Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance

ISSN: 0730-3084 (Print) 2168-3816 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrd20

Maximizing Learning through Assessment in

Middle and High School Physical Education

K. Michael Kniffin & Helena Baert

To cite this article: K. Michael Kniffin & Helena Baert (2015) Maximizing Learning through
Assessment in Middle and High School Physical Education, Journal of Physical Education,
Recreation and Dance, 86:4, 7-16, DOI: 10.1080/07303084.2015.1009203

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2015.1009203

Published online: 01 Apr 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2011

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ujrd20
 MAXIMIZING LEARNING
through Assessment
in Middle and High School Physical Education
K. MICHAEL KNIFFIN
HELENA BAERT

M ore than ever, assessment is in the national spotlight.

In this time of state and national learning standards,
learning outcomes, and various forms of student and
teacher accountability, the need for evidence of stu-
dent learning in physical education is paramount.
K. Michael Kniffin is an associate professor, and Helena Baert (helena.
baert@cortland.edu) is an assistant professor, in the Physical Education De-
partment at the State University of New York (SUNY) College at Cortland
in Cortland, NY.

JoperD 7
Historically, physical educators tended to shy away from as-
sessment because they did not need to show evidence of student
learning (Rink, 2010). Perceived time and management issues of
conducting assessment have contributed to the lack of assessment
within the overall teaching–learning process (Rink, 2010). How-
ever, there are potential benefits to conducting assessment properly
that could, in return, enhance the learning experience. These ben-
efits include communication, engagement, ownership, value, and
reflection. The purpose of this article is to explain and illustrate,
using various assessment examples, how tapping into these five
potential benefits of assessment can aid the teaching and learning
process. By recognizing these potential benefits and making use of
assessments, both the teacher and the learner can be supported,
and teachers can overcome their concerns related to conducting
assessment as part of the instructional process. Developmentally
appropriate assessment tools can help determine where students
are in the learning process and can maximize student learning. To
gain an understanding of how teachers use and value assessment in
physical education, they are encouraged to complete the following
10-question survey.
Are You Tapped In or Out of Assessment?
1.  How often do I have conversations with my students about their
learning on an individual basis?
2.  How often do my students ask me questions about what they are
learning?
3.  How often do I provide feedback and knowledge of assessment
results to my students?
4. How often do I provide opportunities for my students to
self-assess?
5.  How often do my students track their own learning progress?
Figure 1.
Student and teacher discuss performance.
8  Volume 86  Number 4  April 2015
6.  Do I share the responsibility of assessment with my students?
7.  How much do my students value physical education?
8.  How much do my students value assessment in physical education?
9.  How much do my students think they are learning in my physical
education class?
10.  How often do I have students reflect on their performance in
my class?
These questions can help physical educators to reflect on their assess-
ment-practice strengths and weaknesses and provide a platform for ana-
lyzing how each of the five potential benefits of assessments — com-
munication, engagement, ownership, value, and reflection — can help to
strengthen teachers’ assessment practices and enhance teaching as well
as student learning.
Communication through Assessment
An assessment tool such as a checklist or a rubric can serve as a com-
munication bridge between the teacher and the student. In other words,
an assessment tool can help open communication between the teacher
and the student and allows students to become visible participants in
conversations about their own learning (see Figure 1). Talking specifi-
cally about students’ learning progress and answering students’ questions
can help personalize the teaching and learning process. Physical educa-
tors can be lulled into the idea that if students are moving, they are learn-
ing. However, the basic principle of motor learning for any motor skill
begins with a cognitive understanding of what is to be learned and how
to go about it (Belka, 2002; Fitts & Posner, 1967). The communication
bridge facilitates this process. According to Hamre and Pianta (2001),
teachers know that a good assessment tool provides a teacher with an
easy way to connect with individual students through prompts, feed-
back, reminders, and knowledge of results. Creating the communication
bridge highlights the original purpose of assessment, which is to provide
students with important information on
their learning progress (Rink, 2010). Geh-
ris (2014) suggested that students might be
more motivated to learn physical education
content if they have a close connection to
their teacher. The communication bridge of-
fers students and teachers the opportunity
to speak one-on-one and forge a positive
working relationship. It essentially provides
a structure that gives teachers an easy way to
interact more with students and to promote
personalized learning.
Engagement with
Assessment
Engagement refers to the “student’s
willingness, need, desire, and compulsion
to participate in, and be successful in, the
learning process” (Bomia et al., 1997, p. 3).
Some teachers may resist the use of assess-
ments due to the perceived management is-
sues associated with conducting them (e.g.,
the time it takes to set up and administer
an assessment, the number of students to
assess, lack of class control, and possible
student misbehavior); however, just the op-
posite is true when appropriate assessments
are properly administered. Developmentally
appropriate assessment tools offer students the chance to self-assess, and
they play into the natural curiosity students have about themselves. A
developmentally appropriate assessment can tap into this curiosity and
engage students in the lesson. In fact, for engagement to occur, a contri-
bution from both the teacher and the student must take place (Nystrand
& Gamoran, 1991). In essence, offering an assessment may open the
door to engagement.
For example, the cup-stacking assessment illustrated in Figure  2
shows various achievement levels at which students can be engaged,
challenged, and successful regardless of ability. Within this assessment
task, students will have both peer and teacher checks that can increase
the level of engagement and “bridge the feedback gap created by too
many students and too little time in physical education” (SHAPE Amer-
