Advertisement

International Review of Education

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 7–20 | Cite as

Ensuring the continuum of learning: The role of assessment for lifelong learning

  • Yahui Su
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

This article explores how assessment plays a role in helping learners to learn on a continuous, sustainable basis. It begins by exploring the paradigm of lifelong learning, which implies a shift in the way we think about learning and knowledge. Based on knowledge formation rooted in a flux of learning, lifelong learning assessment is not so much the assessment of how much fixed knowledge learners possess but rather the assessment of learners’ abilities to reconstruct knowledge and engage with change. This article argues that three concerns – the primacy of self-assessment, the assessment of learners’ engagement, and the importance of qualitative assessment – are crucial to an assessment which contributes to the development of lifelong learners who have the continuing ability to grow and to find deep and meaningful connections during times of change. The importance of self-assessment as the central aspect of lifelong learning is presented, and the way in which self-assessment relates to formative assessment and summative assessment to ensure a valid development of lifelong learning is considered. Judging whether lifelong learning is relevant or desirable requires learners’ engagement in considering how they are holistically related to the world. To assess learners’ overall engagement, this article suggests a multi-faceted, holistic approach which emphasises qualitative methods to track each individual’s learning situation, although quantitative methods are not rejected. It is hoped that the article’s discussion of this lifelong learning assessment will contribute to an understanding of the assessment’s appropriate nature and development.

Keywords

Lifelong learning Assessment Engagement Self-assessment 

Résumé

Garantir la continuité de l’apprentissage : le rôle de l’évaluation dans l’apprentissage tout au long de la vie – Cet article explore le rôle que joue l’évaluation pour aider l’apprenant à accomplir un apprentissage permanent et durable. L’auteure analyse tout d’abord le concept de l’apprentissage tout au long de la vie, qui implique un changement dans notre façon de concevoir l’apprentissage et le savoir. Fondée sur la formation du savoir émanant d’un flux d’apprentissage, l’évaluation de l’apprentissage tout au long de la vie est moins celle de la quantité de connaissances immuables acquises par l’apprenant, que celle de ses capacités à les reconstituer et à susciter un changement. L’auteure avance que trois aspects – la primauté de l’auto-évaluation, l’appréciation de l’engagement de l’apprenant et l’importance de l’évaluation qualitative – sont indispensables à une évaluation qui contribue au développement de l’apprenant permanent, doté d’une capacité continue à évoluer et à découvrir des liens riches et denses au cours de cette évolution. Elle signale ensuite l’importance de l’auto-évaluation, élément central de l’apprentissage tout au long de la vie, et le moyen de relier cette dernière à l’évaluation formative et sommative pour garantir un développement efficace de l’apprentissage tout au long de la vie. La question de savoir si ce dernier est pertinent ou souhaitable requiert de l’apprenant la démarche de réfléchir à ses rapports systémiques avec le monde. Afin d’apprécier l’engagement global de l’apprenant, l’auteure propose une approche pluridimensionnelle et systémique qui favorise les méthodes qualitatives pour retracer la situation éducative individuelle, sans rejeter pour autant les méthodes quantitatives. Enfin, elle exprime l’espoir de voir cette analyse sur l’évaluation de l’apprentissage tout au long de la vie contribuer à cerner une forme et une évolution appropriées de l’évaluation.

摘要

確保學習的永續:終身學習評量的角色– 這篇文章探討評量如何幫助學習者永續學習。文章一開始探討終身學習典範,及其意味我們對學習和知識的想法轉變。基於知識被視為從學習變流中形成,終身學習評量不再是評量學習者擁有多少固定知識,而是評量學習者重建知識與投入改變的能力。這篇文章關注自我評量的優位、評量學習者的投入、以及質性評量的重要,此三方面有助發展終身學習者持續成長的能力,以及在變動時代中找到意義連結的能力。作者呈現自我評量做為終身學習中心的重要性,以及自我評量方式如何透過連結形成性評量和總結性評量,以確保終身學習有效發展。終身學習需要學習者投入他們與世界整體的關係。為了評量學習者的投入,本文提出多面向整體方法,即雖然量化方法有其重要,更強調運用質性方法去發現個別學習者的學習情況。透過這篇文章的討論,有助瞭解終身學習評量的性質與發展。

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the National Science Council, R.O.C., for its support of this work through grant no.NSC 102-2410-H-328 -006.

