Katy Purviance
June 2, 2015

How would you feel about learning all the rules and skills of a sport, spending months sweating yourself into good physical condition, but never actually playing the game? How much is traditional schooling like this? Schooling frequently centers on individual concepts, facts, discrete skills, and work habits. But how often does a student encounter opportunities to “put it all together,” the way work is done in the “real world”? How often does a student actually get to step on the field and play “for real”? (Hibbard, 1996)

What is Performance-Based Assessment?
Performance-based assessment (PBA), also known as “alternative or authentic assessment” (Sweet, 1993), requires students to create an answer or a product that demonstrates knowledge and skills, including the process by which they solve problems (Project Appleseed, 2014). In my Show What You Know framework (SWYK) of performance-based assessment, there are virtually endless options; not only is there something for every learning style, the myriad options invite the participation of each sovereign student into the delight of learning. Traditional testing is unable to elicit the same joy and thrill.

Through PBA, students develop “a set of strategies for the acquisition and. application of knowledge, skills, and work habits through the performance of tasks that are meaningful and engaging to students” (Hibbard, 1996). Project Appleseed (2014) categorically describes the vast possibilities of performance-based assessments:

• “Group projects enabling a number of students to work together on a complex problem that requires planning, research, internal discussion, and group presentation.
• “Essays assessing students’ understanding of a subject through a written description, analysis, explanation, or summary.
• “Experiments testing how well students understand scientific concepts and can carry out scientific processes.
• “Demonstrations giving students opportunities to show their mastery of subject-area content and procedures.
• “Portfolios allowing students to provide a broad portrait of their performance through files that contain collections of students’ work, assembled over time.”

This kind of assessment also allows teachers to evaluate “the ability to integrate knowledge across disciplines, contribute to the work of a group, and develop a plan of action when confronted with a new situation” (Project Appleseed, 2014). In the language classroom, for example, students are free to synergize and reinforce their learning by using the new language to demonstrate what they have learned in another class. Students can further develop their multi-disciplinary neural network by showing what they’ve learned in class through the lens of their own special interest.

Unlike traditional and standardized tests, there are no “clear-cut right or wrong answers” when it comes to PBA, only “degrees to which a person is successful or unsuccessful” (Brualdi Timmins, 1998). Further, because the student is the author of their learning pageant, their performance is far more likely to be worthwhile for the student’s own life in a way that traditional testing can never hope to be.

Hibbard further points out that PBAs are “an integral part of the learning” itself (1996). Students who know that they will actually be using what they are learning are more attentive and invested in the classroom.

Advantages of Performance-Based Assessment
There are at least as many reasons to opt for performance-based assessment (PBA) as there are students in a class.

PBA creates the space for greater student involvement: All PBAs “require students to be active participants” (Project Appleseed, 2014).

PBA creates the opportunity for more in-depth learning: One of my definitions of learning is “the proper rearrangement of what you already know to make new information fit.” As students struggle through the process of deciding how they will demonstrate what they’ve learned, they will necessarily find themselves having to organize and reorganize ideas into concepts, and “actively construct their own understanding of the concepts in a rich variety of contexts” (Project Appleseed, 2014). As they and they alone are responsible for this, students become more interested, involved, and invested in their own learning.

PBA fits well with “backward design” curricula: Beginning with a framework of demonstration categories, as with SWYK, prompts teachers to proactively identify a perhaps larger swath of knowledge, skills, awarenesses, and attitudes from which to draw when deciding what to include in the lesson plans.

PBA provides teachers with information about how a student understands and applies knowledge: Using PBAs shows teachers what their students have actually learned, rather than what they were able to memorize, as in traditional testing (Project Appleseed, 2014).

PBA provides teachers with greater and more useful feedback: The manner in which students demonstrate what they’ve learned helps the teacher to understand more about the students’ learning needs. The deeper insight attained by this level of feedback permits teachers to better adjust their methods accordingly (Project Appleseed, 2014).

PBA helps students take a position of authority in their own educations: “[PBAs] also allow students to assess their own progress and, therefore, be more responsible for their education” (Project Appleseed, 2014).

PBA lends to the development of critical thinking: In College Knowledge, author David Conley (2005) reports that higher education faculty value “habits of mind”—including the ability to think critically and analytically, to independently draw inferences and reach conclusions, and to solve problems—even more than they value content knowledge.