ica – Society of Health and Physical Educators, 2014, p. 81). In return,
higher levels of student engagement help focus learning and lessen the
class management burden. Simply put, assessments can provide teachers
with another avenue for achieving student engagement in the teaching
and learning process. Effective assessments will direct students’ focus to
learning the content rather than simply keeping students “busy, happy,
and good” (Placek, 1983).
Ownership of Assessment
Students given the responsibility of tracking their own learning
progress through self-assessment, peer assessment, or other forms of
evaluation are investing themselves in the teaching and learning process.
Therefore, giving students a role to play in their own learning promotes
student ownership of the lesson. For example, activities such as keeping
a personal journal, using data to calculate and evaluate a game perfor-
mance score, completing and assessing a dance or gymnastics routine,
or analyzing an arrow pattern and determining the best method to im-
prove arrow placement closer to the center of the target in archery give
a student more ownership in the teaching and learning process. This is
illustrated in Figures 3 and 4, which show a middle/high school game-
performance assessment for the volleyball serve and a high school ar-
chery assessment, respectively. Both sample assessments allow students
to take ownership of their own learning, which helps them become more
responsible and can make learning more meaningful. Furthermore, al-
lowing students to take ownership in the lesson minimizes the idea that
learning is the teacher’s responsibility. As students take on more respon-
sibility in their learning or in the learning of a classmate, they become
empowered to improve. The empowerment benefit of student ownership
is available only to teachers who share the assessment responsibility with
the students.
Value of Assessment
The bane of physical education is compliance grading, where stu-
dents are assessed on attendance, dress, and effort. Students cannot help
but compare the way they are assessed in other classes with the often
questionable assessment practices in physical education. Consequently,
they may perceive the value of physical education as being lower than
other subjects. In order for students to change their negative percep-
tion of physical education, assessment of learning must be based on a
quality curriculum that meets the needs of students. A common goal
of physical education is for students to apply the skills, attitudes, and
knowledge they have learned in the real world to become physically lit-
erate and to live a healthy and active life. Fair, meaningful assessments
help show students the importance of learning and contribute to the
perceived positive value of participating in physical education. The value
of assessment hinges on offering students activities they are interested
in. The perceived usefulness and enjoyment of the curriculum are impor-
tant predictors of positive student attitudes toward physical education
(Subramaniam & Silverman, 2002). It is easier to conduct meaningful
assessments if students value the skills they are learning either because
they enjoy the activities or because they understand why the activities
are important.
The game-performance assessment tool included here (see Figure 3)
is a formative assessment that allows students to assess their peers and
themselves within an authentic game-play context rather than evalu-
ating fragmented elements of skill or tactical performance (Richard,
2010). When students are adequately prepared to use this type of for-
mative assessment, it can provide reliable data that allows for mean-
ingful analyses and discussions of game-play performance and, in turn,
benefit and provide value to the learning process. When the teacher
asks students to assess skill performance in isolated settings, students
will question the value of this type of assessment and often wonder,
“Why can’t I just play the game?” Students want to demonstrate their
skills within the context of a game and question the validity of isolated
skill testing. Using an authentic assessment where students experience
skill practice within game play that simulates real game conditions will
help students see the relevance of the assessment, and they will be more
likely to want to improve their performance (Mitchell, Oslin, & Griffin,
2006; Morrow, Jackson, Dish, & Mood, 2011). Providing more forma-
tive, holistic, and authentic game assessments will help students see the
value of learning to play the game, and, as a result, students will value
what they are learning more.
Reflection through Assessment
In physical education, the most repeated assessment example is for
a teacher to assess students and record the results in a grade book to
determine a marking period grade. Teachers need to carefully reflect
on how and why they are assessing. For example, teacher A assesses
student learning by recording scores in a grade book. The students hear
of this assessment at the end of a grading period but do not know how
they were graded. Teacher B assesses for learning by communicating
the scores to the students throughout the unit as a continuous pro-
cess of learning. In the end, meaningful assessments measure learning
and should be continuous, informative, and dynamic. As exemplified
by teacher B, every piece of data recorded about student performance
in a class offers teachers and students information that should be used
to make important decisions regarding the learning and teaching pro-
cess. The difference between teachers A and B is clearly illustrated
by the following quote: “Assessment should be seen as the enhance-
ment of learning, rather than simply the documentation of learning”
(National Association for Sport and Physical Education [NASPE],
2004, p. 4).
Research shows that systematic observations make teachers aware
of how students perform and meet learning objectives (Kelly, Wessel,
Dummer, & Sampson, 2010). In fact, teachers use assessment to im-
prove their teaching practices and, ultimately, the curriculum (Rink,
2010). Students, on the other hand, benefit from assessments that help
them truly reflect on what they are learning. The definition of reflection
is to give careful consideration to what has occurred (Dyson & Brown,
2010). Teachers can facilitate this process by providing specific questions
that allow students to seriously think about their performance. Each of
the three assessment examples presented here (see Figures 2, 3, and 4)
contains well-structured and reflective questions that aim to help the
student analyze and evaluate his or her strengths and weaknesses and
set goals for further learning. Subsequently, reflection helps students be-
come active participants in their own learning.
JOPERD  9
 Figure 2.
Middle school speed-stacking skill report (self/peer check)

