SUMMARY This research provides an outline for master degree students to conduct quantitative research and qualitative research focusing on art assessment. As the researcher stated, rubrics and controlled task portfolios can be productive formats for collecting data. This research investigated the use of the authentic assessment tools (rubrics, student digital portfolios) to document student growth in a middle school art classroom, and it included a pre- and post- instruction artwork that was assessed with the created rubrics. The procedure of the study was organized into two units of instruction, figure drawing and landscape painting. Students in this study participated in three figure drawings first using a live model prior to drawing instruction taking place. Pre-instruction drawings were assessed with a created rubrics and the researcher assessed the student drawings on the same document that the students used for self-assessment. Next, drawing instruction took place employing teacher demonstrations, and the post-instruction drawings were self-assessed again by the students and then assessed by the researcher on the same form. The researcher did the same thing during teaching landscape painting. In the closing part, students were required to write reflective artist statements to demonstrate their journey learning how to draw and paint in accordance with the lessons, including the instructional objectives and learned vocabulary. All artwork, assessments, and written statements were compiled into digital portfolios for the organization of the data. This assessment tool was designed to test the viability of using detailed rubrics and performance assessments to provide data on student growth and achievement as measures to determine teacher performance evaluation requirements. In addition, the artwork created in this study was additionally assessed by another middle school art educator in the study school district. This art teacher blindly assessed student works using the same assessment tool as did the student for his/her self-assessment. It was hoped that inter-rater reliability would exist between the researcher and the other art educator. Based on this study, the researcher recognized that it was evident in the data and student artwork images that growth was achieved by comparing and analyzing the scores reported in the pre- and post-assessments. In regard to the students who demonstrated little growth; effort and daily progress played a significant role in their lack of improvement in achievement. Daily progress and effort are important factors in student achievement scores. Certainly, students who needed additional time or assistance may have been capable of showing a higher percentage of growth. The researcher believes that authentic art assessments for middle school students should encompass more than two units of art production. Second, the researcher found that students were more critical of their work due to their increased understanding of the medium in which it was created. Third, the students’ writings show that they were able to recognized the growth they had made and also improvements they still needed to make. All in all, this study was limited by the length of art class, and the minutes in class which determined the duration of the two units of instruction. However, the assessment tool successfully documented the percentage of student growth as a result of the units of instruction. It also provided a means to compare teacher and student assessment scores and documented the benefits of using written artist statements. As a result, this assessment was beneficial and informative. RESEARCH PROBLEM The problem of this research is clearly stated. As the researcher claimed, in contrast to core curriculums, art education does not typically assess students using standardized testing, and a standardized method of assessing student achievement in art is not currently in place at the school district in which this study takes place. What is more, a detailed description of the new teacher evaluation standards and criteria places a heavy weight on student academic progress in her state. Certainly, the purpose of the research is discussed. The overall objective of this study is not only to create an assessment model for the current classroom, but also one that may be adapted to meet the needs of other art teachers and their art programs. Furthermore, the researcher defined several significant terms that the viewers need to know, such as Alternative Assessment, Analytic Scoring, Authentic Assessment, Confirmability, Credibility, Formative Assessment, Performance Assessment, Rubric, Summative Assessment, etc. LITERATURE REVIEW The review of previous research is well organized. This research literature review is divided into three parts, including Assessment, Rubrics, and Digital Portfolios. The researcher used the paper results of Huffman (1988), Garrison and Ehringhaus (2012), and Zimmerman (1997) to describe the importance of assessment and how it improves students’ learning. What is more, the researcher cited some research results from Gardner (2006), Huffman (1998), Boughton (1997), Kimberly Bartel (2003) and Madeja (2004) describing how rubrics work in the classroom and how rubrics and controlled task portfolios can be productive formats for collecting the data. Furthermore, the researcher utilized the results from Madeja (2004), Dorn & Sabol (2006) that supported the key components of this research study, and it expressed the need for development in art education that results in measurable data as well as supports the use of authentic assessment. It also supported two main methods for assessment and data collection, digital portfolios and the use of rubrics. Most of the cited resources are current, while there are two papers cited from the last century. RESEARCH QUESTIONS or HYPOTHESES The research questions are clearly stated which are listed below.
