Evaluation in personalized teaching
The idea of evaluation is to signal the level of student’s knowledge and skills to the student him/herself and possibly to employers etc. The student benefits from the evaluation because it signals how much the student has learned. It can also function as an incentive to work harder to achieve better grades. Typically, the grading system of a course is connected to the course aims and there are criteria provided for each grade. If one achieves all the goals, one gets top grades, if not the grades are lower. There is also a minimal level one has to accomplish to pass the course. For the education provider, the grading systems make sure, that everyone who graduates, has the skill level required in that specific course or education. The challenge of evaluation is to measure the right things and in a way that is consistent. The assessment should be unambiguous and not vary by the teacher’s mood or liking of a particular student. It would be good to have clear and public criteria for assessment, ie what kind of knowledge, skills, and qualifications are required for each specific grade. These should be reviewed at the beginning of the course. The unambiguity of the assessment is also improved if the different sections of the course have their grades and criteria.
The challenges of grading the personalized accomplishments
When studies are personalized, it means that people study things they do not know before. The skill levels have been mapped at the beginning of the studies. Finnish Ministry of education (2020)[i] provides some guidelines to help to evaluate the skills. The evaluators have to have enough expertise to evaluate the skill levels. They need to know the course requirements and have expertise in at least one area of evaluation. This is not saying much. Perhaps, it is too difficult to give any specific instructions. Evaluation is quite simple when there are clear solutions to problems (for example, test answers in mathematics). In this case, the ideal situation determines in advance how many points you have to get a certain grade. Although not mathematically accurate solutions, clear solutions can be found in many other fields. A clear solution can be found if 1) the task is easy to limit, 2) there is a clear end or solution to the problem, 3) the number of solutions is limited, 4) the solution can be evaluated unambiguously (Vartiainen & al. 2014, 20–21)[ii].
The more personalized and applied the teaching, the more often we encounter situations for which there is no unambiguous solution (Unkari-Virtanen 2018[iii]). Evaluation is difficult if each student’s output is unique and job definition is difficult. It may be that a student is developing something new or trying to solve a problem for which there are many possible solutions or no solutions at all.
Self-evaluation and peer-evaluation
One possible help comes from self-evaluation and peer evaluation. There will likely be an increasing shift in self-assessment and peer review to evaluation, with teaching resources inevitably shrinking in the future. The future of self-assessment has been considered in particular by Panadero et al. (2016)[iv]. According to them, when using self-assessment, it is important to strive to ensure quality and to take into account the different abilities of the students. In addition to self-assessment, it would seem likely to move more to measure skills rather than knowledge (Wagner 2018)[v]. This development is already visible.
According to Pia Niemelä's (2012)[vi] master's degree, peer review works best at the university-level where students are more willing to take responsibility for their studies. According to Niemelä's interviews, some university students find peer review fun and efficient, while others find it frustrating. Frustration is caused by scores perceived as unfair and low trust in other students as feedback providers. Indeed, the inequality of feedback is one of the weaknesses of peer review. Similar results were found in Manninen and Turvanen's (2010)[vii] study of the experiences of Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences students. Students’ opinions about peer review varied a lot: most found it encouraging and nice, but some found it distressing. Peer review and self-assessment reduce teacher work and increase student feedback and are therefore good tools. However, the quality of peer feedback should be ensured.
[i] Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriö, Opintojen henkilökohtaistaminen, Video: yksilölliset opinnot ammatillisessa koulussa
[ii] Vartiainen, P., Ollila, S., Raisio, H. & Lindell, J. 2013. Johtajana kaaoksen reunalla. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
[iii] Unkari-Virtanen, Lenna (2018): ”Arvioinnin kesyt ja viheliäiset haasteet”, Metropolia blogi Hiiltä ja timanttia, 10.12.2018 https://blogit.metropolia.fi/hiilta-ja-timanttia/2018/12/10/arvioinnin-kesyt-ja-viheliaiset-haasteet/
[iv] Panadero, Ernesto, Gavin TL Brown, and Jan-Willem Strijbos (2016): "The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions." Educational Psychology Review 28.4 (2016): 803-830.
[v] Wagner, Kyle (2018): The ‘Show Me’ Grading System of the Future”, getting smart-blog,
[vi] Niemelä, Pia (2012): ”Kerro, kerro kuvastin: tietokoneavusteinen itse-ja vertaisarviointi.” MS thesis. 2012.
[vii] Manninen, Hannu, and Sari Turvanen (2010): "Vertaisarvioinnin käyttömahdollisuudet koulumaailmassa." (2010).
Kommentit
Lähetä kommentti