Maybe we should be searching for characteristics that define “messy assessment.” I think one hallmark would be that the assignment cannot be faked: it can’t be copied or merely plagiarized. It sounds like you are challenging your students to think on their own, synthesize ideas from real-world news sources, and represent their understanding of those ideas in their own words using the language. This sounds like a winning combination ot me.

Often we get hung up on baggage that goes with words for which we have prior schema. Maybe “standards” and “objectives” fit into this mold. Just as I would never advocate doing away with assessment in education, neither would I advocate doing away with objectives. I think it is critical we focus on how we define those objectives and how they are operationized into tasks: inside and outside the classroom.

Another hallmark of messy assessment can involve audience. If we are just doing something for an audience of one (the teacher) then there may be a higher chance the activity is a fake one: not very authentic. If we are doing it for a broader audience, especially one that extends beyond the walls of the traditional classroom, then chances could be higher that the work we’ll do will be authentic. And the assessment can be messy.

Thanks for posing these challenging questions, Aaron. I will be eager to hear what others thing too.

I agree with one addition. Assessment might drive where we’re going (although we tend to think of it as setting up an accountablility system – measure what we value), but we need to bridge the content/curriculum and the assessment. You hint at this with your assault on worksheets. We need to address instruction.

Recently, in a series of posts, I’ve talked about this very issue. In Part 2 of The Answer to Curriculum Might Not Be Content, I make the case that hard to teach kids can learn the high status curriculum and point to examples of educators who have been successful. And in Part 3, I offer ideas and resources of where we might look for help on what our instruction should look like so both hard to teach and easy to teach students can learn to high standards

I really enjoyed this post. Maybe I’m not fully understanding you here, and so I would like to venture asking you a question.

I work as an ESL teacher in Mexico City, and I’m pushing to use standards in our classes. *cringe* Now, this is where my question lies: The standards I am referring to are in relation to describing what a student should be able to do before he/she can move onto the next level of learning English.

These standards, or proficiency statements, refer to spoken, listening, reading, and writing skills that we need to help our students be able to do. Does that make sense?

I guess I’m wondering if you agree with these kinds of standards. They totally, in my humble opinion, step away from the traditional classroom assessment and embrace what you call “messy assessment.”

Why they are messy:
An example of a Spoken Standard: “I can ask someone else and talk about my day-to-day activites and routine work requirements.”

How do you cleanly evaluate that? It defies a handout (loved that line by the way). It doesn’t fit nicely into a test that you can memorize for, and then later forget. It has been, so far, very messy.

Here’s what I am thinking of doing with this standard: I am working with my students to help them prepare what they would say to meet this statement. (We’re on class 3 around this so far.) When I say prepare, we’re listening to authentic interviews from CNN, National Public Radio etc where people describe their daily routines, we’re using that audio to glean useful language and notice verbs etc., and we’re doing a lot of writing.
I’m encouraging them to think about, and reflect upon their work. We’re writing it down, we’re exchanging and writing comments on each other’s work (prepping for an introduction to blogging)
The goal is not a test. The goal is to record them in conversation, and insert that conversation in a portfolio as proof that they have met the standard.

Wes, I hope this makes a little bit of sense, but I really wanted to ask you for your opinion. Do you think this is messy? Or do you think this is an example of an evil standard?