Subjectivity in the summative assessment is a difficult to control problem in a objective desired environment let’s say. It is still present no matter how many numbers, scales or rubrics we use when evaluating. Is this in the end judgement guided by criteria or criteria guided by judgment?
My impression is that subjectivity is something we cannot get rid of when talking about validity, especially in this kind of assessment for understanding. There’s a definition within the text that reinforces my puzzled idea about understanding assessment: Validity refers to the meaning we can and cannot properly make of specific evidence. This process of obtaining this desired meaning is the one that makes me think that no matter how “objective” the evaluation instrument is, there will be a judgment behind; bias is always present.
To avoid this subjectivity, we naïvely tend to think that by paying attention to scores we go more objective ”in part because scoring for correctness makes assessment so much easier and seemingly objective”, and consequently, more valid.
Now that we learn that what matters is the interpretation of the score, the previous belief goes discarded. Having these instruments called rubrics discussed, are they really objective? I guess again they can be difficult tools to be conceived, since my criteria might not be reflected into the descriptions meant to appear in my grids.
I have seen that some rubrics (along with several other assessment instruments) are created just for the sake of score. And when evaluating, it’s the subjective appreciation the one that predominates in the end, “because the student did more like a bit more about this than this other point”
In the end it’s your judgement the one that imposes over my seemingly objective rubric.
There is one solution provided by the text, which provides a solution quite plausible: “it doesn’t matter what tests you use as long as they are varied and many” and I would also add that their interpretations need to be shared too with some other colleagues to reduce this blind spot in evaluation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Dear Claudio!
Your reflection about this particular issue regarding criteria and validity made me think a lot of things. As you said, bias will always be present in each part of our daily routines as teachers practitioners, and I think the reason for this is just because we are humans and obviously our science is the Humanities; therefore, even though we make great efforts for using objective instruments, we will always get information that could be clearly objective, but it is our interpretation that could be bias somehow. Math is an exact science and its results will be objectives all the time, but when we talk about “communication”, I think, the scenario changes radically. Therefore, it is our job to articulate criteria and the purpose we are seeking when assessing in order to avoid bias and be as fair, clear, accurate and objective as possible.
Best
Angie
Claudio:
I agreed with the solution that the authors gave in their book to reduce subjectivity in tests. Undoubtedly, validity and reliability are crucial factors when we are talking about this issue. Are tests consistent? or do they measure what I am looking for? are questions that are always present in the teachers’ mind. Your position that there is not a way to be completely objective, I found it very interesting since it touches a very important point. We do not have to forget that although many approaches or ideas about how to avoid subjectivity exist, teachers are human beings. This is the key factor which has to be taken into account before talking about judgments and how to deal with them.
My dear:
there's no doubt that this issue of using rubrics to assess our students brings along another bigger issue which is subjectivity. But I think it's something we'll never agree on, since it's extremely difficult to leave aside our thoughts and impressions when assessing, although we might have all the tools, personal judgement will always influence the process. Now, for me the goal is to reduce the influence of personal judgement as much as we can, and rubrics can help us a lot in that sense. Therefore, if we devote enough time to make a clear and appropriate rubric, I think we disminish the risks of being that subjective.
That's it! Hugs,
Scarlette
Hi Claudio!
As we were discussing some weeks ago, assessing and overcoming subjectivity seem to be a haunting ghost in our minds as teachers. I am sure whenerev we are asssessing our students we wonder whether we are being fair with the score or mark we are giving. Subjectivity is something we cannot get rid of, I am afraid; since we are all individuals determined by our experiences and our beliefs, the best best solution I can think of is the one you are mentioning: valiety and sharing.
Team work becomes a powerful strategy to really validate whatever rubric we are to use. Sharing different points of view will help us make our instrument of assessment more objective, and also, the use of different kinds of evaluation to get evidence of our students' degree of understanding through different means.
My dear... I agree on what you say.
Although, you are always negative like Mary Shelley's gloomy atmospheres, I think in the end it is not possible not avoid judging when assessing. Nonetheless, as you also mention we can try to diminish this by doing what Wiggins suggests: "it doesn’t matter what tests you use as long as they are varied and many" Also, and I said the same in another post somewhere, we teachers should share our criteria and beliefs in order to reduce the 'judging' margin to the minimum. Sharing among peers allows us to work less, sharing among peers allows us to realize of our own weaknesses, sharing among peers allows us to triangulate our criteria, sharing among peers allows us to find validity and be fair when assessing the ones who live in darkness...
See you nihilist!
Dear Claudio,
Honestly speaking, subjectivity in tests is something we cannot get rid of, but we can certainly minimize it by the use of rubrics. Wether holistic or analytic, they can definetly give you a sense of objectivity in an oral test, for example.
Marking oral tests may be very challenging for teachers. How then can we possibly be fair and objective in these sort of tests? Quite simply a holistic rubric can solve our problems, particualrly if we also inform and communicate this rubric to our students. And more importanlty, feedbak in relation to this oral evalation is given to our students. In sum, what is considered at first sight as highly subjective can turn out to be very objective and enriching.
You mentioned a great idea of sharing interpretations. I think it would be very good to minimize subjectivity or to share different ideas of subejectivity before taking a final desicion.
Loreto mentioned the importance of working on rubrics with our collegues, which I think it is something crucial to be done.
So, if we share the tasks of designing rubrics and gathering validity with our collegues the final results would be more reliable and easier to carry out.
I know team work could be quite difficult because of many factors, but is not a utopia.
Hi Claudio,
More than the test or performance based assessement resutls we could obtain, the real important thing is all the interpretations based on those assessments results we make.Bsed on that interpretations we make decisions and there is the big issue,because our decisions have consequences and sometimes we are not realy aware of the effects those consequences would have in our students'lives.
Post a Comment