PBA better prepares students for the real world than does traditional testing: Traditional testing only reveals whether or not the student knows the (one) correct answer. PBA, on the other hand, allows the student to demonstrate the answer to the question, “How well can you use what you know?” (Hibbard, 1996). PBAs demand creative problem solving and typically have a range of acceptable solutions, answers, or results, all of which “require students to explain their reasoning” (Pecheone, 2008). Students necessarily “see that learning is a process” (Project Appleseed, 2014).

PBA has long-reaching benefits to the economy: “[E]conomic trends and the training needed for the new workforce require that school systems shift from a fact-oriented curriculum to one that emphasizes problem solving and innovation” (Herman, 1992). Fadel further emphasizes the necessity of changing assessment to make students more competitive in our changing economic climate. He declares that assessment will have to:

• “Be largely performance-based. We need to know how students apply content knowledge to critical-thinking, problem-solving, and analytical tasks throughout their education, so that we can help them hone this ability and come to understand that successful learning is as much about the process as it is about facts and figures.
• “Make students’ thinking visible. The assessments should reveal the kinds of conceptual strategies a student uses to solve a problem.
• “Generate data that can be acted upon. Teachers need to be able to understand what the assessment reveals about students’ thinking. And school administrators, policymakers, and teachers need to be able to use this assessment information to determine how to create better opportunities for students.
• “Build capacity in both teachers and students. Assessments should provide frequent opportunity for feedback and revision, so that both teachers and students learn from the process.
• “Be part of a comprehensive and well-aligned continuum. Assessment should be an ongoing process that is well-aligned to the target concepts, or core ideas, reflected in the standards” (Fadel, 2007).

Disadvantages of Performance-Based Assessment
The prospects of grading may deter some teachers from performance-based assessment. Some worry that they just don’t know how to be fair in their assessments (Airasian, 1991). Some teachers have tried PBA in the past and found their results inconclusive (Stiggins, 1994). Further, some critics argue that, due to the subjective nature of grading PBAs, some students may be “unintentionally penalized for such things as having a disability, being from a certain cultural background, or attending classes at a school with limited resources” (Project Appleseed, 2014).

There are no clear right and wrong answers when it comes to PBA; it simply demands a greater degree of subjective judgement than traditional testing methods. Project Appleseed (2014) suggests that teachers create an evaluation rubric that clearly defines the characteristics of poor, average, and excellent performances so teachers can score them in a consistent manner. I myself don’t like using rubrics, instead, I prefer students themselves to use a self-assessment model as discussed later in this paper under the heading “Assessing Performance.”

Why Consider Using Performance-Based Assessment?
Traditional testing requires students to read questions and choose “the answer” from a number of provided responses. Some of these questions are designed specifically to trick students. Some of these responses are designed specifically to trick students. Even if neither the question nor the responses are intended to be tricky, they may be worded in such a way that is unnecessarily confusing or even discriminatory (Teachnology). In almost all cases, the question being asked is asked ex situ, and students are required to answer ex situ. Pecheone posits that performance-based assessment is “authentic when it mimics the kind of work that is done in real-world contexts” (2008). Which begs the corollary: traditional testing is inauthentic.

Performance-based assessments, on the other hand, are a “more valid indicator students’ knowledge and abilities” (Sweet, 1993) in that students must “demonstrate their knowledge, skills, and strategies by creating a response or a product” (Rudner, 1994) (Wiggins, 1989). As the author of both the question and the response, students are able to more accurately elucidate the effect that teaching has had on them. Teachers, in turn, receive better feedback about the efficacy of the teaching and are able to make more precise adjustments going forward.

What do Practitioners Say?

In a study of the Kentucky instructional results system (Kiris), which assessed student progress through a combination of open-ended response items, multiple-choice items, portfolios, and performance events … performance assessment contributed to improved instructional practices: “40 percent of teachers reported that the open-response items and portfolios have a great deal of positive effect on instruction, and virtually none reported that about multiple-choice items” (Matthews, 1995, p. 11).

A report on the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP), another performance-based assessment program, similarly found that “98 percent of school principals felt MSPAP has a positive effect on instruction” (Koretz, 1996, p. 29).

What does the Research Say?