Speed-Stacking Skill Report

Assessment Task: Students choose their level of entry and complete the speed stacking task as outlined in the assessment. A speed
stacking timer will be used to measure the time. Students will self-check (S4.M6.7*) or peer-check all levels of performance, but must
successfully pass the level 3 teacher-check prior to advancing to more complex speed stacking patterns.
Assessment Goals: A level 3 performance indicates a level of competence in knowledge and skill that allows a student to participate
successfully in the activity. This level of performance helps ensure continued participation in the activity and is a stepping stone to
higher levels of proficiency.
Scoring: The teacher will assess the speed of a 3-3-3 stack completed without fumbles. A time of 8 seconds or less is required before
moving on to level 4.
*S4.M3.7 and S4.M6.7 are national outcomes (SHAPE America, 2014).
Circle the level you started on (must start at level 3 or below)

Level 5 3-6-3 Stack: Check when completed

3-6-3 stack combines the 3-stack with a 6-stack.
Trial 1 £ ______
All stacks must be complete and standing before
you can begin to down-stack. Trial 2 £ ______
Trial 3 £ ______
Best recorded time†: _____
†
S uccessful level 5 is completed at or under
10 seconds without any fumbles.
Times to aim for:
•  Beginner: 15 sec.
•  Fast: 7 sec.
•  Really fast: <5 sec.
•  World class: <3.5 sec.
Level 4: Before 6-cup Stack: Using the 3-2-1 method Check when completed
attempting to complete Up-Stack: Hold 3 cups in one hand. Leave one on
this level please watch Trial 1 £ ______
the table. Hold the other two in the other hand.
the instructional video Stack by alternating hands, starting with the hand Trial 2 £ ______
on the iPad, located in with 3 cups. Trial 3 £ ______
the front of the room.
Down-Stack: Using one hand on the top cup, and Best recorded time: _____
the other hand on a cup at the second level, slide
the cups down on top of each other to form a
2-1-3 formation. Place the 2-stack over the center
cup and then the 3-stack over the center stack to
complete the down-stack.

