Assessment Synergies and Tensions in Germany

• In Event: Synergy and Tension Between Large-Scale and Classroom Assessment: International Trends

Abstract

Objective: To draw on policy and research to describe the tensions and synergies between large-scale assessment and classroom teaching, learning, and assessment in Germany.

Perspective and Findings: In Germany, a strong focus on the monitoring of school outcomes emerged in the early 2000s, when unexpected mediocre PISA outcomes resulted in public debate and change in educational policy. In this vein, the Standing Conference of the Cultural Ministers of Germany’s 16 “Länder” (federal states) (KMK) has expedited the use of outcomes in LSAs to inform educational policy. Its strategy for educational monitoring includes (1) participation in international LSAs, (2) regular national evaluation of outcomes in primary, lower, and higher secondary education in relation to educational standards and competency models, and (3) assessments and interventions designed to enhance educational quality at the school level (KMK, 2015). While the first two have little impact on the school or classroom level, low-stakes school inspections (SI) and comparative tests (CT) pertaining to the third are decidedly aimed at providing feedback to schools.

SI practice, focusing on the quality of instruction and processes inside schools, varies somewhat in methodology, variables assessed, and modes of feedback across the Länder. Yet, Germany’s overall approach to SI builds strongly on insights from school-level stakeholders rather than on promoting competition amongst schools or on imposing consequences for schools with insufficient outcomes (e.g. Rürup, 2008). Feedback is exclusively directed at individual schools, and the outcomes lead to agreements on objectives for school development. Studies on the effects of SI revealed that it is well-accepted and perceived as helpful by school principals (Böhm-Kasper, Selders & Lambrecht, 2016), but teachers found it difficult to use the feedback they receive for improving their instructional practice (Böttcher, Hense & Keune, 2013). There is limited evidence of impact on students’ competence tests outcomes (e.g. Pietsch, Janke & Mohr, 2014). Recently, some Länder have opted to suspend their external SI and transfer responsibility directly to schools.

CT (“Vergleichsarbeiten”) are conducted nationwide in Grades 3 and 8 to generate feedback on students’ competencies in a number of domains. Reports including individual student outcomes, class and school aggregated data, and reference group data are provided to schools and their teachers, who are expected to deduce relevant information for enhancing the quality of their work. Empirically, using CT reports for purposes such as developing instructional materials and assignments, competency orientation and individualization was fairly common amongst teachers, but teachers’ self-reported intensity in using CT reports had no impact on students’ learning outcomes (Wurster, Richter & Lenski, 2017). Only half of school principals reported using CT feedback to inform school development practices (Bach, Wurster, Thillmann, Pant & Thiel, 2014).

Significance: A lack of consistent effects of SI and CT on outcome variables has raised critiques that while there is an extensive national strategy on monitoring and significant data is continuously collected, an adjacent change management strategy on how to make use of this data is widely missing (e.g. Böttcher, 2014).

Author

• Christoph Schneider, Universität Trier