Practising what we preach:
Evolving an innovative, progressive continuous assessment procedure for a part-time in-service B Prim Ed degree course through distance education at Fort Hare

Have a careful look at the Results Form for the University of Fort Hare Distance Education Project B Prim Ed on the opposite page. You will see that this is something quite different from what we are used to seeing in tertiary education. The stories of Alan and Viv Kenyon, S’boh Mtaka and Mpithi Mapingana’s will give you some understanding of how this form was derived and experienced. Then, if you want to know more about this programme and the Fort Hare Distance Education Centre, get in touch with them at telephone (040) 639-3082; fax (040) 635-1883; or e-mail disedu@iafrica.com

Alan’s story
Here in South Africa, the deep experience of assessment is of a long tradition where terminal examinations drive the whole curriculum at all levels of education. There is a strong backwash effect right down into the earliest years of formal schooling. But, after 1994, in the new South Africa, strong calls for a paradigm shift in education mandated a new approach to both the curriculum and to assessment. Always ‘easier said than done’.

For our course, there was a strong imperative to evolve and develop a pattern of assessment that went beyond paying lip-service to continuous assessment. Our process of development could not be assessment driven. We needed to evolve an assessment pattern that supported and helped build the learning process. Our challenge was to establish a monitoring, appraisal, and validation process that was rigorous and accountable, but which was also manageable and realistic in our context. And finally, what means or device could we use to capture and go public with the summative moments of our continuous assessment process?

This challenge was hanging over my head in September 1998 when I visited the University of South Australia. Their work on the ‘Development of Graduate Qualities’ really impressed me. I was concerned that something as sophisticated might be technically difficult to administer and share in our developing context. What tool or mechanism could we invent or discover to capture the relative success of the teacher-learners working through our course, so that assessment was both useful and authentic?

The answer suddenly came to me in the Reptile House while on a weekend visit to the Cleland Animal Park. The display case with each different snake had a Relative Danger Index that correlated a set of factors giving a scientific measure of the overall potential danger to humans of each species. How venomous was the poison? What was its habitat? When was it active? What was its disposition?

For each year of the Distance Education Project (DEP) course, we could isolate and identify the few main, or key, attributes (qualities) that we were hoping to develop in our teacher-learners. Teacher-learners could then be ranked, based on the evidence and extent to which they revealed and had developed these attributes/qualities. Then, rather like a pH scale in chemistry, we would be able to arrive at a comparable indicator of progress and development for any teacher-learner in any one year of the course.

Viv’s Story
Initially, as the course evolved, my main concern was how we could work with our abakhwezeli¹ to establish a way of making appraisal² a constructive, learning process, instead of just giving unexplained ‘marks’. It was important to respond to teacher-learners’ work in such a way that they would understand why a piece of work had been assessed as it had. The best way to do this was by giving sympathetic, encouraging, and constructive feedback, emphasizing what was good, pointing out where improvements could be made, and suggesting the means to improve.

When Alan returned from his visit to the University of South Australia in September 1998, we ran the first of several workshops on assessment for our abakhwezeli. At this first Assessment Workshop, we dealt with the appraisal of reports, in particular the report that teacher-learners would write for the very first umthamo³ (Language, Literacy and Communication 1). This forced me to consciously think about, and then articulate, what I wanted the teacher-learners to actually do when they wrote their Reflective Reports.

At the workshop, we looked at three sample reports, ranked them, discussed reasons for the ranking, and shared our rankings. What was remarkable was that there was consensus about the ranking. We discussed the fact that we were not concerned about ‘marks’, as such. We would not give our teacher-learners percentage marks or grades. Instead, we suggested that they should judge each piece of work on a five-point scale from weak to excellent, with regard to meeting the task requirements.

We had learned two important things. First, we had to be very clear about the requirements of any written task. Second, responding as a form of constructive comment was not as easy as simply remarking on or ranking work.

We emphasized the importance of writing a constructive paragraph or more, in which an umkhwezeli would give an explanation for her/his assessment. These justifications would affirm teacher-learners and build on their strengths as a positive way of working on, and improving, their writing skills. We shared our belief that, if someone has something valuable and important to say and the message matters, over time, style and correctness will improve, develop, and grow.

We continued to look at assessment at subsequent workshops in order to gain confidence to pursue this way of appraising our teacher-learners. These workshops provided forums in which abakhwezeli could share their experiences of appraising their teacher-learners’ work.

