A TEACHER’S AUTONOMY IN ASSESSING STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE: A BRIEF CONCEPTUAL REVIEW ON THE ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES

Wamaungo Juma Abdu

Abstract


In formal schooling, testing/ or assessments are always done on entry, and on exit of the student. Assessment during entry is  carried out to assess the entry behaviour of a student, while the on-exit assessment is conducted to know how well students have achieved on the learning objectives. This means that assessment of a student has always had a strong foundation in the ‘hands of the teacher’.  Having taught, a teacher understands the students than any other assessor or evaluator. However, this is not the case in most countries, more so in the developing world, where students’ testing/assessment has always been done by the national examination bodies, a thing which terminates the teacher’s role in student’s assessment, hence hindering sincere evaluation of learners. Mr. Obama describes such a situation as teachers forced to spend their academic years preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests (Cody, 2011). This Obama comment implies that teachers should be given authority in a substantive manner towards a more balanced method for evaluating students learning and achievement. In this paper therefore, I describe the need for a teacher’s autonomy in testing and or assessing students’ performance [school assessment] versus the national examinations organized by the national examination body under the ministry of education..

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ali, S and Rizvi, M. (Ed.). (2007). Quality in education: Teaching and leadership in challenging times. Vol. 2. Karachi: Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development. Retrieved from http://ecommons.aku.edu/books/7.

Brown, A. (2018). The Advantages of Using Chalkboards in Teaching. Retrieved from https://www.theclassroom.com/advantages-using-chalkboards-teaching-5872788.html.

Cody, A. (2011). Obama Blasts His Own Education Policies, Living in Dialogue. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in dialogue/2011/03/obamas_radical_critique_of_tes.html.

Eurydice. (2008). Levels of Autonomy and Responsibilities of Teachers in Europe. Belgium: Eurydice, European Unit, Avenue Louise 240.

Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond Testing: towards a Theory of Educational Assessment(London, Falmer Press).

Hanushek, A.E and Wößmann, L. (2007). Education Quality and Economic Growth. THE WORLD BANK: Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/Resources/278200-1099079877269/547664-1099079934475/Edu_Quality_Economic_Growth.pdf.

Harker, A. O. D. (1911). The Use of Mandamus to Compel Educational Institutions to Confer Degrees, The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 20, No. 5 (Mar., 1911), pp. 341-352.

Little, D. (2007a). Learner autonomy. Dublin, Authentik.

Little, W. J. (1990b). The Persistence of Privacy: Autonomy and Initiative in Teachers’ Professional Relations, Teachers College Record, Volume 91, Number 4, Summer 1990.

Littlewood, W. (1996). Autonomy: An autonomy and framework. System, 24(4), 427-435.

McClain, L., Gulbis, A and Hays, D. (2017). Honesty on student evaluations of teaching: effectiveness, purpose, and timing matter! Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 369–385. doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1350828.

NCTE. (2009). National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education: Towards Preparing Professional and Humane Teacher. Retrieved from https://www.ncte.gov.in/Website/PDF/NCFTE_2010.pdf.

OECD. (2013). Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/synergies-for-better-learning.htm.

OECD. (2009). Teacher Evaluation: A Conceptual Framework and examples of Country Practices. Mexico, International Practices, Criteria and Mechanisms, held in Mexico City on 1-2 December 2009.

OECD/CERI. (2008). Assessment for Learning Formative Assessment: OECD/CERI International Conference “Learning in the 21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy”. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/site/educeri21st/40600533.pdf.

Osmankovic, J., Jahic, H and Sehic, E. (2011). Education in economic theory. Econ Rev-J Econ Bus 9(1):63–79

Ozturk, I. (2001). The Role of Education in Economic Development: A Theoretical Perspective, Journal of Rural Development and Administration, Volume XXXIII, No. 1, Winter 2001, pp. 39-47.

Price, M. E and Verhulst, S. (2000). The concept of self-regulation and the internet. In J. Waltermann & M. Machill (Eds.), Protecting our children on the internet: Towards a new culture of responsibility(pp. 133-198). Bertelsmann Foundation Publishers. Retrieved fromhttp://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/142.

Rand Education Research Brief. (2004).“The Promise and Peril of Using Value-Added Modeling to Measure Teacher Effectiveness.” Santa Monica, Ca.: Rand Education.

Reece, I. and Walker, S. (2000). Teaching, training and learning a practical guide. 4th Edition, Business Education Publishers Limited, Sunderland.

Sehrawat, J. (2014). Teacher Autonomy: Key to Teaching success, HARTIYAM INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATION & RESEARCHA: quarterly peer reviewed International Journal of Research& Education, Volume4, Issue 1, December 2014, ISSN:2277-1255.

Sinclair, J. (1995). Collins COBUILD English dictionary, COBUILD series. London: Harper Collins.

Strong, E.G.L. (2012). A Psychometric Study of the Teacher Work-Autonomy Scale with a Sample of U.S. Teachers. Dissertations Presented to Lehigh University.

The White House. (2012). K-12 Education. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/education/k-12.

Wamaungo, J.A. (2014). Education and microfinance as a combined empowerment approach for the microfinance clients: A multiple cases study of two local microfinance organisations in Bandung in Indonesia, submitted to the school of postgraduate studies, January 15, 2015

Webb, M. (2010). Beginning teacher education and collaborative formative e‐assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 597–618. doi:10.1080/02602931003782541.

William, P and Ochan, KP. (2011). How to Teach Now: Five Keys to Personalized Learning in the Global Classroom. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/earr.v3i1.21717

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Educational Administration Research and Review



Educational Administration Research and Review is issued by Educational Administration Program,
School of Post Graduate, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.