References

  1. Alheit, P. (2009). Biographical learning—within the new lifelong learning discourse. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists… in their own words (pp. 116–128). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, E. L. (2009). The influential of learning research on design and use of assessment. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), Development of professional expertise: Toward measurement of expert performance and design of optimal learning environments (pp. 333–355). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  4. Benner, P. (1994). The tradition and skill of interpretive phenomenology in studying health, illness and caring practices. In P. Benner (Ed.), Interpretative phenomenology: Embodiment, caring, and ethics in health and illness (pp. 99–127). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  6. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1996). Rethinking learning. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling (pp. 485–513). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2003). In praise of educational research: Formative assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 29(5), 623–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. New York: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bohm, D. (1995). Wholeness and the implicate order. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  12. Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boud, D. J., & Falchikov, N. (2005). Redesigning assessment for learning beyond higher education. Research and development in higher education, 28, 34–41.Google Scholar
  14. Broadfoot, P., & Black, P. (2004). Redefining assessment? The first ten years of Assessment in Education. Assessment in Education, 11(1), 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown, S. (1999). Institutional strategies for assessment. In S. Brown & A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment Matters in higher education (pp. 1–13). Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, J. S. (2002). From knowledge as substance to knowledge as participation. In Keynote Lecture at Organisational Knowledge and Learning Conference, Athens, 4–6 July 2002.Google Scholar
  17. Brown, G. T. L. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions of assessment: Implications for policy and professional development. Assessment in Education, 11(3), 301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  19. Candy, P, Crebert, G. & O’Leary, J. (1994). Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. Commissioned Report No. 28 National Board of Employment, Education and Training. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  20. Carr, M., & Claxton, G. (2002). Tracking the development of learning dispositions. Assessment in Education, 9(1), 9–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2004). Assessment strategies for self-directed learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Crooks, T. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dann, R. (2002). Promoting assessment as learning: Improving the learning process. London: Routledge Falmer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. De La Harpe, B., & Radloff, A. (2000). Informed teachers and learners: The importance of assessing the characteristics needed for lifelong learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 169–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dunne, E. (1999). The learning society: International perspectives on core skills in higher education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  26. Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  28. Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  29. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2000). Changing classroom assessment: teachers’ struggles. In N. Bascia & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), The sharp edge of educational change: Teaching, leading and the realities of reform (pp. 97–111). London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  30. Earl, L. M., & LeMahieu, P. G. (1997). Rethinking assessment and accountability. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational change with heart and mind (pp. 149–168). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  31. EC (European Commission). (2002a). European report on quality indicators of lifelong learning. Brussels: EC.Google Scholar
  32. EC (2002b). eEurope 2005: an information society for all. Brussels: EC.Google Scholar
  33. Ecclestone, K., Gawn, J., Davies, J., & Derrick, J. (2010). Transforming formative assessment in lifelong learning. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fallows, S. (2000). Integrating key skills in higher education: Employability, transferable skills, and learning for life. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Faure, E., et al. (Eds.). (1972). Learning to be: The world of education today and tomorrow. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  37. Freire, P. (1980). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  38. Fromm, E. (1976). To have or to be?. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  39. Gardener, J. (2006). Assessment and learning: An introduction. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 1–6). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed Learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 18–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  43. Gipps, C. (1996). Assessment for the millennium: Form, function and feedback. Inaugural lecture. London: Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