“Mere acquisition of knowledge and skills does not make people into competent thinkers or problem solvers. To know something is not just to passively receive information, but to interpret it and incorporate it; meaningful learning is reflective, constructive and self-regulated” (Wittrock, 1991, Bransford and Vye, 1989, Marzano et al., 1988, Davis et al., 1990). (Herman, p. 15).

“An exclusive reliance on multiple-choice tests that primarily measure basic skills and discrete knowledge—but neglect complex thinking and problem solving—is not consistent with what practitioners in the field know about the kinds of assessments that promote student learning” (Pecheone, 2008).

“Research on thinking and learning processes also shows that performance-based assessment propels the education system in a direction that corresponds with how individuals actually learn” (Ibid.).

Preparing Students for Performance-Based Assessment
Most students are not accustomed to demonstrating what they have learned, and so the teacher will need to prepare her students. With the SWYK framework, each student will likely be doing a different type of project than his/her peers. Each option should be clearly defined at the beginning of the term, including the criteria of what a successful project would comprise, as well as models of successful projects (e.g. a relevant YouTube video) so that students have something against which to judge their work-in-progress. Students go into SWYK day knowing exactly what skills and concepts they need to use in order to show what they know.

Options of Performance-Based Assessment
In my SWYK framework, students can choose to work alone, with a partner, or in a small group. Students can choose a writing genre to demonstrate their knowledge; they may create something outside of class and then “show and tell” the class; they may give a kind of speech or demonstration, or they can give an outright entertaining performance. The chart of options they receive in their syllabus looks like this:

The variety of demonstration modalities caters to student preferences. Allowing students to choose their own options allows them to focus first on their strengths, by which they gain confidence in this assessment method. By ruling that students must choose a different option each time, students gradually find themselves taking on options that they themselves find more challenging. Blank spaces are demonstrative of the fact that this framework is meant to change over time.

As there is no expectation that students are familiar with each option at the outset, the course begins with a research segment. Each student chooses an option that they know little about. During class time, they use available resources (i.e., their smartphones and me) to investigate their option. Each student will make a poster about their option to tell their classmates what they need to know about this option. Some questions a student should consider when making their poster include:

• What is the definition of this?
• What do you need to do for this option?
• What are the criteria for success with this option?
• Does it involve writing? Does it involve speaking? Something else?
• What are some popular examples that people might be familiar with?

During the creation of the posters, the teacher moves around to observe and act as a quality control agent to ensure that the option criteria are accurate. Each student presents their option. The posters are displayed and stay up on the walls for the duration of the course so that students may continue to reference them. As options evolve and new options are invented, new posters are made.

The SWYK framework gives students a lot of freedom; anything that can be done, written, or spoken about in English qualifies as a potential language classroom performance-based assessment. Here are some specific examples of performance-based assessments that use a synergistic blend the SWYK options and the content learned in science and math courses:

• Science Experiment (2 people): Students conduct research on the impacts of fertilizer on local groundwater and then report the results to the class and via an informational brochure (Pecheone, 2008).
• Informative Speech (1 person): Students demonstrate their understanding of interest rates and how it is calculated by shopping for a used-car loan, comparing the interest rates of banks and other lending agencies, and identifying the best deal.
• Advertisement or commercial (1 or 2 people): Students produce a powerful message for their peers by researching how the fine for speeding is determined in their state and demonstrating the negative financial results of speeding.
• Debate (4 people): Students determine the potential need for a new traffic light near their school by observing, counting, and graphing the number of vehicles that cross the intersection (Hibbard, 1996). Students on one side argue for why their community needs this traffic light, while students on the other side illuminate the potential ill effects of such a traffic light. Students can bring any significant results of their study and debate to the next city council meeting.

Assessing Performance
Brualdi (1998) suggests creating and using a rubric to assess performance, typically using a numerical scale where a teacher may rate each criterion on a scale of one to five with one meaning “skill barely present” and five meaning “skill extremely well executed.” Both Airasian (1991) and Stiggins (1994) suggest a kind of simplified “checklist” rubric, wherein the teacher only has to indicate whether or not certain elements are present in the performances. If a rubric is used, the students should play a role in developing the rubric and should be given the rubric at the time the assignment is given.

A departure from the rubric approach, suggested again by both Airasian (1991) and Stiggins (1994), is the Narrative/Anecdotal Approach, which requires teachers to write narrative reports of what was done during each of the performances. From these reports, teachers can determine how well their students met their standards.

