Chapters 5 &6 in Optiz's text discussed informal and formal assessments. The text provided many examples of formal and informal assessments that can be used, and that most teachers most likely already use day to day in their classroom. Personally I've used checklists, reading attitude surveys, running records, interest inventories, and interviews with my students in the past. I'm also currently using several of these with my tutee. Informal assessments provide the teacher with the opportunity to assess the student easily and drive instruction. The article stated, "are not data driven but rather content and performance driven (Weaver)." "Authentic assessments help teacher measure the students abilities using procedures that simulate the application of these abilities to real life situations (Opitz, et, al., 2011, p. 64)."
Where do the ideas seem to merge? What differences can you discern?
The text and the article both seem to state the same thing. Informal assessment and performance based measures should be used to inform instruction. The article stressed assessment used needs to match the purpose of assessing. I didn't notice any strong differences between my article and the text, however, the text provided excellent examples of formal and informal assessments that could be used with students.
References:
Opitz, M., Rubin, D.,
& Erekson, J. A. (2011). Reading diagnosis and improvement, assessment
and instruction. (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Weaver, B. (n.d.).
Formal versus informal assessments.
Retrieved from
http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/formal-versus-informal-assessments
No comments:
Post a Comment