What inspections tell us about assessment practices in post-primary schools

The curriculum and assessment landscape in post-primary schools in Ireland has experienced significant changes in recent years. The introduction of the Framework for Junior Cycle ( 1) in 2015, the challenges to external assessment for certification experienced during the Covid-19 pandemic and, more recently, the redevelopment programme for senior cycle, set a context in which discussion on assessment is more prevalent.

Often the discourse relates to the two significant assessment events, Junior Cycle and Leaving Certificate, which mark the educational experience of post-primary students. The Leaving Certificate has at its core the accreditation of achievement in learning at the end of formal schooling. However, its use as a selection mechanism by further and higher education providers garners most attention. The forthcoming changes within the redevelopment of senior cycle includes a commitment to include Additional Assessment Components (AACs) for each new and redeveloped subject specification. This provides the opportunity to leverage existing good assessment practice and broaden assessment approaches in teachers’ classroom practice.

Views of learning are relevant to changing views on assessment, with increasing importance placed on the assessment of student learning on an ongoing basis in the classroom. In the everyday life of schools, as teachers observe and interact with their students through their use of formative and summative assessment practices, they can gather a rich evidence base of students’ learning.

Assessment is understood as ‘an ongoing process of gathering evidence to determine what students know, understand and can do’ ( 2). Therefore, assessment needs to address the learning process as well as the learning outcomes ( 3) Newton (2007) proposes that ‘the essential characteristic of summative assessment is that it occurs after the learning has taken place, in contrast to formative assessment which takes place during the learning to improve it’ ( 4). Though this approach reflects distinctive and separate functions of formative and summative assessment, others, including Black (1998), argue that these two functions are ‘two ends of the spectrum with no sharp difference’ ( 5).

The importance of ongoing assessment to support and inform teaching, learning, assessment and planning as outlined in the Framework for Junior Cycle, emphasises the further integration of formative assessment as a normal part of teaching and learning in classrooms.

Changing the understanding of assessment drives and incentivises a different kind of teachers’ practice, and different learner experiences and outcomes. In term of teachers’ practice, this means that assessment becomes something that is planned for as part of the preparation for teaching and learning. Reflecting on how students will be expected to demonstrate their learning supports the provision of learner experiences that are more purposeful and effective. It facilitates the identification and sharing of learning intentions and success criteria with students. It provides motivation and a focus for feedback to students, which in turn support the capacity for self-assessment and peer assessment. Very importantly, this experience of assessment promotes students’ sense of ownership and responsibility regarding their own learning, and the development of student agency. The use of assessment for formative purposes provides an incentive for the use of a range of assessment types and the differentiation of teaching approaches in ways that are responsive to the strengths and needs of the learners.

The Framework for Junior Cycle 2015 provides the basis for post-primary schools to plan high-quality, inclusive and relevant education programmes with improved learning experiences for all students, including those with special educational needs. The most significant change introduced by the Framework for Junior Cycle 2015 was in the area of assessment. It allows for new ways of learning and a broader range of skills to be assessed. There is a dual approach to assessment in subjects ( 6), comprising ongoing classroom-based assessment and a final, externally assessed, state-certified examination.

It is important to note that work related to the classroom-based assessments is best seen as an integral part of ongoing assessment and routine classroom practice ( 7). The purpose of changes to the role of assessment in junior cycle is expressed in the Framework’s statement that ‘all assessment in junior cycle, formative or summative, moment-in-time or ongoing, SEC( 8), NCCA or teacher-designed, should have as its primary purpose, the support of student learning’ ( 9).

The philosophy underlying the assessment approaches promoted in the Framework for Junior Cycle are also at the core of the ongoing redevelopment of senior cycle. The inclusion of an Additional Assessment Component in subjects at senior cycle is framed as one response to consistent calls from students, teachers and parents for change at this final stage of post-primary education. It addresses the need for a greater variety of assessment approaches, greater distribution of the assessment workload across the two years, alleviation of the pressure to perform in a single examination and the enhancement of links between senior cycle and the Framework for Junior Cycle ( 10).

Analysis of reports on inspections of different types conducted in post-primary schools between 1 September 2022 and 31 December 2023 indicates that assessment practices are evolving. Evidence for the findings in these reports comes from a range of sources, including classroom observations, interviews with teachers and school leaders and focus-group discussions with students.

