly encounters a person without purposefully striving to learn his name. In a following situation, e.g., when we again encounter the person, he immediately is remembered and we can use (implement) his name so that we can recognize and place him. This means that the name learned incidentally in the first situation is actualized in the second one. In this way, actualizing is “evidence” that earlier there was learning in a haphazard way. The fact is that there is no learning without actualizing.
Reproducing. Actualizing and reproducing are closely related to each other. Actualizing has special reference to remembering matters that were learned spontaneously and haphazardly.
Reproducing involves recalling something in a new situation that had been previously learned and memorized purposefully. Thus, reproducing especially involves contents or things that the person himself previously had purposefully exercised. For example, here one thinks of a poem that a learner had learned by heart or of the times tables. In this sense, reproducing is a form of actualizing but actualizing is not necessarily always a form of reproducing. The reason is that everyday forms of actualizing can occur without any discernible links to consciousness.
Transferring. Actualizing and reproducing can result from repetition but it is not necessarily so. Irrespective of cases where a repetition occurs of an earlier relationship or experience, actualizing a learning effect also can take place as a whole of action that is new to the learning person. In this respect, transferring means that what one has learned in one situation, under certain circumstances, can contribute to the activities in a subsequent situation. The fact of transferring means that there is no need for new learning; insights, solutions, methods of solution, etc. from one situation are applied to another to solve a new problem. Transferring also ensures the linking together of subsequent learning activities.
Anticipating. When a person intentionally learns one can note that he often chooses his answers or activity structures on the basis of a totality he is aware of. Thus, a person does not always proceed immediately to analyzing. He selects his answers or activity structures possibly on the basis of some particularities that intrude themselves in his thinking. In the case of a totality, a learner anticipates or runs through the particularities of the whole on which he is working in advance. When he concentrates on the sub-parts of a whole he again anticipates the whole on which he is working. This means that in his learning activity he makes leaps of thought by anticipating aspects of the contents without spending direct time or energy on them. Anticipating is of the greatest significance in learning because it has the consequence of quickly increasing the level of thinking.
You also can note that since the learning activity, as discussed in this component, continually is involved with the question of thinking and language, it is not possible to think about the learning activity without the two overarching categories of insight and generalization.
Insight is connected with learning to the extent that it also is modified by the immediate grasp of the relationships among matters and the connections, causes and functions of a particular event or activity. There can be little or no learning if there is no insight. Generalizing also is connected with learning because a learner continually recognizes that the valid findings of one matter or situation are valid for another related matter or situation. This means that a learner continually draws connections, makes applications and in his generalizing he works through to generally valid findings that help him to understand and clarify for himself the essence of the matter with which he is working.
A teacher in a second order or formal teaching situation (school situation) cannot exceed the forms of teaching of the original teaching situation in the family, he must know the essences (categories) of the learning activity before he can establish the most effective teaching forms for a learner and select particular content for the lesson situation. The relationship, and especially the harmony between the lesson forma teacher chooses to unlock particular contents for a learner is determined by the learning activity that can most clearly be directed to the essences of the contents in that lesson form.
In the following component an explication is given of the aspects of the theory that a teacher interprets in a particular lesson situation to guarantee, as far as is possible, positive learning results [13, 20].
6.2 Evaluation and assessment: examinations and tests
Generally speaking, evaluating, assessing and administering examinations and tests are the most common and everyday activities that a teacher has. They are also the most complex and difficult of all of his professional responsibilities. As far as learners are concerned, evaluation is certainly the most important part of the teaching situation because the quality of their input and their progress in teaching and learning situations give sense and meaning to their existence in the school.
In addition to these categories, there is usually a small group of learners in every class who are troublesome, a few who never really do their homework, a number of learners who are regularly absent, certain individuals who continually try to attract the foreign language teacher’s attention, etc. All of these statements that reflect part of the daily teaching situation result from evaluations. Although the evaluations are not formalized, this kind of subjective assessment leads to classifications, groupings and to important strategies of testing in the classroom.