  44. Gordon, S., & Reese, M. (1997). High stakes testing: Worth the price? Journal of School Leadership, 7, 345–368.Google Scholar
  45. Hager P. (2003). Changing pedagogy: Productive learning. OVAL Research Working Paper 03–16. Sydney: OVAL Research UTS.Google Scholar
  46. Hager, P. (2004). The inescapability of metaphors for thinking about learning. In G. Jover & P. Villamor (Eds.), Voices of philosophy of education. Proceedings of the 9th Biennial Conference of the International Network of Philosophers of Education (pp. 143–151). Madrid: Complutense University.Google Scholar
  47. Hanson, F. A. (2000). How tests create what they are intended to measure. In A. Filer (Ed.), Assessment: Social practice and social product (pp. 67–81). London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  48. Harlen, W., & Crick, R. D. (2003). Testing and motivation for learning. Assessment in Education, 10(2), 169–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Henderson, A. F., & Kegan, R. (1989). Learning, knowing, and the self: A constructive developmental view. In K. Field, B. J. Cohler, & G. Wool (Eds.), Learning and education: Psychoanalytic perspectives (pp. 267–303). Madison: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
  50. Heron, J. (1992). Feeling and personhood: Psychology in another key. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Illeris, K. (2004). The three dimensions of learning (2nd ed.). Malabar: Krieger.Google Scholar
  52. Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. McDowell, L. (1998). Editorial. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(4), 335–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mentkowski, M. (2006). Accessible and adaptable elements of Alverno student assessment-as-learning: Strategies and challenges for peer review. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 48–63). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Mezirow, J. (1985). A critical theory of self-directed learning. In S. Brookfield (Ed.), Self-directed learning: From theory to practice: New Directions for Continuing Education (pp. 17–30). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  57. Morrison, K., & Tang Fun Hei, J. (2002). Testing to destruction: A problem in a small state. Assessment in Education, 9(3), 289–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (1996). Lifelong learning for all. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  59. OECD (2003). Networks of innovation: Towards new models for managing schools and systems. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Proudman, B. (1992). Experiential education as emotionally-engaged learning. The Journal of Experiential Education, 15(2), 19–23.Google Scholar
  61. Regehr, G., & Eva, K. (2006). Self-assessment, self-direction, and the self-regulating professional. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 449, 34–38.Google Scholar
  62. Rogers, A. (2005). Non-formal education: Flexible schooling or participatory education?. Hong Kong: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  63. Roos, B., & Hamilton, D. (2005). Formative assessment: A cybernetic viewpoint. Assessment in Education, 12(1), 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schuetze, H. G. (2006). International concepts and agendas of lifelong learning. Compare, 36(3), 289–306.Google Scholar
  65. Scott, D. W., & Meyer, J. W. (1994). The rise of training programs in firms and agencies: An institutional perspective. In W. R. Scott & J. W. Meyer (Eds.), Institutional environments and organizations: Structural complexity and individualism (pp. 228–254). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  66. Sinnott, J. D. (2009). Cognitive development as the dance of adaptive transformation: Neo-Piagetian perspectives on adult cognitive development. In M. Smith & N. DeFrates-Densch (Eds.), Handbook of research on adult learning and development (pp. 103–134). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Su, Y., & Feng, L.-Y. (2008). Assessing graduate attributes for employability in the context of lifelong learning: The holistic approach. US-China Education Review, 5(11), 1–10.Google Scholar
  68. Sun, Q. (2012). The Confucian learning: Learning to become fully human. In P. Jarvis (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook on lifelong learning (pp. 475–485). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Tan, K. (2007). Conceptions of self-assessment: What is needed for long-term learning? In D. Boud & N. Falchilcov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment in higher education (pp. 114–127). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Taras, M. (2008). Issues of power and equity in two models of self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(1), 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Taylor, C. (1993). Explanation and practical reason. In M. C. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 208–241). Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yorks, L., & Kasl, E. (2002). Toward a theory and practice for whole-person learning: Reconceptualizing experience and the role of affect. Adult Education Quarterly, 52(3), 176–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zull, J. E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching the practice of teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Teacher Education CenterNational Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and TourismKaohsiungTaiwan, ROC

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options