11.3 Assessment & Evaluation under Growing Success

11.3 Assessment & Evaluation under Growing Success

Quick Summary: Assessment, evaluation, and reporting in Ontario public schools are governed by the landmark Ministry of Education policy document Growing Success: Assessment, Evaluation, and Reporting in Ontario Schools (2010). The policy mandates three distinct assessment purposes (Assessment FOR, AS, and OF Learning), evaluates student work across four Achievement Chart categories (Knowledge and Understanding, Thinking, Communication, Application), and benchmarks performance against a 4-Level scale where Level 3 (70–79%) represents the provincial standard.

---

Core Philosophy of Growing Success (2010)

The fundamental purpose of assessment in Ontario schools is to improve student learning. Growing Success establishes a clear policy framework ensuring that assessment practices are fair, transparent, equitable, and supportive of all students (including English Language Learners and students with Individual Education Plans).

graph TD
    GS["Growing Success Policy Framework (2010)"]
    
    GS --> P1["1. Assessment FOR Learning<br/>(Diagnostic & Formative)<br/>Teacher Feedback / No Marks"]
    GS --> P2["2. Assessment AS Learning<br/>(Metacognitive Formative)<br/>Self & Peer Assessment"]
    GS --> P3["3. Assessment OF Learning<br/>(Summative Evaluation)<br/>Grading & Report Cards"]
    
    P1 & P2 & P3 --> TRI["Triangulation of Assessment Evidence<br/>Observations + Conversations + Student Products"]

---

The Three Purposes of Assessment

Growing Success categorizes assessment into three distinct operational purposes based on timing, audience, and usage:

1. Assessment FOR Learning (Diagnostic & Formative)

• Timing: Occurs before instruction (diagnostic) and continuously throughout instruction (formative).
• Primary Purpose: To gather evidence of student readiness and learning progress so teachers can adjust instructional strategies, scaffold learning, and provide targeted descriptive feedback.
• Grading Rule: Results of assessment for learning are not included in the determination of report card grades. Teachers may record and share them, but they inform instruction and feedback rather than the grade.
• Examples: Diagnostic pre-tests, entry tickets, observational checklists during group work, teacher-student conferencing notes.

2. Assessment AS Learning (Metacognitive Formative)

• Timing: Occurs continuously throughout the learning process alongside Assessment FOR Learning.
• Primary Purpose: To foster student metacognition, self-regulation, and ownership of learning. Students learn to reflect on their mathematical thinking, evaluate their own work against co-constructed success criteria, and set personal learning goals.
• Grading Rule: Like assessment for learning, results of assessment as learning are not included in the determination of report card grades.
• Examples: Student self-assessment rubrics, peer feedback checklists, learning logs, exit tickets reflecting on personal growth.

3. Assessment OF Learning (Summative Evaluation)

• Timing: Occurs at or near the completion of a period of learning (end of a unit, term, or course).
• Primary Purpose: To measure student achievement against provincial curriculum expectations and assign marks or levels for official reporting (report cards).
• Grading Rule: Used directly to determine report card grades and summary achievement levels.
• Examples: Unit rich performance tasks, summative math tests, final portfolio evaluations, standardized EQAO assessments.

---

The Ontario Achievement Chart for Mathematics

The Achievement Chart provides a rigorous, standardized framework for assessing and evaluating student work across four broad categories of knowledge and skills:

graph TD
    AC["Ontario Achievement Chart for Mathematics"]
    
    AC --> KU["Knowledge & Understanding<br/>Content recall, basic algorithms & facts"]
    AC --> TH["Thinking<br/>Critical thinking, planning & problem-solving"]
    AC --> COMM["Communication<br/>Expressing ideas, symbols & terminology"]
    AC --> APP["Application<br/>Transferring concepts to real-world contexts"]

The Four Categories Breakdown

---

The 4-Level Performance Scale & Provincial Standard

Student achievement in Ontario is evaluated against a criterion-referenced 4-Level Performance Scale. Level 3 represents the target benchmark for all Ontario students.

$\mathbf{\text{Level 3 (70--79\%)} = \text{The Provincial Standard}}$

---

Triangulation of Assessment Evidence & Descriptive Feedback

1. Triangulation of Evidence

To ensure that evaluation is reliable and valid, Growing Success mandates that teachers collect assessment evidence from three distinct sources:

graph LR
    OBS["1. OBSERVATIONS<br/>(Teacher watching student math inquiry)"] --- CONV["2. CONVERSATIONS<br/>(Math interviews & conferencing)"]
    CONV --- PROD["3. PRODUCTS<br/>(Tests, rich tasks & portfolios)"]
    PROD --- OBS

Relying solely on paper-and-pencil tests (Products) distorts student achievement. Including Observations and Conversations provides a complete picture of student mathematical competence.

2. Principles of Effective Descriptive Feedback

Descriptive feedback during formative learning stages is significantly more effective than letter grades or numerical scores. Effective feedback follows the Medal & Mission model:

• Specific and Actionable: Pinpoints exactly what was done correctly (Medal) and provides a concrete next step for improvement (Mission).
• Aligned to Learning Goals & Success Criteria: Refers explicitly to co-constructed success criteria rather than vague praise ("Good effort!").
• Timely: Provided while the student is still engaged in the learning task, allowing immediate opportunities to apply feedback.

Example of Effective Descriptive Feedback:

• Ineffective (Evaluative): "6/10. Messy work and wrong answers on page 2."
• Effective (Descriptive): "Medal: You correctly set up the linear equation $C = 15n + 50$ and identified the slope accurately. Mission: On question 4, remember to include units ($/km) in your final rate sentence, and check your subtraction when solving $15n = 135$. Please revise question 4 and resubmit."

---

Classroom Assessment Scenario & Grading Walkthrough

Classroom Scenario: A Grade 8 student completes a summative rich performance task involving designing a school garden plot within a fixed budget.

• Knowledge & Understanding: Correctly recalls area formulas ($A = lw$) and multiplies decimal costs accurately (100% accuracy on computation). $\rightarrow$ Level 4 (92%).
• Thinking: Selects an appropriate optimization strategy, but misses one minor constraint in the budget optimization table. $\rightarrow$ Level 3 (76%).
• Communication: Written work is neatly organized, but the student omits metric squared units ($ ext{m}^2$) from final statements and omits axis labels on the graph. $\rightarrow$ Level 2 (65%).
• Application: Successfully connects garden dimensions to real-world store pricing and calculates 13% HST correctly. $\rightarrow$ Level 4 (85%).

Evaluation Synthesis: Rather than averaging numbers mechanically, the teacher reviews the overall profile against the Achievement Chart. The student demonstrates solid performance across Knowledge and Application (Level 4) and Thinking (Level 3), but requires targeted instruction in Communication (Level 2). The overall synthesis places the student's work at Level 3+ (78%), securely meeting the provincial standard while providing actionable feedback to improve mathematical communication.