As the National Curriculum for History is being reviewed and the methods of assessment, recording and reporting are being talked about by Mr Gove, I thought I’d reflect on the ways in which I’ve used Assessment in History in the past.

In all of my teaching roles I held responsibility for Assessment. In my early years of teaching I found Assessment to be highly cumbersome and time consuming: and probably not all that effective, come to think of it. Over the years I adapted, learnt from more talented and experienced colleagues and developed a range of resources that improved my Departments efficiency whilst also improving the impact of the assessment process. Here’s a quick run through some of the things I had in place:

Following the last review of the National Curriculum the schemes of work had a major overhaul.  Click here for an overview of my Key Stage 3 Scheme of work. As the whole department had been involved in developing the SoW and ‘bought into’ it we could easily agree where, how and why we could assess. There were clear links to the concepts and processes identified in the National Curriculum for History and this made it easy to decide what the assessment package for KS3 would look like.

One thing that I’d been conscious of was that previously our assessment had been far too much focused on the teachers getting data – rather than the pupils learning how to improve. To get around that problem I came up with a flexible assessment grid. Based on the processes and concepts noted in the National Curriculum we developed it so that it identified, in pupil speak, the different levels of attainment. These could easily be referred to time and again during assessment work: making objectives easier to understand. We also started adding in examples of pupils work at each of these levels so that pupils doing the assessment in the future could see what worked, why it worked and (hopefully) learn from those examples. These assessment grids then changed our focus away from simple data collection. I added a self and peer review section which were completed after a reminder of what is expected at different levels. First, I got a peer assessment of the task. These took some time to become highly focused - but it was worth the wait. Then, I got the pupil to do an initial self assessment. After these had been done staff then assessed it themselves and added comments and targets as appropriate. My Key Stage 3 History Assessment Grids were then turned into a booklet that the pupils retain in a portfolio over the course of the Key Stage.

I found that completing these grids and having them readily available provides pupils with clarity and additional focus when they are working. Whilst they’re designed for ‘formal’ assessment purposes pupils and teachers can refer to them in other lessons and with copies of the assessed work added to a folder, they provide a really handy portfolio of pupil progress. These make parents evenings a bit easier and save a few panicky moments when there’s an Inspection or Departmental review.

To support the use of these grids I always make sure I’ve got lots of visual aids and reminders in the room. One of my favourites is Roy Huggins’ Learning Ladder which provides a really simple but effective guide to making progress.

Analysis of assessment results has never been one of my favourite tasks. Luckily one of my former colleagues had a few simple but effective ideas that saved lots of time and made the findings incredibly clear: and more useful in the classroom. First up we used these simple Student monitoring speadsheets which use conditional formatting to highlight areas of particular concern. These were supported through use of Pivot Tables to illustrate how many pupils were at each level: see An example used for KS4. Of course there’s also use of FFT and analysis features available within Management Integration Systems which are very helpful for management purposes – my examples are designed to be easier to use in the classroom whilst working with individual pupils or groups of pupils.

What would I change if I were involved in looking at the way we assess History?

I’ve never seen the point in sub levels in history at Key Stage 3. Pupils can be significantly better at one skill than they are at another, rendering a sub level a rather meaningless average point that perhaps doesn’t reflect how good they actually are at anything.

I’m yet to be convinced that Controlled Assessment is any better than Coursework used to be. Neither are really true reflections of how good a young historian a pupil is, though I’ve not got a cunning plan that’s any more suitable. Nor is the Controlled Assessment immune to cheating: I’ve received e-mails from pupils (not my own) who have sent CA work to me in the hope that I’ll edit / correct it for them. (I haven’t, of course).

With the introduction of the E Bacc I think we really need to be looking at a tiered exam rather than the one course fits all that we currently have. It could do much to help make our subject more appealing and accessible to pupils who may previously have never considered the subject.