My educational journey: Reflections on the impact of assessment methods on students’ mindsets.
by George Kanellopoulos
Having completed my undergraduate degree in physics at Edinburgh University, I have now fully experienced four very different educational frameworks over my academic life, a milestone that has prompted me to reflect on my different experiences of assessment, which might be of interest to readers. From primary to tertiary education, controlled and standardised testing and exams have been a common characteristic; however, their implementation and subsequent psychological impact on me and my approach towards education have been markedly different.
From ages 6 to 12, I attended a Greek state primary school where the curriculum mandated small tests after each unit, graded out of 10, which contributed to the end-of-year score for the according subject. While emphasis was placed on performing well in these tests, teachers repeatedly urged us to focus on their comments rather than the test grade. We were constantly reminded that our primary goal was to develop key skills (arithmetic, writing, language) for secondary education. Teachers often added extra tests to reinforce core skills and ensure we met benchmarks. By year’s end, final grades were often treated as a formality, with teachers focusing more on feedback about skills and attitudes needing improvement, using past test results as evidence. This was greatly facilitated by the fact that they often taught their allocated class, comprising several subjects; these built a broader understanding of a student’s learning development and a more extensive relationship with the class, improving communication. It might interest readers that teachers also utilised their role to occasionally promote the use of skills and knowledge across subjects, even though the national curriculum did not officially provide any specifications on that.
This view of assessment did not follow on into my secondary education, where I attended both the Greek curriculum and the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme (IB MYP) from ages 12 to 16. In the Greek system a year was split into semesters, with grades for each subject issued at the end of each semester, culminating in controlled revision exams. The final grade for each subject was a combination of these semester grades and the end-of-year exam score, all calculated on a scale of 0 to 20. Notably, every grade report included not only individual subject grades but also the corresponding average class grade, creating a strong sense of competition and relative achievement among students.
Overall, there were fewer class tests and teachers did not provide a uniform model of how they arrived at our semester grades, perhaps because the number of learning outcomes was greater and their descriptions more obscure relative to primary education. As a result, end of year exams were viewed as the most controllable path to achieving a desirable final grade. These had a standardised structure, with the basis consisting of knowledge recall questions followed by problem-based questions of scaling familiarity and complexity. The structure motivated most students to focus on knowledge retention over skills development, to maximise grade achievement.
The IB MYP, in contrast, used an A-F grading system with each grade linked to subject specific skills and learning outcomes. Its summative assessment methods were varied, including project work, presentations, and problem-based tasks, often encouraging interdisciplinary thinking, which were spread over the year. For example, one MYP assessment asked students to combine their historical knowledge of ancient Greek monuments with their understanding of physics to roughly outline possible transport and construction methods used by ancient Greek cities. MYP feedback forms were commentary-focused and did not provide a platform for competition, which when coupled with a lacklustre communication of their purpose by most teachers meant that parents paid limited attention to them and as such students continued to focus their effort on the Greek exams.
From 16-18, I completed the IB Diploma Programme, which required me taking six subjects from different disciplines or subject areas (i.e. language and literature, social sciences, mathematics, etc.). The final grade for each subject was on a scale from 1-7 with each grade level accompanied by extensive skills and outcomes descriptors, while for most subjects, one quarter of the final grade was contributed by project-based coursework and the rest from a set of controlled exams. Despite having holistic thinking at its core, the IB diploma was seen by most of my cohort as a path to higher education and as such, achieving the grades required to match our conditional offers, often took priority over exploring interests. Emblematically, during the final year, time that was previously allocated for general interest discussion with teachers was replaced by exam technique workshops, matching a general shift towards exam focused feedback. The sentiment to maximise grades was so prevalent that even when given wide freedom to choose the format and topic of our project-based assessments, most of us picked topics suggested by our teachers and deemed more likely to achieve an adequate grade. Notably, while interdisciplinary projects were allowed to be submitted, this was strongly discouraged by teachers in many cases, as they were less confident in how external examiners would apply the standardised marking criteria to them.
Controlled end-of-year exams were structured relatively differently in my undergraduate studies. Knowledge recall questions carried relatively less weight and problem-based questions consistently required applying a combination of taught concepts. It is also noteworthy that due to a variation of examination methods between courses, by the time of my final year there was a clear distinction between students that preferred coursework-based examination over those that favoured exam based.
the psychological impact of exams
Overall, while my primary school solely used controlled exams for summative assessment, the way in which teachers framed them, instilled a positive focus on attaining skills and knowledge by working towards clear benchmarks. This lack of framing during middle years, led to a grade obsession that meant that the balance of learning styles and student motivation were very sensitive to the mode and structure of exams. My experience of the IB programmes displayed that a focus on achieving grades reduced risk-taking and as such students’ creativity and likelihood of pursuing interdisciplinary learning, regardless of examination mode. Nevertheless, the IB MYP demonstrated that spreading the weight of summative grades across examinations and time, greatly reduced the psychological impact of exams on students’ attitude.
A grading system offers a standardised way of tracking learner progress and signalling a capacity for improvement, yet my experience has shown that grades can dominate students’ attention, negatively impact their learning and blur communication with their teacher. While heavily weighted end of year-controlled exams can exacerbate this issue, in general they are not entirely unproductive. My experience has shown that employing a mix of summative assessment types results in more constructive student mindsets. Ultimately my reflection raised some questions: Are grades an appropriate tool for teacher-student communication? Could an educational framework forego grades in favour of skills and learning outcomes rubrics? Are controlled exams entirely incompatible with courses that prioritise risk taking and creativity?
George Kanellopoulos was born and raised in Athens, Greece, is studying towards a Physics MPhys degree in Edinburgh University and plans to pursue a career in law after graduation. While developing his interest to explore the intersection of law with physics, George has created and delivered a series of interdisciplinary practical workshops for s3-4 students on patent law and physics.
 |
|
Thanks George. Of course the elephant in this room is the question Why assessment?
The obvious response , I.e. to support the learner in their learning journey (otherwise what are we all here for?) is too easily replaced by ‘ to rank order students or perhaps to rank order schools or teachers. As a teacher, examiner, chief examiner and inspector I have been at the centre of many an examination/assessment process. Mostly the process has been impersonal by design (candidates are numbers not people) and governed by the need to ensure mark allocation is standardised across teams of markers. Hence a reliance on closed questions, coded answers and factual or process recall.
Against this backdrop the movement towards formative assessment, e.g. publications such as Inside the Black Box came as a breath of fresh air. Modern teacher educators are doing their best to develop the profession in new directions. It is a slow process.