However, when matters such as determining a learner’s intelligence quotient are involved, or when aptitude, learning achievements and the promotion of learners to the next grade are considered, subjective assessment is unacceptable. A teacher simply does not sit down with a list of names in his hand to mark those who pass or fail, although he knows very well who is bound to pass and who probably will not. These decisions must be based on objective information that has been collected objectively. Therefore, a variety of tests is introduced to insure that the evaluation is accountable in terms of objective criteria. Tests do not supersede a teacher’s judgment: they actually supplement it. In this sense, tests are an independent means of assessing the nature and level of the learner’s achievements.
Consumers of education are most interested in a teacher’s procedure of evaluation. The outcome of these procedures indicates the nature and scope of the progress parents expect of their learner. In this context some teachers have learned through bitter experience that if examination and test marks are kept as high as possible parents will be satisfied, irrespective of whether their learner has, in fact, reached the level suggested by the mark or percentage. A teacher reasons that a few added points cost nothing, that parents will not ask awkward questions and that the learner’s self-image will not be endangered. In this case a teacher uses a strategy of evaluation that avoids conflict, thereby hoping to establish an equable learning and teaching environment. It is obvious that this strategy cannot be justified pedagogically, didactically or in any other way. Nowadays this kind of subjective evaluation is difficult to use because the marks achieved by learners in all classes are continually determined by standardized tests that have been stored in secure data banks. Standardized tests are used regularly by schools to verify the quality of the learners’ achievements.
Other consumers of education are also interested in evaluation, especially employers. Schooling always leads to the achievement of a certificate. Certificates are statements of ability or of a level of education (schooling) that has been reached. This is important for a learner as well as for the employer. For the learner, the certificate his competence to proceed with his formal education (e.g., by enrolling in a tertiary educational institution) or to start training outside the formal school system, in which case his certificate serves as a qualification for entrance. On the other hand, his certificate provides him with direct access to employment. The fact that employers place high value on these pronouncements of the educational sector and their comments regarding the capabilities of their employees (e.g., their ability to use language correctly) are important for educational institutions because they serve as a barometer to control the quality of schooling.
Government and the “powers that be” are another sector of society most interested in evaluation practices.
Authorities, therefore, expect schools to contribute to forming independent, dependable, loyal and economically productive citizens. Trained manpower is the greatest asset any country can have. Therefore, the quality of the training must be carefully and continually monitored and controlled by means of standards especially designed for every form of education. Nothing could ever damage the image of a university more than to suggest that its standards are suspect.
Strategies of evaluation are of great importance in society as a whole. Education and the possession of certificates provide access to job opportunities for learners. Work generates income, i.e., economic independence. Generally, the better the qualification, the higher the income, and level of income generally determines the level of status in society. This is especially important in developing
In this context we have translated “reliability” as “trustworthiness”. Clearly the authors do not use “reliability” only in the technical, psychometric sense of “consistency” or “stability”; by this term, they simultaneously imply that one can rely on a test result really meaning what it is being interpreted to mean (i.e., it’s validity). For us, the nontechnical term “trustworthy” deals with this ambiguity, while preserving it, because it simultaneously embraces the psychometric concepts of reliability and validity. Countries because it provides the mechanism for social mobility and means that one can aspire to higher social status on the grounds of good education and training. The stratification of society by classes, levels or ranks is always criticized but it cannot be ignored or wished away. It seems that it has become a part of every society. The certificates of educational institutions are an important key for unlocking these doors for the consumer of education.
This brief overview hopefully explains why “trustworthy” evaluation procedures and standards in education are of general importance in every country and community.
Naturally there is widespread and intense criticism of tests and examinations. Criticism is aimed at all levels and kinds of testing and examining, from measuring the intelligence of a young learner to doctoral examinations. Reasons for the criticism are well known: it encourages the overemphasis of examination results, learners do not learn to think, they only memorize; it prejudices the teaching of the gifted; it is discriminatory in education and in society as a whole, etc. But nobody has as yet suggested an acceptable strategy to replace tests and examinations. In fact the contribution modern technology has made to insure the “trustworthiness” of test and examination procedures has increased their prestige.
The aim of this component is not to provide the prospective teachers with comprehensive training in evaluation procedures. This is in itself a study or training course that is included in most teachers training curricula.