(continued)

A Word of Caution
It might be uncomfortable to give students more responsibility by
asking them to assess themselves and their peers. However, not pro-
viding this level of ownership to the students will limit the poten-
tial benefits of the assessment. Ultimately, the assessment tools are
being used to facilitate student learning, not to replace the teacher. The
teacher is the guiding force behind learning, and the assessment tools
provided in this article help to enable the teaching–learning process.
The authors are not suggesting that students should be responsible for
grading. Instead, teachers can use the self- and peer-assessment scores

10  Volume 86  Number 4  April 2015

 Figure 2.
(Continued)

Level 3 3-3-3 Stack: This is our goal for today! Check when completed
Complete 3 up-stacks. Once all 3 stacks are
Trial 1 £ ______
standing, complete down-stacks by starting on the
same side you started the up-stacks. Trial 2 £ ______
Trial 3 £ ______
Best recorded time†: _____
†
 efore moving on to level 4, the 3-3-3 stack must
B
be shown to a teacher.
†
S uccessful level 3 is completed at or under 8
seconds without any fumbles.
________ Teacher’s signature Times to aim for:
If the teacher is busy with another student please •  Beginner: 10 sec.
practice the 3-3-3 until a teacher is ready for you. •  Fast: 6 sec.
•  Really fast: <4 sec.
•  World class: <3 sec.
Level 2 3-3 Stack: Check when completed
Complete two up-stacks with 3 cups. Once both
Trial 1 £ ______
stacks are standing complete, down-stack by
starting on the same side you started the up-stack. Trial 2 £ ______
Trial 3 £ ______
Best recorded time: ____

Level 1 3-cup Stack: Check when completed

Complete one up-stack/down-stack with 3 cups.
Trial 1 £ ______
Trial 2 £ ______
Trial 3 £ ______
Best recorded time: _____

Reflection Questions:
1. Determine the entry level that matches your present level of ability.
2. After your first three attempts, describe and analyze your initial performance in terms of skill and speed.
3. Reflect on your performance to determine how you can improve your speed stacking technique and improve your speed.
4. Observe another student’s speed stacking performance at a level higher than yours. Identify and describe how their performance
can help you improve your speed stacking technique (S4.M3.7*).
5. Observe, analyze, and assist a less skilled performer and describe how you assisted the student (S4.M3.7*).

to become more informed about student progress in learning. For ex-
ample, in Figure 2, the students self and peer assess their speed stack-
ing performance, yet, when students are ready, at level 3, the teacher
assesses student performance for a grade, as indicated by the signature
signoff. The assessments in this article can be directed and controlled
in many ways by the teacher.
Creating Assessments that Encompass the
Five Potential Benefits
For assessment to be most effective and helpful, teachers should tap
into all five of its benefits. The benefits rarely work in isolation; rather,
they are interrelated and create a flow cycle (see Figure 5). As the as-
sessment examples within this article illustrate, an assessment includes

JOPERD  11
 Figure 3.
Middle/high school game-performance assessment for the volleyball serve

Volleyball Serve Assessment

Assessment Task: Organize students into small teams (3 vs. 3 or 4 vs. 4). The teacher will review the scoring components and
operational definitions. Students will peer assess each other using the scoring rubric below. Or, students will be video recorded and
can later self-assess their own performance. To obtain a level 3 performance, students must earn a 70% on game performance.
Assessment Goal: A level 3 performance indicates a level of competence in knowledge and skill that allows a student to participate
successfully in the activity. This level of performance helps to ensure continued participation in the activity and is a stepping stone
to level 4 proficiency.

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

<.5 (50%) .5–.69 (50–69%) .7–.8 (70–80%) >.8 (>80%)

Scoring Components & Operational Definition:

Context Volleyball Serve

Skill Execution Student serves a ball into the opponent’s court
Effective: Performs a legal underhand serve with control over the net into the opponent’s court
(S1.M12.8*)
Ineffective: Fails to perform a legal underhand serve into the opponents’ court
Decision Making Student makes appropriate choice of ball placement
Appropriate: Varies ball placement, force, and timing of serve to prevent anticipation by opponents
(S2.M8.8*)
Inappropriate: Fails to vary ball placement, force, and timing of serve to prevent anticipation by
opponents
Support Student returns to the appropriate play position
Appropriate: Following the serve, student quickly returns to the correct playing position on the court.
Inappropriate: Following the serve, student fails to return to the correct playing position on the court
or fails to return quickly.
*S1.M12.8 and S2.M8.8 are national outcomes (SHAPE America, 2014).

