From the moment of birth, assessment and measurement are part of our lives. Within their first five minutes, newborns are given a quick evaluation of activity, pulse, grimace, appearance, and respiration and assigned a score from 0 to 10. That Apgar score is just the first of dozens of standardized test scores that children will accumulate.
When they enter school, children are tested on their readiness to learn. Later, they are tested to determine their achievement in different subjects, to rank them against others at the same grade level in their state or country, to recommend what vocations they should pursue, and to predict their success in college. In many nations, tests at the conclusion of secondary school determine which, if any, university a student can attend.
During the last 65 years, ASCD publications have charted the education profession's perennial quest to design and use assessments wisely. ASCD and its members have consistently urged clarity about the purposes of evaluation and advocated the use of assessments that are appropriate for their specific purposes. A thread that runs through six decades of writing about assessment is the belief that assessments should answer two questions: How are we doing? How can we do it better?
The "we" in those two questions has broadened over the years as the area of assessment has undergone profound changes. Journal articles and ASCD yearbooks on assessment in the early years reflected their times, centering on assessment of individual student achievement and focusing on developing tests that were fair to students and that tested what was taught. Recognition of the power of external influences, such as nutrition and the family's socio-economic status, represented a paradigm shift and prompted a new look at assessments.
More recently, technology has made it possible to collect and analyze data in ways that were impossible even 20 years ago. In the United States, the federal government has injected itself more deeply into assessment, an area traditionally the province of states and localities. Assessments are now being used to compare schools and districts with one another, to rank states, and to apply sanctions. ASCD publications and resources have responded to these new realities while keeping student learning front and center. For example, recent Educational Leadership themes have included "The Challenges of Accountability" (November 2003); "Assessment to Promote Learning" (November 2005); "NCLB: Taking Stock, Looking Forward" (November 2006); and "Informative Assessment" (December 2007/January 2008).
But even as ASCD responds to evolving challenges, some issues remain constant. In a guest editorial in Educational Leadership 20 years ago (April 1989), Art Costa suggested five approaches to "reassessing assessment": (1) reestablish the school as the locus of accountability; (2) expand the range and variety of the assessment techniques used; (3) systematize this variety of assessment procedures by developing schoolwide plans for collection and use of information; (4) reeducate legislators, parents, board members, and the community to help them understand that standardized test scores are inadequate indicators of the quality of schools, teachers, and students; and (5) remind ourselves that the purpose of evaluation is to enable students to evaluate themselves. Costa's recommendations are still relevant today and are consistent with ASCD's legislative agenda recommending multiple indicators of achievement.
As more nations reach consensus on what skills are essential for success in the 21st century, we can expect yet another chapter to unfold in the extended discussion about good assessment. A continuing challenge will be using assessment to improve learning and encourage reflective practice by students and teachers. Whether or not the education profession masters that challenge is our biggest test.