The circumstances in which he carries out his teaching contribute importantly to the strategies he will use. He must organize his test and examination procedures to grade learners effectively according to their achievements. This is a very sensitive and important task. The learner’s self-image, his image of the future (direction of study, vocation), his relationship to his parents, his prestige in the class all depend on the “trustworthiness” of teachers’ evaluation procedures. A large part of this is subjective. The subjective factor in assessment can never be completely eliminated; therefore, every teacher must use evaluation strategies as correctly as possible to guarantee the “trustworthiness” of his evaluations.
The marks awarded to a learner that to a large extent eventually reflect his ability, aptitude, acceptability, usefulness, etc., are usually used in the following ways:
- as a profile of his progress in school;
- as a basis for his promotion to the next grade;
- as encouragement to make greater learning effort;
- to serve as a guideline for choosing a direction of study and for vocational guidance;
- to draw a profile of his personality and character;
- to serve as motivation to study for scholarships, awards, etc.;
- to serve as criteria to assess his worth when he applies for a job;
- to provide data for research in a variety of circumstances, but especially for educational purposes.
For these reasons test and examination results may not be shrouded in mystery or considered to be an aspect of a teacher’s responsibility that is not open to public scrutiny. Learners must know at all times what a teacher’s procedures are as well as the criteria he will use in his assessment.
Aims are valid for evaluation? From what has been said above, the following aims of evaluation are important.
Certification of learners’ achievements. Although many teachers doubt the desirability of grading learners on the basis of examinations (A, B +, B, C or 80 %, 65 %, 50 %), it cannot be denied that well constructed examinations (tests) do provide a “trustworthy” criterion to determine the level of achievement and especially to decide whether a learner can be promoted to the next grade.
Reasons for measuring achievements were mentioned above. Surely it is inconceivable that a teacher could decide intuitively to fail a learner! In addition to determining scholastic achievement, there is a whole series of equally valid aims when testing and examining in order to make responsible educational decisions such as the kind of school a learner should attend, or to provide a basis for advising the parents. Without the substance of evaluative data teachers cannot function effectively as an educationist.
The following are conditions where assessing and testing must be as objective as possible in order to make responsible and accountable educational decisions.
Grouping learners. This is a common practice in teaching. Grouping learners in grades, subjects, remedial classes, etc. are examples. When grouping learners, teachers seek either homogeneity or individual differences in order to provide more effective teaching; for example, in selecting highly gifted learners. In certain classes, learners can also be grouped according to learning tempo (quick, average and slow). In practice, learners are never grouped only according to tests. A teacher’s observations are at least as important as the test results. Grouping also is never used in an attempt to eliminate individual differences.
The organization of specific learning programs. “Trustworthy” test results can provide valuable information in organizing learning programs; for example, the development of abilities, specific talents (art) or the solution of learning problems. They also provide an opportunity to construct a curriculum or design teaching material in accordance with learners’ needs.
To determine aptitude. This is a normal practice in school as well as vocational guidance. Tests provide indispensable information for choosing the right subjects, in determining the kind of teaching that must be provided (e.g., vocational education) and in deciding on the most applicable course of study for a specific learner (e.g., the humanities or the natural sciences).
Changing schools. It is often very difficult for teachers to determine a learner’s level of achievement when a learner moves to a new area and school. It would be unwise to attempt to establish a learner’s level while he is trying to adjust himself to a new school and circumstances. The use of standardized scholastic tests is a guide and reasonably “trustworthy” way to determine the newcomer’s level of achievement and give him the necessary attention in class.
Research. The importance of well-designed and carefully executed evaluation procedures for educational research is self-evident. Various aspects have already been referred to: giftedness, learning problems, data banks to provide standardized examinations, determining realistic levels of achievement for different age groups, the development of “trustworthy” predictors of academic or vocational success for all categories of learners, and last but not least, school readiness. These are examples of the positive contribution “trustworthy” evaluative procedures can make to education.
Evaluating the effect of teaching. Good testing can be a valuable support for teachers in assessing the effect of his teaching. Although standardized tests and examinations are available and are increasingly used in education, it is a teacher who actually decides on its contents. Whatever appears on the examination reflects what teachers consider being important and how he wants the learners to deal with it. What exactly must be achieved in teaching specific aspects of contents? It follows that a teachers evaluate (selects contents) in terms of aims and objectives identified in the curriculum.