While it is a standard procedure for teachers to assess students’ performances, Brualdi (1998) proposes that teachers allow students to assess them themselves. Referenced earlier in this paper under the heading “Disadvantages of Performance-Based Assessment,” this proposed self-assessment model gives students the time and space to deliberate upon the quality of their work and, further, to learn from their successes and failures. In SWYK, students provide one another with peer feedback. Performers meet with their “Critical Friend” to review the feedback and discuss the quality of the work. Together they complete the self-assessment form for the SWYK option they have chosen. Here’s an example of this form: (downloadable pdf)

---

Show What You Know Assessment: Pecha Kucha [Example]
Today’s date:____________________________
Your name:______________________________

Pecha Kucha Requirements:

• Write a true story about yourself.
• Find 20 pictures that help you tell the story.
• Make a slide show with only these ten pictures. Each picture will only be displayed for 20 seconds. This means it should take you 400 seconds to tell your story.
• Rehearse
• Tell your story to the class while showing your slide show.

What goal(s) are you working on for this project? (Look at “Goals & Objectives” in the syllabus for ideas, or use your own goals.)

Write a brief summary of what you did for your SWYK project:

How do you feel about what you did? (Circle one)
Fantastic! Good Okay Not Good Awful

Summarize the feedback you received:
People liked…

People didn’t like…

Give this form to your Critical Friend, and ask them to write what they thought about your performance.

What grade would you give yourself? Please explain why.

Bring this form and all peer feedback to our next conference.

---

This form, plus the other students’ feedback, and any tangible SWYK work are to be submitted to the teacher. Students are encouraged to meet with the teacher once or twice a month to discuss the form(s) and the student’s progress. Together they will use this documentation, the teacher’s notes, and any other work (e.g. the student’s dialogue journal) to determine the student’s grade for the unit.

Evaluating Performance-Based Assessments
How can a teacher determine if their PBA options are working for any particular class? Which ones could be tweaked? Which ones should be thrown out altogether?

Project Appleseed (2014) suggests these criteria:

• Does the performance assessment cover important skills and knowledge?
• Are the [assessment options] varied to fairly test students having different experiences, backgrounds, and motivations?
• Does the assessment give students worthwhile educational experiences?
• Does the assessment require students to use higher level thinking and problem-solving skills?
• Are teachers receiving training and assistance in designing and using performance assessments?

The options in my SWYK framework are meant to evolve. Only by seeing how students struggle with the options will the hidden strengths and weaknesses be revealed. The framework has “Your Choice” options to further encourage student inventiveness.

References

Airasian, P.W. (1991). Classroom assessment. New York : McGraw-Hill.

Brualdi Timmins, Amy C. (1998). Implementing performance assessment in the classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 6(2). Retrieved May 9, 2015 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=6&n=2.

Conley, D. T. (2005). College knowledge: What it really takes for students to succeed and what we can do to get them ready. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hibbard, K. M. and others. (1996). A teacher’s guide to performance-based learning and assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Fadel, C., Honey, M., & Pasnik, S. (2007, May 18). Assessment in the age of innovation. Education Week, 26(38), 34, 40. Retrieved May 21, 2015, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/05/23/38fadel.h26.html

Herman, J. L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Koretz, D. M., Mitchell, K., Barron, S. L., & Keith, S. (1996). The perceived effects of the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program: Final report (CSE technical report no. 409). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.

Matthews, B. (1995). The implementation of performance assessment in Kentucky classrooms. Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.

Project Appleseed. Performance Based Assessment. (2014). Retrieved May 16, 2015, from http://www.projectappleseed.org/#!assessment/cwvf

Teachnology. Performance Based Assessment. (n.d.). Retrieved May 16, 2015, from http://www.teach-nology.com/currenttrends/alternative_assessment/performance_based/

Pecheone, R. (2008). Stanford SRN Informational Booklet. Retrieved May 16, 2015, from https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/events/materials/2011-06-linked-learning-performance-based-assessment.pdf

Rudner, L. M., & Boston, c. (1994). Performance assessment. ERIC Review, 3(1), 2–12.

Stiggins, R. J. (1994). Student-centered classroom assessment. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Sweet, D. (1993, September). Performance Assessment. Retrieved May 16, 2015, from https://www2.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/perfasse.html

Wiggins, G. (1989, May). A true test: toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(9), 703-713.