Tactical Game-Performance Assessment

Student Name: ________________________
Observer Name: _______________________
Observation Dates: (a) ___________________ (b) ____________________ (c) ____________________
Recording Procedures:
•  Use a tally to mark the observed category.
•  Mark each player’s responses during the game. Decide whether the skill execution is effective (ESE) or ineffective (IESE)
according to the above pre-decided skill component. Note if the decision-making is appropriate (ADM) or inappropriate
(IADM). Decide whether or not the student appropriately (AS) or inappropriately (IAS) returned to a support position.

Skill Execution Decision Making Support

Effective Ineffective Appropriate Inappropriate Appropriate Inappropriate
Name (ESE) (IESE) (ADM) (IADM) (AS) (IAS)
Carrie IIIII IIIIIIII II IIIII III
John II III III II IIIII I

(continued)

12  Volume 86  Number 4  April 2015

 Figure 3.
(Continued)

Scoring:
Skill Execution Index (SEI) = ESE / (ESE+IESE)
Decision Making Index (DMI) = ADM / (ADM+IADM)
Support Index (SI) = AS / (AS+IAS)
Game Performance = (SEI + DMI + SI)/3
To calculate the final percentages, multiply the scores by 100.

Student SEI DMI SI Game Performance Level

Carrie 5/(5 + 0) = 1 8/(8 + 2) = .8 5/(5 + 3) = .63 (1 + .8 + .63)/3 = .81 (81%) 4
John 2/(2 + 3) = .4 3/(3 + 2) = .6 5/(5 + 1) = .83 (.4 + .6 + .83) = .61 (61%) 2

Reflection example: Based on the information recorded above, Carrie obtained a level 4 game performance for the volleyball serve.
Carrie is strong in her skill execution of the serve and makes appropriate ball placement decisions. She can further work on returning
to her correct game play position. John obtained a level 2 game performance score for the volleyball serve. While strong in returning
to game play position, he must improve on his skill execution and his decision making for ball placement. Using the reflection
questions below, John and Carrie can evaluate themselves critically and determine how to improve their performance.

Assessment Reflection
Student Name: ________________________
Observer Name: _______________________
Observation Dates: Day 1: ________________ Day 2: _______________Day 3: _________________
Reflection Questions:
1. Analyze and rank your game performance in three categories (skill execution, decision making, and support).
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
1. 1. 1.

2. 2. 2.

3. 3. 3.

2. Based on your analysis and rankings, identify three things you can do to improve your game performance.
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
1. 1. 1.

2. 2. 2.

3. 3. 3.

3. Based on the performance of your scores across observations, set a new realistic game-performance score (goal).
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
Goal: Goal: Goal:

Scoring categories adapted from Mitchell, Oslin, & Griffin (2006, p. 511).

JOPERD  13
 Figure 4.
High school archery assessment

Archery Assessment
1  
1

Assessment Task: Shoot six arrows into the target from 10 yards. In addition to the shooting   2  
2

performance points in this rubric, each archer must take into consideration the distance to 3  
3

the target, wind direction, and method of aim to successfully analyze arrow groupings and 4  
4
5  

improve shooting performance. 6  

7  
7
8  
Assessment Goal: A level 3 performance indicates a level of competence in knowledge 9  
9
10  
10
and skill that allows a student to participate successfully in the activity (S1.H1.L1*).
This level of performance helps to ensure continued participation in the activity and is a
stepping stone to level 4 proficiency.
*S1.H1.L1, S2.H1.L1, S2.H2.L1, S4.H2.L1, and S4.H5.L1 are national outcomes
(SHAPE America, 2014).