If a teacher wants the learners to know (remember) certain facts or formulas then he must test accordingly. The same applies to aims such as creative thinking, learning methods for solving problems, transferring insights to new situations, etc. This imperative is true even for the smallest teaching unit. If a teacher teaches without first determining exactly what his aim is, he does not know what he is doing. If he then tests without knowing what he is testing, the same applies. This means a teacher expects specific achievements from his learners that must be reflected in his test, that he has carefully identified these achievements and competencies in his marking scheme and that he knows exactly the criteria for which credit will be given and the weight they will have for each answer. In effect, he is, in part, assessing the influence of his own teaching through the quality of his learners’ achievements. When grading papers, it is often disconcerting to a teacher to see the quality of his teaching reflected in the answers his learners give.
Encouragement. Tests and examinations can also encourage learners, especially because they are so intent on succeeding. There are few motivations in life that are as encouraging as success. Good achievements by learners encourage a teacher to attempt to improve his teaching even more. The same applies to the learner. For the achiever, the examination should never be a crisis but an opportunity to show his steel. Badly devised tests frustrate this aim. The preparation of a good test requires much time and hard work but it has its own rewards [13, 20].
Programmed and computer-assisted teaching. Each answer of a learner is immediately assessed and marked right or wrong. If teachers develop these programs for their own teaching, they must include immediate assessment in the program.
6.3 A teacher is as an evaluator
Nowhere in our society are tests and examinations conducted more regularly and more extensively than in our schools. A teacher is the center of this educational activity; in fact, in the most literal sense of the word, he is the hub of the evaluation wheel. Therefore, it goes without saying that a teacher must be a knowledgeable and “trustworthy” evaluator, examiner and judge of his learner’s achievements. The contribution he makes to his learners’ future can never be overestimated. For this reason, accidental or casual factors have no place in his evaluative responsibilities. He must know the theoretical basis of evaluation and must be able to apply the related principles in his classroom. This not only applies to the learner’s achievements in a specific subject, it applies equally to the evaluation of him as a person including his aptitudes and potentialities as a human being.
Many of the tests a teacher uses are highly specialized. Education authorities appoint teachers specialists to administer specialized tests (e.g., intelligence tests). Generally speaking, schools make use of tests (i.e., all forms of examination and evaluation) as instruments to maintain and promote the quality of teaching. By means of these tests a teacher constructs a profile of every individual learner’s achievement. The aim is to eventually help each learner attain the highest level of achievement by individualizing the teaching and learning situation. This is the most important reason for introducing computer-assisted teaching in schools all over the world. In their striving to increase positive teaching effects in this context, education planners and curriculum compilers are continually looking for ways to stabilize a teacher’s evaluation. Homogeneous grouping of learners is one example of what is meant. Programs to prepare school beginners are another. A teacher is examiner by virtue of the fact that he teaches people.
Teachers can approach the problem in different ways in the classroom. However, teachers can also make use of objective tests of which there are many variations. These tests are considered to be objective because they are not influenced by a teacher’ opinion [13, 20].
The questions (items) and answers have been previously standardized. When the essay on Napoleon’s foreign policy is marked, the assessment is subjective because there is no standardized answer. It hardly ever occurs that two examiners award the same marks to an essay because their own interpretations of the answer will differ. Examples of objective examination items are given later.
6.4 Norm directed evaluation
One of the most important objectives in evaluation is to establish criteria in terms of which teachers can describe the learner’s achievement. It is important for a teacher to remember that a mark (score), irrespective of its nature, is relatively useless unless he knows what the basis or background is to which the mark refers.
For example, in administering a scholastic test, a mark of 10 can indicate exceptional giftedness for a school beginner but serious retardation for an older or secondary school student. The mark can be interpreted only if one knows the norm to which it can be related.
There are mainly two kinds of comparative groups that can be used to give evaluative meaning to a learner’s achievement on a test. One can compare the learner’s achievement with that of other learner of his age, grade level or within his class. The comparability of his achievement is the important consideration. The norms used to interpret the individual learner’s achievements are generally classified as follows.
Age norms. These norms compare the individual learner’s achievements to those of the same age learner. A clear example of this is found in studies of babies. At a certain age a learner should weigh so much, be able to sit without help, be able to crawl, etc. However, as learner grow older, it becomes more difficult to use age as a norm because its “trustworthiness” becomes suspect. Differences in learning achievement cannot be described only in terms of comparative ages.
