Abstract:

It is well established that evaluation should correspond with the method of teaching, thus we should expect teachers in schools with a progressive approach to apply more sophisticated evaluation methods. However, that seldom occurs. In practice, state authorities drive mainly towards an achievements’ evaluation of standard-based instruction.
We follow Davis, Humbleton, Terwilliger and others, who criticize the current use of evaluation policy in schools, and promote the use of alternative methods in classroom assessment.
Thus we suggest:
1.For a continuous sequence of teaching-learning-and evaluation, where the teacher observes the student’s attempts at learning and where assessment plays the role of feedback.
2.As learning types are multifaceted and divergent, and unique for each student, so must assessment be varied in alternative methods, to correspond with divergent teaching methods and meet various learners, learning situations, and various learner’s authentic goals.
3.For learning to occur, students should be active in all domains, learning as well as evaluation. They should be involved in active learning, students’ mutual teaching, and self-evaluation.
We propose a model of alternative methods in classroom assessment. Our starting point is in mapping the types of learning methods used in schools. Next, we suggest appropriate multifaceted methods of evaluation to facilitate these varied types of learning, while, at the same time, developing learners’ self-evaluation competence.
The model presents three levels:
Level 1 – A traditional normative approach of direct teaching and directive assessment, aimed at socialization and acquiring common knowledge and basic skills. Assessment of these pre-set goals requires at a lower stage objective summative testing, and at a more advanced stage - formative or value-added assessment.
Level 2 – An interpretive empowering approach, which aims at developing learner’s self-directed-learning through independent and cooperative study. Evaluation is conducted in alternative ways, teacher’s facilitative feedback, and pupil’s self- and mutual-assessment.
Level 3 – A personal approach, which seeks to develop inner self-growth powers of learning and to accommodate each person’s unique aims and interests. At this level, self-evaluation of one’s own goals is encouraged, to facilitate growth and foster autonomy.
To sum up the model: There are three levels of evaluation: Level 1– is divided into Normative and Formative; Level 2 – Interpretive, and Level 3 –personal. At level 1, teaching focuses on directing and guiding, and learning is focused on acquiring basic knowledge & skills. When learning is directed, the students practice and follow instructions, and evaluation is summative. When learning is guided, the emphasis is on students' understanding of self-progress, and evaluation is formative. At level 2, teaching is aimed at empowering. Learning focuses on self-direction, planning and implementing projects. Evaluation consists of diagnosing through alternative methods, giving corrective feedback for further learning tasks. At level 3, teaching is aimed at growing, learning focuses on experimenting, self-coping, taking own decisions and self-awareness. Evaluation focuses on assisting self-awareness, enhancing self-evaluation, identifying needs and removing learning blocks.
A study aimed to examine the validity of the model is currently designed.

Keywords:

Evaluation, self-evaluation, empowering.