Skill Rubric:

Level Stance Draw & Anchor Aim & Release Hit Target
4 Consistently uses a stance Uses a full draw and anchor Uses a smooth release on at Hits the target face with a
with feet parallel to position on at least 5 of 6 least 5 of 6 attempts. final score of 45 points or
the shooting line and attempts. Uses instinctive or sight higher. Arrow groupings
shoulder of the bow arm Bow arm and draw arm aiming method. tend to be in yellow and
toward the target. elbow are always parallel red.
to the ground.
3 Usually uses a stance Uses a full draw and anchor Uses a smooth release on at Hits the target face with
parallel to the shooting position on at least 4 of 6 least 4 of 6 attempts. a final score of 30–44
line, with shoulder of attempts. Uses instinctive or sight points. Arrow groups
the bow arm toward the Bow arm and draw arm aiming method. tend to be in red and
target.† elbow are usually parallel blue.
to the ground.
2 Uses a stance with front Uses a full draw and anchor Uses a smooth release on at Hits the target face with
foot toward target and position on at least 3 of 6 least 3 of 6 attempts. a final score of 18–29
shoulder open. attempts. Uses instinctive or sight points. Arrow groupings
Bow arm and draw arm aiming method. tend to be in blue and
elbow are sometimes black.
parallel to the ground.
1 Uses a stance with both feet Uses a full draw and anchor Uses a smooth release Hits the target face with
and shoulders facing the position on fewer than 3 on fewer than 3 of 6 a final score of 6 to 17
target. attempts. attempts. points. Arrow groupings
Bow arm and draw arm Uses instinctive or sight tend to be in black and
elbow are rarely parallel aiming method. white.
to the ground.
0 Violates safety procedures and/or does not complete the assessment and/or scores less than 6 points. Student receives a
zero when S4.H2.L1* (etiquette) and S4.H5.L1* (safety) are violated.
†
For level 3, students may have front foot facing partially forward.

Scoring:
Consistently = 90% or above
Usually = 75%–89%
Sometimes = 60%–74%
Seldom = Below 50%

(continued)

14 Volume 86 Number 4 April 2015

 Figure 4.
(Continued)

Archery Assessment Reflection

Reflection Questions:
1. After shooting an end of arrows, draw and describe the pattern of your arrow placement (S2.H2.L1*).
Drawing:

Description:

2. Analyze the arrow pattern and determine the method by which you can move the arrow placement closer to the center of the
target. Be sure to provide references of distance, wind, anchor point, and method of aim, draw, and release (S2.H2.L1 and
S2.H1.L1*).
Skill rubric © PE Metrics Secondary School. Modified with permission from PE Metrics Secondary School (NASPE, 2011, pg. 53). Permission to
reuse must be obtained from the rightsholder.

valuable information that must be communicated to the students along has taken place. Therefore, the assessment tools must support the learn-
with a meaningful task that leads to engagement. When students are ing process. A good assessment tool that is appropriately administered
engaged in the task and the assessment, there is a greater likelihood of has the potential to provide the five benefits. Hence, teachers should
ownership and value. Ultimately, students will use reflection to empower critically evaluate the assessment tool before using it. The following
their own learning, thus completing the cycle. Take a careful look at
each of the three example assessment tools and determine for yourself
if each tool embraces the five potential benefits within the assessment
flow cycle (see Figures 2, 3, and 4). It is important to note that not all
assessment tools will yield these potential benefits.
Communication  
A good starting point is to locate assessments that take place in real-
world settings. According to Lund and Kirk (as cited in Lund & Tan-
nehill, 2010, p. 92), assessments should adhere to the following charac-
teristics: they (1) incorporate meaningful tasks that represent real-world
performance, (2) allow for higher-level thinking, (3) alert students to Re9lection   Engagement  
the assessment criteria in advance, (4) are embedded seamlessly within Assessment  
instruction, (5) allow for learning outcomes to be presented publically Tool  
Tool
when possible, and (6) include analysis of both process and products of
learning. Selecting assessment tools that reflect these assessment criteria
will help produce the five potential benefits of assessment.

Evaluating the Assessment

Value   Ownership  
Today, physical educators have more assessment tools at their dis-
posal than ever before. However, not every assessment is worthy of use.
It is vital, particularly with new assessment procedures used for teacher
performance reviews (e.g., the Annual Professional Performance Re- Figure 5.
view assessment), that assessment tools are used to verify that learning Flow cycle of the five potential benefits of assessment

 

  JoperD 15

 

 