Class or grade norms. Grade level norms are established by calculating the average score or mark of learners in the same grade. A test is given to a representative sample of learners who, although they come from different areas, socio-economic backgrounds, and although their ages might differ, are all at the same grade level.
In using this method, comparisons are possible because all of a learner have enjoyed the same range and level of education. In this way, a norm is established for a specific grade level in school with respect to particular aspects of the curriculum, e.g., fractions in arithmetic. When such a standardized test is given to a learner, his achievement can be compared and judged with respect to the average achievement of learners in this specific grade.
Percentile norms. When using percentile norms, the percentages of learners are determined with which the individual learners’ achievement can be compared: if 75 % of the learners with whom learner A’s achievements are compared scored lower marks than he did, this means that learner A has a percentile rank of 75 %. Learner A therefore achieved a higher score than 75 % of the learners who took the test, but he achieved a lower score than 25 % of the group.
The particulars of norm directed procedures of evaluation imply the statistical analysis of test results. As was pointed out, the aim of this component is not to go into the details of such statistical analyses. Nobody doubts the value or accuracy of results analyzed in this way; nobody doubts the “trustworthiness” of the conclusions that can be drawn from these analyses [13, 20].
The question of statistical accountability will, therefore, not be gone into any further. There are, however, a large number of different everyday considerations of a more general didactic nature that should be explained.
6.5 Criterion directed evaluation
Norm directed evaluation is aimed at devising procedures to compare a learner with other learners in different ways. However, many evaluation experts are of the opinion that this is not the best way to assess a learner’s achievements. Their aim is to identify a set and fixed standard of evaluation in terms of which the individual learner should be evaluated. In this case, the individual learner is not assessed in terms of the achievements of another learner or group but according to criteria derived from the contents, as such. The level of achievement of all of the other learners regarding the criterion is irrelevant when the individual is assessed because the criterion does not reflect the achievement of a group of other learners. The criterion is found in the contents themselves. A criterion directed test will, therefore, indicate the degree to which an individual learner has grasped a specific theme or problem, for example the ability to correctly spell certain categories of words. It is quite irrelevant that 80 % of all learners of his age and grade level can spell these words correctly; only the individual learner’s achievement is important. The test will indicate the learner’s difficulties or problems, irrespective of the difficulties of the learners in his age group or any other group.
Criterion directed evaluation leans heavily on the importance of aims and objectives and insists that the learner’s achievement is assessed in terms of the specific teaching aims and objectives and the contents that were chosen for these purposes [13, 20].
Data banks and question banks are primarily associated with this type of evaluation because the questions and answers have been extensively tested and verified; the discrimination value has been established empirically and the criteria (answers) are absolutely constant.
6.6 Examinations and tests
The contents that are selected must insure the realization of these aims in a general and specific sense. At the same time, the ordering of these contents must place the learning task within the learner’s grasp, and it must insure a realistic level of access for a learner while revealing the specific nature (elementals, essences) of the contents. Curriculum evaluation cannot occur outside of the framework of these aims. Also, the curriculum is not evaluated only after it has been designed: this evaluation is a continuous, summative procedure that occurs even while the curriculum is being constructed.
When a practicing a teacher is testing pilot curricula as part of a research team (i.e., when it is made operational in didactic situations), assessing the relationship between aims and contents is a teacher’s fundamental concern. If the learning aims are not fully covered by the contents, i.e., if they cannot realize the desired learning effect, the pilot curriculum must be reviewed.
The same principle holds for all examination and test procedures used by a teacher. He always tests and examines in terms of the teaching and learning aims formulated in the curriculum. He determines his own specific teaching objectives in terms of curriculum aims and incorporates them in his lesson designs (plans). This is an inexorable and inescapable demand for every aspect of his evaluative practice. This principle never loses its validity in education, whatever the circumstances might be. Therefore, it is self-evident that a teacher cannot design a lesson without carefully and explicitly formulating his objectives. Any other procedure will put him in the position of a dog chasing its own tail.
The same principle applies to examinations. Examinations are concerned only with the formulated teaching and learning aims.
