Assessment Rant 2012

Assessment for Learning = The “No Zero” Policy

WELCOME BACK TO SCHOOL… it’s the first day back to school and I love looking at Twitter to check out edu-stuff people want to share, contribute or enlighten others.  Well, I’m no different.  One post caught my eye about assessment practices and the “No Zero” policy.  A classic policy implementation problem…

On the one hand, the learner deserves to get a ZERO if they know absolutely NOTHING on the summative assessment exercise (i.e. unit test, final exam, or project).  There is no question in my mind if that the learner is unable to demonstrate ANY UNDERSTANDING of the learning outcomes being evaluated, then yes… the academic performance is zero worthy.

On the other hand, the teacher has provided several formative assessment activities (i.e. assignments, group work, or journals) to know that the the learner knows nothing, the learner understood from these activities that he/she knew nothing, and the feedback provided had no positive affect on the learner’s understanding of the learning outcomes.  The learner is unable to learn any of the content… this is zero worthy.  Think about it… How can a learner know NOTHING by the final assessment?  It’s possible, but not probable.

Here’s some news… The NO ZERO POLICY is MISUNDERSTOOD.  You can give a ZERO if the learner understands NOTHING on the final assessment.  However, giving a ZERO as a means of managing behaviour to punish learners for not handing in their work or completing a task on-time is wrong.  I give this a zero.  Yes, giving zeros may “motivate” learners to get the job done, but not for the right reasons.  Teaching and learning is more complex than Skinner’s behaviourist approach.  Giving grades for “good” learning behaviour or denying grades for “bad” learning behaviour TOKENIZES LEARNING.  In this case, the learner deserves an N, not a zero.  News flash… it’s a work habit problem.

What annoys me more is the idea that giving zeros is preparing learners for the future.  Are marks a form of currency?  I hope not.  If an adult is not working, committing time theft, or under performing, he/she would be warned, investigated, or informed well before pay is deducted.  The adult would be pulled aside, spoken to, and given ways to “make things better.”  This is known as ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING.  Give formative feedback to learners, without punishment, and give opportunities to “make things better” before making a judgement or final evaluation.  It happens in schools.

As you can see, assessment practices are near and dear to my heart as an educator.  The issue with the “No Zero” Policy is not the policy itself, but the disconnection between policy makers and policy implementers as to what the policy intends to achieve and what it would look like in practice.  If the title of the policy is taken at face value, then yes, I would agree that “not being allowed” to give out ZEROS is outrageous.  But I believe that the policy suggests, when grading, the mark should reflect the learners’ understanding of the learning outcomes, not their work habits.