What inspection findings tell us about classroom-based assessments (CBAs)

A majority of teachers and students were positive with regard to their experiences of CBAs. There was a recognition that CBAs provided an opportunity to affirm development in competencies that are not assessed in traditional terminal examinations. Students highlighted the positive impact that CBAs had on their research and presentation skills, and how working on CBAs supported their development as independent learners. This latter point was consistent with teachers’ comments that CBAs provided good opportunities for student reflection and for peer feedback. These findings suggest an increasing awareness of the value of formative assessment in schools where CBAs are used most effectively.

Inspectors noted that CBAs were most effective where they were integrated as part of everyday teaching, learning and assessment processes. The following commentary from a whole-school evaluation report described the positive impact of such an approach on student learning and development:

Inspectors also identified areas for improvement in relation to CBAs. Two issues feature frequently in inspection reports. The first of these relates to scheduling of CBAs in the school calendar. Inspectors often observed that CBAs in multiple subjects were scheduled for a short timeframe in the school year. In these cases, both teachers and students reported that the concentration of assessment events led to increased levels of stress for students. Many schools had not implemented guidance from the Department of Education whereby CBAs are expected to substitute for other assessments, such as house examinations ( 11). The arrangements in these schools contributed significantly to the assessment demands on students and teachers.

The second area that featured frequently in inspection reports was the need to link work on CBAs with day-to-day teaching and learning in the subject. In some cases, the competencies required to work on the CBA represented a significant departure from those usually expected of, or developed by, students in their day-to-day experience at school. Some students reported that the CBA represented their first experience of having to work independently and make decisions about their own learning. In some cases, students stated that the descriptor awarded for the CBA had not been communicated to them. The lack of feedback had a negative impact on students’ engagement with the process. While this may be due to a number of different factors, a key purpose of the CBA process is undermined where this is the case. The CBAs should ‘facilitate developmental feedback to students during their engagement with the assessment task and at the end of the process’ ( 12).

Inspectors’ commentary on these two issues highlights the challenge of using an effective combination of formative and summative assessment practices. Although CBAs were intended to be exemplars of formative assessment, they were often approached and presented as discrete, high-stakes, summative events that were at a remove from the usual process of teaching and learning. The commentary in inspection reports resonates with findings to date of the longitudinal study that the NCCA has commissioned on the introduction of the Framework for Junior Cycle, in which “it was noted that CBAs do not appear to have been experienced as intended' ( 13). In order for that to happen, day-to-day learner experiences need to incorporate the formative assessment approaches that are a feature of CBAs. In so doing, CBAs would come to be regarded as integral to teaching and learning, rather than as a departure from the familiar patterns of teaching and learning.

Learning intentions and success criteria provide key reference points for assessment. A learning intention is generally understood as:

Success criteria are linked to learning intentions. They are developed by the teacher and/or student and describe how the successful achievement of the learning intention might be demonstrated.

In a range of learning contexts across junior cycle and senior cycle, inspectors commented positively on the use of learning intentions and the sharing of learning intentions with students. They noted that the sharing of learning intentions provided clarity for teachers and students with regard to the purpose of the learner experience. When learning intentions are shared with students, they support the students’ capacity for reflection about their own learning and improvement. The effective use of learning intentions was described in the following extract from an inspection report:

The potential for more effective use of success criteria was highlighted frequently in inspection reports for most subjects. The use of success criteria, which should set out clearly for students what is expected in the completion of learning and assessment tasks, is closely linked to the provision of meaningful feedback and with the development of a sense of responsibility for and ownership of learning. The following recommendation was typical of recommendations made in inspection reports across a range of subjects:

The following extract from an inspection report acknowledged the importance of success criteria for effective formative assessment and noted the need for greater alignment of success criteria with teacher-devised learning intentions and the curriculum specification learning outcomes:

The potential for further development in this area of junior cycle assessment is notable in light of findings in the most recent report from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Despite some very positive findings and improvements in Ireland’s relative position internationally, PISA also found that a higher percentage of Irish students experienced problems in motivating themselves to do schoolwork than their international peers during the Covid-19 pandemic ( 15). An increased sense of ownership by students of their work, through a greater understanding of how to develop and enhance that work, could play a part in improving this. While the clarity provided by the effective use of success criteria is not the sole means by which this area might be addressed, it is certainly an important part of good practice.