Any other approach is unprofessional, unethical and unquestionably dishonest. Therefore, a teacher must not decide what the questions will be for this afternoon’s test or examination while riding a bus to school in the morning. Learning objectives, test questions and marking or scoring rubrics are a unified trilogy. A number of acts and particulars are of importance in this context when a teacher considers his test procedures.
Informal testing techniques. These techniques can be of great importance in drawing a profile of a learner’s achievements over a long period. Norm and criterion directed evaluations formalize the evaluation situation in a specific sense. They lead teachers to objective measurement procedures that have a certain merit in their own right: they are unprejudiced, relatively free from subjectivity and they should provide “trustworthy” test results under almost all circumstances. However, we all know that the teaching situation is not objective by nature or character. In practice, there are no standard learners or schools and this means that a complete perception of an individual learner’s achievements cannot really be obtained by making exclusive use of objective tests. Important aspects of a learner’s personality and character can be determined only by careful observation by teachers.
A teacher’s observation of a learner in a series of situations, often over a long period of time, can be of decisive importance in explaining the learner’s profile of achievement that is established by means of objective tests, and to place them in perspective.
A good example of this kind of evaluation is found in pre-primary and primary education where standardized test have only limited value (except in the testing for school readiness). Many important decisions regarding learner are based on the foreign language teacher’s observations. The key to this kind of evaluation is that it must be systematic. Teachers must decide beforehand what areas of the learner’s achievements should be observed. These particulars must be written down carefully and regularly.
Education offers many opportunities for this kind of evaluation. In addition to the circumstances already referred to, teachers can make unobtrusive notes on the learner’s self-confidence, bravado, apparent indifference, venturing attitude, aggression, the quality of his concentration, his ability to think logically, his behavior in a group (e.g., his constant efforts to draw attention to himself), his preference for certain learning situations (projects or tasks), over dependence on help from others, the quality of his language and articulateness, exceptional gifts (singing, drawing, dramatization), learning tempo, reading competences, perfectionism, etc. All of these factors have an important influence on a learner’s stability and his participation in teaching situations.
Teachers often overlook the importance of stability. When learners are conspicuous in one way or another (rowdiness, copying other learner’s work, etc.), one is inclined to concentrate on that particular aspect of behavior instead of considering all of the factors that determine the stability of the learner’s activity input. Where inconspicuous learners are concerned, teachers seldom or ever go to the trouble of consciously observing the ways their psychic life is manifested in the learning situation. These observations by teachers are of the most fundamental importance because they provide the background against which formal test results can be assessed and interpreted. It has to be emphasized once again that these observations need to be planned and that a record must be kept of each learner’s particulars in order to make a comparison with formal test results possible.
Class tests and examinations. Generally speaking, teachers seldom make use of standardized tests and examinations. This is partly because they are not always available and partly because teachers formulate their own teaching and learning objectives that they prefer to evaluate by constructing their own tests and evaluations.
However, with the emergence of the computer, standardized items are more readily available (via question and data banks) and, therefore, more attention should be paid to the advantages these items offer for evaluation. The advantage of the objectivity of these tests has already been discussed. The fact is, they are more reliable (psychometrically) than tests constructed on an ad hoc basis by teachers; this is largely because they have been administered to a large number of learners over a long period and because statistical analyses have established the (psychometric) validity of the item (question). Validity, in this sense, means that it has discriminative value. The item discriminates (differentiates) between those learners who know and those who do not know.
During the formulation of the item and the establishment of its validity, attention is given to factors such as the possibility that the correct answer can be guessed, that it can be inferred from the way the question has been asked or that the answer can be discovered from the information provided in the phrasing of the question.
Although the general teaching situation does not provide for the extensive use of these controls, the demands for reliability concerning the results of teachers designed test are equally binding. The items on a teacher’s test also must be valid and have discriminative value. If a specific question is answered correctly by 90% of the learners, it has very limited discriminative value.
These requirements will be discussed below from time to time. The fact remains that a teacher has an important responsibility to keep (psychometric) validity and reliability in mind as criteria when designing a test. In addition, it is an unavoidable requirement that a teacher’s teaching and learning objectives must be reflected in the contents of his test for him to be able to properly evaluate the effect of his teaching.