 

questions can be used to critically evaluate and modify the assessment
tools already being used in physical education classes:
•  Does the assessment tool clearly communicate the assessment
task, goals, and scoring rubrics, thus creating a strong communication
bridge between the teacher and the students? If the communication
bridge is weak, could it be strengthened?
•  Does the assessment task provide opportunities for engagement by
offering various developmentally appropriate challenge levels that are
closely associated with the assessment goals? In short, does the assess-
ment tool invite the students to be engaged?
•  Does the assessment tool display clear tasks that allow for students
to be actively involved in the assessment? Hence, does the tool allow for
students to take ownership of their own learning?
•  Do the students find meaning in the assessment task? Accordingly,
does the tool display an authentic assessment task that increases the like-
lihood for students to value the assessment as part of the learning process?
•  Are the assessment tasks and goals coupled with open-ended re-
flection questions that will help students to create meaningful connec-
tions to enhance their own learning within the activity?
Conclusion
In the end, all teachers want students to learn, and the only way
to know if learning has taken place is to successfully assess them. By
tapping into the potential benefits, assessment becomes part of the in-
structional process and not an unrelated task to be included in the les-
son. After reviewing and understanding the five potential benefits of
assessment, it is clear that teachers need to make an effort to select and
modify assessment tools wisely. Teachers who are using appropriate as-
sessment tools will be more effective in assessing learning and will ac-
complish their goals as teachers. It is always useful to refer back to the
10 questions at the beginning of this article, to reflect on and make the
best assessment decisions possible for students, as well as to enhance the
teaching and learning process.
16  Volume 86  Number 4  April 2015
References
Belka, D. E. (2002). A strategy for improve-
ment of learning-task presentations.  Jour-
nal of Physical Education, Recreation &
Dance, 73(6), 32–35.
Bomia, L., Beluzo, L., Demeester, D., Elander,
K., Johnson, M., & Sheldon, B. (1997).
The impact of teaching strategies on in-
trinsic motivation. Champaign, IL: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early
Childhood Education.
Dyson, B., & Brown, M. (2010). Adventure
education in your physical education pro-
gram. In J. Lund & D. Tannehill (Eds.),
Standards-based physical education curric-
ulum development (2nd ed., pp. 219–245).
Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
Fitts, P. M., & Posner, M. I. (1967). Learning
and skilled performance in human perfor-
© iStockphoto/loonger
mance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Gehris, J. (2014). It’s about relationships.
Journal of Physical Education, Recreation
& Dance, 85(5), 5–7.
Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2001). Early
teacher–child relationships and the trajec-
tory of children’s school outcomes through
eighth grade. Child Development, 72,
625–638.
Kelly, L., Wessel, J., Dummer, G., & Sampson, T. (2010). Everyone can!
Skill development and assessment in elementary physical education.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Lund, J., & Tannehill, D. (2010). Assessment in curriculum development.
In J. Lund & D. Tannehill (Eds.), Standards-based physical educa-
tion curriculum development (2nd ed., p. 92). Boston, MA: Jones and
Bartlett.
Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. l. (2006). Teaching sport concepts
and skills: A tactical games approach (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics.
Morrow, J. R., Jackson, A. W., Dish, J. G., & Mood, D. P. (2011). Measure-
ment and evaluation in human performance (4th ed.). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
National Association for Sport and Physical Education. (2004). Moving
into the future: National standards for physical education (2nd ed.). Res-
ton, VA: Author.
National Association for Sport and Physical Education. (2011). PE met-
rics: Assessing national standards 1–6 in secondary school. Reston, VA:
Author.
Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1991). Student engagement: When reci-
tation becomes conversation. In H. Waxman & H. Walkberg (Eds.),
Effective teaching: Current research (pp. 257–276). Berkeley, CA: Mc-
Cutchan.
Placek, J. (1983). Conceptions of success in teaching: Busy, happy and
good? In T. Templin & J. Olsen (Eds.), Teaching in physical education
(pp. 44–56). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Richard, J. (2010). Student-involved formative assessment as a cornerstone
to the construction of game performance. In J. Butler & L. Griffin (Eds.),
More teaching games for understanding: Moving globally (pp. 157–169).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Rink, J. (2010). Teaching physical education for learning (6th ed.). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Society of Health and Physical Educators. (2014). National standards &
grade-level outcomes for K–12 physical education. Champaign, IL: Hu-
man Kinetics.
Subramaniam, P. R., & Silverman, S. (2002). Using complimentary data:
An investigation of student attitude in physical education. Journal of
Sport Pedagogy, 8, 74–91. J