What inspections tell us about feedback to students

As a key component of formative assessment, high-quality teacher feedback supports students in revisiting aspects of learning that require further attention. By giving and receiving feedback, teachers are empowered to reflect on aspects of their own practice to make the required adaptations to inform and support the direction of learning and teaching.

The following extract from an inspection report describes practices associated with the effective provision of feedback as observed during an inspection. It was followed by a recommendation that these approaches be adopted more widely in the school.

The potential to have a wider range of feedback modes was also noted in some reports. In some instances, inspectors found that the adoption of digital technologies to support feedback was proving very effective. This is evident in the following extracts from two separate inspection reports:

In these schools, it is clear that teachers were adopting innovative and highly effective approaches to leverage digital technology in a manner that not only enhanced their capacity to communicate feedback to students in appropriate ways, but may also support better management of their assessment workload.

What inspection reports say about the Subject Learning and Assessment Review (SLAR) process

Inspection reports highlighting teacher collaboration in designing assessment tasks affirmed this practice and typically recommended its broader adoption across the school. Inspections found that the collaborative design of assessment tasks served as a means of professional development for teachers with regard to assessment literacy. It also helped to refine teachers' practice in evaluating the appropriateness of assessment tasks, ensuring they are closely aligned with the learning underway, the extent to which the tasks supported inclusion and the key feedback to be shared with students.

One specific model of collaboration required by the Framework for Junior Cycle is the subject learning and assessment review (SLAR) process. Teachers of classes completing CBAs are required to engage in SLAR meetings as part of the process. These meetings provide an opportunity for teachers to ‘share and discuss samples of their assessments of student work and build a common understanding about the quality of student learning’ ( 16). SLAR meetings are intended to:

• develop a collegial professional culture
• build confidence about judgements regarding student performance
• ensure consistency and fairness within and across schools
• support a shared understanding of national standards and expectations
• enable teachers to reflect on the assessment process and provide useful feedback to their students (17).

Evidence from inspections indicated that the SLAR process was being implemented effectively. Schools reported positively about teachers’ attendance at SLAR meetings and on the professional development that was taking place as a result. Many teachers identified the collective understanding of standards as the area in which they learned most from the SLAR process. It was interesting that teachers of subjects that were introduced in the earlier implementation phases of junior cycle were more likely to link their learning from SLAR meetings with the activity of teaching, learning and assessment. This may be seen as a positive trend, with increasing experience of the SLAR process correlating with an increased tendency to link the process to teaching, learning and assessment.

SLAR meetings have significant potential as an opportunity for shared sense-making with regard to assessment design, pedagogy, standards and feedback to students. They may have an important part to play in the fostering the culture in which assessment is valued for its formative role as an integral element of the process of teaching and learning.

The design of the junior cycle CBA model centres on teachers’ professionalism and working as co-professionals within schools. The development of teachers’ assessment literacy and skills and a culture of professional collaboration are positive outcomes of the assessment approach. However, the experience with CBAs in some schools indicates that an assessment culture will not be changed by Department circulars alone.

Classroom cultures that value ongoing engagement in formative assessment by teachers and students lead to positive learning experiences. The changes announced to the assessment at senior cycle provides the potential to reduce the dependence on single one-off examinations. It can broaden the understanding of assessment and provide the means to capture learning across senior cycle with a positive effect on teaching and learning. The extension of the range and diversity of assessment practices, including increased use of digital technology, has the inherent potential to improve the learning experiences and motivation of students.

However, this is not without challenge. Broadening assessment approaches requires a high level of assessment literacy among teachers and school leaders. It also requires reflecting on the lessons learned in junior cycle, avoiding developing cultures of over assessment and balancing formative and summative assessment approaches. The evaluative and advisory work of the Inspectorate and the professional learning experiences provided by Oide( 18) will be very important in this regard.

Given the importance of the assessment culture across and within subject departments in post-primary schools, support for school leaders will be of the utmost importance. The development of such a culture will be facilitated by the ongoing redevelopment of curriculum specifications and assessment arrangements at senior cycle.