When compiling a test or examination, a teacher is, in fact, informing his learners of what he considers to be important in the syllabus. Therefore, one can understand why learners are constantly analyzing copies of old examinations in their effort to discover what teacher is likely to ask. As far as a teacher is concerned, his learners’ answers are an important source of information regarding the quality of his teaching as well as the progress of his learners as a group and as individuals. He can determine from the answers which aspects of the syllabus have not been mastered adequately and which learners need extra help because their progress is unsatisfactory.
One fact has become very clear: good tests do not drop from the sky; they are carefully planned and constructed with great consideration. Nor must a teacher ever assess learners’ answers without a scoring rubric; that is, he must know exactly what he expects the answers to be, the number of points to allocate to each question and for what he will penalize the learner. He must also accurately judge how much time a learner will need to answer a question. At the time of developing the test, a teacher also composes the scoring rubric. It also is important to discuss the questions with the learners when returning their test papers, especially those answers deserving high marks and those awarded only low marks. General mistakes and factors that influenced learners’ achievements (e.g., the amount of time spent on each question or mistakes in interpreting questions) must be discussed.
Kinds of aims. To teach without an aim is like going on a journey without a destination. In the literature dealing with teaching aims, one encounters many variations.
Aims may vary from subject to subject but, generally speaking, there are three main categories, i.e., three kinds or types of aims that are intended to actualize learning by means of teaching.
Cognitive aims. Cognitive aims are closely associated with knowledge. Knowledge, as such, covers a wide spectrum of abilities, e.g., subject detail, subject terminology, subject methods, generalizations and abstractions, etc. These aims are also aimed at understanding contents, the application of knowledge, the analysis of data and the synthesis and evaluation of information. As is well known, these aims always appear in the form of an instruction (verb), for example:
Aim Instruction (verbs). Knowledge Define, prove, differentiate between, explain, identify, name.
Understanding Change, write in your own words, illustrate, translate, interpret, determine the value, arrange, estimate, generalize, make conclusions, infer.
Analysis Apply to, calculate, classify, choose, develop, use, transfer to, rearrange. Synthesis Combine, make deductions, develop, formulate, change, plan, design, make a suggestion, tell, write.
Evaluation Reason, judge, consider, decide, value.
It is once more important to note that cognitive aims imply a question that contains an instruction that is introduced by a specific verb that tells a learner exactly what he must do when answering the question.
Learners often misread instructions; they decide what they think the question is and simply write down everything they know about the topic. Therefore, teachers must pay attention to examination competences during their teaching. A learner must study how to write a test or examination; how to read the questions; how to interpret the question and how to organize his answer. This does not happen by itself and learners do not simply know these aspects of examinations without receiving careful instruction from teachers. The fact that a learner must be able to recognize and differentiate between these aims is just as important as a teacher’s knowledge of aims. For this reason, teachers should never write ambiguous questions. If he genuinely doubts the correctness of any two answers, the question must be a bad one, because the results of the learner’s answers will be misleading and a teacher will be unable to make valid deductions concerning the quality of his learners’ study or his own teaching.
Affective aims. Affective aims are directed at the quality of the learners’ input.
Because these aspects of achievement cannot always be observed directly, they pose specific problems for the examiner in effectively ordering and in designing authentic criteria for evaluation. Aims such as optimizing the learner’s intention, attitude, appreciation, principles, etc., are difficult to evaluate. One cannot simply award marks for qualities of existence although they are certainly intrinsic aspects of all teaching and learning situations.
One often finds that affective learning aims are coupled to specific contents like poetry, music and art where the accountability of a learner’s appreciation has a great deal to do with the way he has identified with the contents. His answers are often an unfolding of his experiences of the world that he attempts to articulate. His receptivity, the amount of attention he gives to the contents and the ways he makes them his own are, therefore, important aims within the field of teaching [9, 21].
Psychomotor aims. The concept “psychomotor aims” means that the Teacher will assess he directly observable competences of his learners. During the primary phase of schooling, psychomotor aims are to learn to write and read correctly. In the secondary school, a teacher seeks proficiency in the learners’ handling of a musical instrument or a machine such as a lathe or typewriter used in vocational preparation. Therefore, the items in the test are formulated in terms of observable competences. Words like draw construct and indicate initiate the tasks and instructions normally contained within these items.