At the workshop in April 1999, together we evolved a process and procedure for the end of year Portfolio Presentation Assessment for June 1999. This was the culmination of all our ideas and experiences, and resulted in a guiding document which was virtually custom-made for our Project. From this workshop, we drew up a draft Summary-of-Assessment Form together with an explanation about how to complete it.

S’boh’s Story
Our teacher-learners’ Moderation Day was on 2 July 1999. We had to organize an extra session so as to prepare ourselves thoroughly before the actual day of the Portfolio Presentation. Everybody turned up earlier than the normal time, and we spent the whole day together, with everybody wanting me to examine carefully each and every piece of work that he/she had brought. The teacher-learners explained clearly why they had chosen each piece of work from their portfolio as part of their presentation. Once a teacher-learner has explained his/her selection to my satisfaction, she/he would ask me if really I was satisfied and what for suggestions I could make for the presentation on ‘D-day’.

My suggestion always was, ‘Cool down. Just explain why you have decided to include that particular item in your portfolio. What surprised you about it when you were in your class? What in it interested you?’ I was really satisfied by their explanations on that day and on Moderation Day. I therefore feel that almost everything went well with the assessment process on the Moderation of Assessment Day.

I was a bit frightened before Moderation Day, because my teacher-learners were so worried and afraid of the moderation team. They seemed to be expecting the ‘inspectors’, not the ‘caregivers’. I therefore doubted that they would be bold enough to talk and explain as they had done with me, their umkhwezeli. I kept on comforting them, so that they would forget about the ‘monsters’ they were expecting, and would just feel free.

I don’t think that there will be any problems in the next three years, because the teacher-learners are used to this procedure now. They found that there was nothing to be afraid of! Since they have experienced this process, they are aware of what will be expected of them in the future. They know what is assessed (that is, participation, attendance, oral presentations, written reports, and the portfolio presentation). And they know how it is assessed.

I think it would be helpful if the portfolio presentation could be done at a different time of the school year, so that the teacher-learners could put maximum effort into their presentations. Having the portfolio presentation during or towards the mid-year examinations and near end-of-year examination time is not a good time.⁴

Mpithi’s Story
When we began our face-to-face session for the first time, we were introduced to self and peer types of assessment. We all found it hard to believe that your own colleague could assess you, let alone yourself. Our abakhwezeli took their time to convince us that this type of assessment was not only fair and valid, but also more reliable.

First, it nullifies favouritism and victimization, as many people are involved. Second, the assessor will have to state the reason why s/he is awarding that particular assessment. This is very helpful in making improvements as a teacher and a learner. At first, we were afraid to criticize each other, not knowing that criticism can be positive and can lead to increased success and better achievement. There is clearly a need for self and peer assessment, because educators need to reduce their reliance on written tests and examination papers. They also need to increase their range of assessment styles. These assessment styles need to be appropriate to the outcomes that we are assessing. Assessment should be continuous and integrated into our teaching. We have found that self and peer assessment is meaningful, because it is a strategy that can help one improve one’s own work.

The presentation of portfolios is characterized by anxiety and uncertainty. It involves the assessment and evaluation of chosen work from the contents of your concertina file. This includes audio-visual materials (teaching resources used in the classroom, as well as learners’ work, and your observations and comments) and your journal. In fact, portfolio assessment can best be described as a teacher-learner’s detailed curriculum vitae for the year.

Apart from the regular presentation of our work at face-to-face sessions, as a rule we presented our portfolios to our peers and our abakhwezeli twice a year. This is where we present concrete evidence of, and explain the work that we have done. Each teacher-learner is invited to display work and share her/his experiences. It is a forum where a teacher-learner is given the chance to defend (or explain) any surprises or uncommon experiences. It is also an opportunity to explain how you are changing in your classroom.

The second Portfolio Presentation is the climax of the year’s activities. It results in an indication by the moderators whether a teacher-learner is to proceed with merit, proceed, repeat a year or part of a year, or to withdraw from the programme. It is also a moment to celebrate successes and the year’s achievement.

Footnotes
1 The term umkhwezeli is an Nguni word which describes the person who attends to the fire and the pots as the food cooks. We use this term to describe the tutors (abakhwezeli) who mediate our materials.
2 Use of the term appraisal is deliberate and conscious. We have chosen this term over assess or evaluate or test or remark. The imbedded focus on praise implies a positive focus on what is praiseworthy, rather than a negative focus on what is missing or inadequate
3 Because of the many different understandings around the word module, we have taken another Nguni word, meaning a mouthful, to describe our modules: imithamo (plural), umthamo (singular).
4 We have subsequently changed the pattern of our academic year. Currently, an academic year for a group of teacher-learners can begin in April or October and ends in March or September.