DATA SOURCES/SAMPLING The data source and the method of selection are clearly described in this research paper. The researcher conducted this research in a middle school located in a rural area of Virginia. Participants were sixth grade art students during the fall semester in which the study occurs. These sixteen students have had previous art instruction during their elementary education. Nine of the sixteen students participating have attended the same elementary school and received the same art instruction for their entire elementary school experience. The other six students in the sample transferred in, receiving more than three years in the elementary school that feeds into the study middle school. MEASUREMENT TOOLS An adequate description of all measurement tools is provided. In the methodology part, the author described several tools that she used. In order to measure the correlations, between student self-assessment and teacher assessment, teacher assessments and student self-assessment were recorded on the same document. Similarities and differences in the scores will then be visually represented and described as a percentage of difference. Assessment of the pre-instructional drawings and the assessment of the post-instructional drawings will be compared for student scores that are aligned with the scores of the educator. The validity and reliability data are reported in her research. She stated that a fellow art teacher in the school system participated in peer debriefing as well as an audit of the study. Peer debriefing is a means of supporting the credibility of a study. METHODOLOGY/PROCEDURES The descriptions of the methods and procedures are provided adequately. The author talked about the procedure in detail in the chapter 3. First, all forms, letters, and the proposal for this study were reviewed by the Institutional Review Board at James Madison University. The procedure of the study was organized into two units of instruction, painting and drawing. The focus of the drawing unit is figure drawing from a live model. This unit also includes instruction in the use of contour line to describe form, representation of standard human proportion, representation of proportion of facial features, and the use of value to describe form. Two days were allotted for the pre-instruction drawings which included four ten-minute poses. Students volunteered to model. Models rotated and all students drew the same four poses. Students submitted what they believed to be their best two drawings to be assessed. Ten fifty-minute class periods were dedicated to the implementation of this drawing unit. Detailed descriptions and examples of the criteria on the drawing assessment will be provided to the students before they self-assess. On day three of the drawing unit, following the introduction of artist images and vocabulary, students self-assessed their pre-instruction drawings. Students were introduced to the assessment tools. Rubrics, criteria, and the four achievement levels were explained in detail. Students were guided through their self-assessment as a copy of the assessment tool was projected and read aloud to them. Students had begun to develop the skills assessed on the rubrics and had viewed and discussed examples of the criteria in relation to achievement levels. Throughout the units students were directed back to the assessment tool as it clearly defined the learning objective that the daily class activities were supporting. Student progress, attitude, effort, and attendance were documented in the author’s observational notes. Following the drawing unit, the post-instruction drawing occurred. Students drew the same four poses using the same time frame of ten minutes as they had for the pre-instructional drawings. Students self-assessed their post-instructional drawings and completed an artist statement that accurately incorporated vocabulary used throughout the unit and described the skills the students have developed. The participants were given a writing prompt to guide their artist statements. These documents are a reflection of the students’ perceived areas of growth and areas still in need of improvement. The painting unit followed the same protocol as the drawing unit. RESULTS The results are understandable and the research questions are answered.
DISCUSSION The conclusions are related to the research questions, also the author shared some suggestions in addition which are appropriate. The author concluded that this study was limited by the length of the art classes, and the minutes in class limiting the duration of the two units of instruction. If we were to conduct a similar research project, or if we were to design a research project to test the validity of the assessment method, we might consider longer time intervals for the units. It is recommended that art teachers share the progress and data collection from alternative authentic assessments with administrators in order to advocate for assessment practices other than standardized, multiple choice testing in the arts.
1 Comment
Kathy
3/7/2017 03:09:39 pm
You chose a very good article to review for this translation as it will be valuable for your upcoming research lab. This is very important:"This research investigated the use of the authentic assessment tools (rubrics, student digital portfolios) to document student growth in a middle school art classroom, and it included a pre- and post- instruction artwork that was assessed with the created rubrics." I wonder how the teacher could assess EFFORT without knowing which student they were assessing? I would like to see the rubric. On the post assessment were they looking for growth or evaluating the quality of the final work. How did they assess the understanding of the process of drawing or painting?
Reply
Leave a Reply. |