What is fairness in assessment? What does it mean for a test or an assignment to be marked "fairly"? I was thinking yesterday that the whole nature of assessment is not as numeric as people might suggest it is. When a person assigns an 87%, say, on a written assignment, they are making an assessment based on a variety of different reasons, many of which are context-based.
Fairness is an interesting concept, because, to be truly fair, one actually has to honor difference. But to what extent is the problem. Most teachers have some understanding, whether through their education or their philosophy of assessment, that students have different needs. A single assignment cannot capture all the possible needs or scenarios of every student. But at the same time, teachers do need to establish guidelines and boundaries that encourage students to make reasonable efforts, such as completing the assignment to the best of their abilities. A standard does need to be in place, but it's probably not quite fair to be a stickler for the standard itself. Allowing students to have some creativity in their self-expression seems a must when it comes to evaluating writing in particular.
The reality seems to be that academic life is based on a sliding scale in which efforts of different students are compared. It's simply impossible, no matter how benevolent or well meaning the teacher may happen to be, to not assess a student based on their relative efforts compared to other students. This may not necessarily seem fair from the outset. After all, aren't students all special in terms of their own gifts that they bring to this world? And how do we honor those gifts if the students are being compared? We don't compare the gifts of family members and friends (in terms of price or quality of the gift, for instance) and perhaps we shouldn't, but would it thus be unfair to do so with students?
A balance needs to be established between the students needs and also the need to standardize for the purpose of figuring out who goes where. This is where, to my thinking, assessment seems to serve the dual purpose of serving the student's learning needs, on the one hand, and getting the student through the system, on the other. Whereas the first assessment metaphor relates to learning as an intrinsically valuable pursuit which mines the student's individual worth, the second assessment metaphor relates more pragmatically to how institutions (schools, workplaces, HR departments etc.) rank and organize individuals by their demonstrated skills . Let's face it: assessment is not just a personal exploration or revelation. For most students, assessment determines where people end up along the way: which school they end up going, what career path they can follow, etc. This is, indeed, where assessment is by nature comparative.
But at the end of the day, too much emphasis on a standardized notion of grading can overlook unique abilities that students can add to the institutions to which they attend. It can pigeonhole students unless they have a good perspective where they feel respected by the system and recognized. I don't have an answer to any of these balances, but am only identifying them for future research and discussion.
