The Proof is in the Pudding

One of the capstones of education is the belief that a student's understanding or mastery of a skill or topic can be determined through assessments.  Typical assessments that have stood the "test of time" are essays and tests.  In formal education, tests have been the most popular means of assessing student knowledge, mostly because they have been deemed the most "objective" means of determining such. Assessments that are open to interpretation, such as essays and creative projects work well to assess a student's ability to write or create projects, but to determine true, objective understanding, a test has always been best.

Fast-forward to 2014.  The concept of objective assessments has been expanded through the use of rubrics, which are meant to take the subjectivity out of subjective assessments.  An essay rubric, for example can explicitly state that the student must give three examples from their reading in order to earn full credit, or that only two mistakes are allowed in order to exceed the standard.  While rubrics have certainly made subjective assessments LESS subjective, they still are by no means objective. In our current climate of accountability, it is crucial to many that students be assessed in a way that cannot give them an advantage over others.  This is why our high stakes tests to assess whether or not a student is at their grade level have gotten even more prevalent despite these positive changes in assessment.

Denver Post cartoon satirizing the effect of standardized tests on public education.
Source: Mike Keefe, Denver Post, 2002

The question has been raised, are tests the only form of objective assessment?

In my personal, and professional opinion, the answer is no; which brings me back to the title of this piece. "The Proof is in the Pudding" is a saying that goes back to the early 14th century, and means "To fully test something, you need to experience it yourself". Authentic Assessment, is the best way to determine if a student has mastered a particular skill or concept. Anytime a student is actively engaged in authentic activity, it is pretty easy to determine whether or not they have met or exceeded a standard.  Tests, while objective, do not prove that a student can accomplish a given task in context or over a sustained period of time.  Tests can be studied for, and then forgotten. Authentic assessment provides a way for students to use their skills or knowledge as they would need to in the real world. It is a much more authentic assessment of a student's ability.  As the cartoon above illustrates, workplaces hire employees based on what they can do, not by how well they did on tests. Tests are an authentic assessment of whether or not a student can pass a test, which makes them a pretty lousy indicator of a student's success in other skills. I understand that not all knowledge can be assessed authentically, however, I am a strong believer that whenever it can be, it should be.