Unlock the Power of Student Self-Assessment

As teachers reflect on their experience with remote learning, many are questioning traditional practices and wondering which of the temporary measures that emerged will remain. Some of the instructional strategies teachers developed during remote learning were short-term emergency conditions that did not last when students returned. However, other adjustments were responses to long-standing deficiencies with in-person learning exposed in the remote environment.

For many teachers, traditional assessment practices did not fit the remote environment. Reliance on conventional assessment designs like select-response, closed-book free-response, and other forms fell flat when students could not be closely monitored. Teachers needed to find new ways to assess students without relying on in-person proctoring. Although not a new format, self-assessment saw an increase in implementation during this time and is a format that teachers could and/or should continue to use. 

What is self-assessment?

Self-assessment is challenging to define because it is similar to many reflective activities, some of which are no more than ill-designed checklists or emojis akin to the “How are you feeling?” prompts on the wall of a hospital room. Self-assessment can be summative or formative. Student self-assessment can be for personal reflection or shared with the instructor and used as part of the grade. Self-assessment is an activity by which students make a judgment about their learning processes, the products of their learning, or their ability to learn (Andrade, 2019). 

Effective Self-Assessment

Research suggests that regular and effective self-assessment improves students’ achievement, self-efficacy, and self-regulation (Yan, Z. & Brown, G., 2017). Students who self-assess are far more likely to understand and make adjustments to their learning process. When given the opportunity to self-assess, students produce work of a higher quality and learn more (Brown, G., & Harris, L., 2014; Panadero, 2017). Researchers disagree on some aspects of what makes self-assessment effective. However, there are some practices that research indicates are universally accepted as beneficial.

1. Formative is better than summative. When asking students to self-assess their work, having the opportunity to make edits before submitting it for a grade is more beneficial than asking students to self-assess a summative assessment that has already been submitted. Students who know they have a chance to improve the product prior to turning it in are more likely to engage in the self-assessment process. If a student knows they won’t have a chance to resubmit an assignment, they are far less likely to learn from the self-assessment.
2. Use a rubric. Self-assessment is of a much higher quality and consistency when students are given a rubric or directed prompts to consider. When assessing a product, use the same rubric you will be using to grade the assignment. When asking students to assess their learning process, use specific reflection questions. The more specific, the better. If questions are left open-ended such as “what did you learn from this” or “what do you think you’ll do differently next time?” are likely to produce generalized answers of little substance. Instead, use directed questions such as “How did you decide which evidence to use to make your argument?” or “Which specific part of this assignment gave you the most trouble?”
3. Self-assessment does not have to be accurate to be effective. There is a great deal of research concerned with the accuracy of student self-assessment (i.e., does a student’s evaluation align with the teacher’s evaluation?). Only when the student’s assessment is being used as part of the grade does the accuracy matter. When a self-assessment is being used in a formative manner, the student receives the same benefits whether their judgment is accurate or not. 
4. Self-assessments should be relatively private. Although assessments do not need to be accurate to be effective, certain levels of public exposure may lead to false statements that damage the effectiveness of the process (inaccurate and knowingly false are not the same thing). When students are asked to publicly share their level of understanding, there is an increase in anxiety that is associated with an increase in false statements. Students are more likely to claim they know something they don’t if the information is displayed for all to see (Brown, G., & Harris, L., 2014). In addition to false statements, publicly shared assessment information may also lead students to incorrectly evaluate their performance or process. If students know they must publicly share their perceptions of their learning, they are more likely to focus on unrelated but positive aspects rather than negative but accurate information. For example, students may report a strong effort when the question is asked for their level of understanding. These situations lead to unrealistic and inaccurate information. 
5. Consistency over time will yield the best results. When self-assessment is a regular part of a classroom experience, students receive compounded benefits. Regular self-assessments provide students with multiple opportunities to reflect on and improve their work and learning processes. Given many opportunities, students get better at self-assessment and their confidence and self-awareness grow. 

Technology Tools for Self-assessment

Self-assessment can be difficult to manage for a large number of students. Fortunately, there are several technology tools that can help make the process more efficient and manageable.

• Schoology—Schoology does not currently have a dedicated self-assessment feature, but you can still use Schoology to have students self-assess. For the assignment you want a student to evaluate, create a second assignment and post the rubric you are using. Students can complete the rubric and submit it as an assignment. In addition, Schoology Assessment can be used to post short, un-scored quizzes that students can opt to take to test their own learning.
• Clips, Flipgrid, or Padlet—If you want students to evaluate their learning process, develop a set of specific questions and post them in Flipgrid or Padlet. Students can respond to the prompts with a quick video, audio, or written response. Students can also use an app like Clips to record a simple video that can be easily shared. In each of these apps, you can have students save their previous entries to form a “Process Portfolio” to see how their learning process has evolved over time. Students in performance classes (music, art, or PE) can also use apps to create videos of a performance to self-evaluate. 
• Google Workspace—Create a rubric in Google Docs and share it with your students. By having a shared rubric with each student, you create a platform for dialogue between the teacher and student, or between students, that allows a student to share feedback with small audiences for additional support and suggestions.

What is your best self-assessment strategy? Comment below and add to the conversation!

References

Andrade, H. L. (2019). A critical review of research on student self-assessment. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087

 Brown, G., & Harris, L. (2014). The future of self-assessment in classroom practice: Reframing self-assessment as a core competency. Frontline Learning Research. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v2i1.24

Chung, H. Q., Chen, V., & Olson, C. B. (2021). The impact of self-assessment, planning and goal setting, and reflection before and after revision on student self-efficacy and writing performance. Reading and Writing, 34(7), 1885–1913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10186-x

Panadero et al. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learn.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/273542/1-s2.0-S1747938X17X00031/1-s2.0-S1747938X17300313/main.pdf?X-Amz-Security-

Yan, Z. & Brown, G. (2017). A cyclical self-assessment process: towards a model of how students engage in self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42:8, 1247-1262, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2016.1260091