Critical Review of Eleanor Hargreaves Corresponding author

(2005) Assessment for Learning? Thinking outside the (black)

box, Cambridge Journal of Education, 35:2, 213-224,
Name:
Course
Teacher:

Juan Obierna
:
Introductory Academic Program
Academic English and Communication Skills Component
Anisha Gautam

Introduction
The author of this article entitled Assessment for Learning? Thinking
outside the (black) box (Hargreaves, 2005), argues that the assessment
for learning models articulated in the National Curriculum assessment
system hinders the teachers from using appropriate assessment models,
thus she encourages them to think outside of the (black) box in order to
enhance the quality of the learning process and learning outcome. In this
paper, the writer will prove that her suggestion is already irrelevant. To do
this, the writer will argue the evidences that support her answer to the
three problems presented in her article, namely: a) link various teachers
understanding about assessment for learning to the different assessment
for learning models, b) categorize the teachers assessment concept, and
c) identify the reasons why some form of assessment for learning is
dominant over the other in the English education system.
Summary
The primary objective of the article is to determine and deduce the
concept on the assessment of learning as practiced by two groups of
educators, the teachers and the head teachers with the ultimate goal of
relating this concepts and practices on the assessment for learning
models in the 1998 National Curriculum assessment system of England.
In this article, the author was able to establish that there are two
assessment of learning models which is dominant in the National
Curriculum.

These

models

are

the

assessment

of

learning

for

measurement and the assessment for learning as a form of enquiry

(objective model). After determining the dominant assessment for learning

models, Hargreaves (2005) attempted to relate these models to the

different assessment of learning practices of her respondents. She found
out that aside from the model of assessment inferred from the 1998
National

Curriculum

assessment

constructivist assessment for

system,

teachers

use

the

co-

learning model

which she called in her article as the unconventional

(outside of the box) model. Having determined this, she suggested that
this model should be taken into consideration by education policy makers
in order that the quality of the learners learning process will be enhanced
and in the long run the learning outcome as well.
Review
Eleanore Hargreaves (2005) analytical skills is evident in realizing her first
two research objectives. As aimed in her first objective, she was able to
dichotomize and linked the understanding of her respondents to the
different models of assessment for learning espoused by several experts.
For example, response phrases such as continuous monitoring.,
graded improvement. , seeing where we are at etc.) are phrases
which indicate that teachers are doing the target setting thus, she linked
this to assessment for learning1 as a means to monitor the performance of
the pupils.

Bound (Boud, 2000)claims that the role of a teacher in

assessment is to communicate to the learners their collective learning

intention or objective.
On the second objective, Hargreaves (2005) work in differentiating
assessment for learning in the context of assessment as a form of
measurement; and in the context of assessment as a form of enquiry
(objective assessment),

is as convincing as the responses of her

respondents as it fits with the definition that it is a procedure believed to

provide hard evidence (Pollard & Filer, 2001). According to her, in order
that an assessment can be considered as a form of measurement, it
should be viewed as something that the assessor could not influence thus,
she equated one of her respondents classroom assessment strategy 2 as a
manifestation of this concept.
1 Other assessment models mentioned by Hargreaves (2005) include
assessment for learning a means to a) inform next step in teaching and learning,
b) give feedback for improvement, c) learn about childrens learning, d) have
children take control of their learning, and d) turn assessment in learning event.

On the context of objective assessment for learning model, Hargreaves

(2005) averred that its emphasis should be on the deeper understanding
of the leaner as person and not just a performer. To support her claim, she
used her observations on assessment for learning in Nadia, Remy, Melina
and Ben. Particularly, she cited Nadias strategy as:

2 Jill is one of the respondents who lets the pupils read a text, makes judgment
about her pupils reading level, and provide books at the level for the pupils to
read.

Students are encouraged to investigate their learning process

during the day. Then they are given 30 minutes to describe their
reflections in learning journals, which can remain private to the
students if they wish to. Later in the term they search through the
journal and comment on their own learning.
Given the aforementioned understanding of people about assessment for
learning, the author claimed that teachers in England may have been
using models of assessment for learning which they believe are based on
the National Assessment framework of the National Curriculum which
otherwise can be categorized as an outside of the box assessment model.
To Hargreaves (2005), the assessment model being used by the teachers
in her country become dominant not because it is the most appropriate
model as the teachers see it. Rather, it is what the national leadership and
the

National

Curriculum

Assessment

system

mandated

them

to

implement. To support her assertion, she cited the Plowden Report

(1967,volume 1, p.188, quoted in Dann, 2002, p.21) and Galloway et al.,
(1994) which say that the childs education should focus on how s/he
could be integration in a market society of which s/he is a part of. Because
of these claims, she suggested that teachers and policy makers should
think outside of the box in deciding for a suitable model of assessment for
learning to ensure the quality of the learners learning experience and the
learning outcome as a whole. This brings this writer to disagree on her
third conclusion that the teachers are inflexible in choosing appropriate
assessment model for their learners because they are not allowed to
deviate from the National Curriculums Assessment system by their
superiors thus, there is a need for them to think outside of the (black) box.
Hargreaves (2005) conclusion implies that teachers are helpless as to
what model of assessment for learning they will use in their classrooms.
However, a study published prior to her study argues that teachers in
England and Wales use various models of assessment which are not
articulated in the National Curriculum assessment system. These models

of assessment are very flexible that even the people who are in power to
influence education policies

did not find trouble when teachers adopts

them in their classrooms (Daugherty, 1996).

Conclusion
Considering all the arguments stated in this paper, it can be concluded
that Hargreaves (2005) is effective in her categorization of the different
notions of assessment for learning and in differentiating assessment as
measurement from assessment as enquiry. Furthermore, her suggestion
that teachers should consider other models of assessment for learning 3 as
alternatives to the prescribed assessment system in the National
Curriculum of England is no longer relevant since teachers are already
practicing it even before she conducted her study.

References
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable Assessment: Rethinking assessment for the
learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.
doi: 10.1080/713695728
Daugherty, R. (1996). In search of teacher assessment-its place in the
National Curriculum assessment system of England and Wales. The
Curriculum Journal, 137-152. doi: 10.1080/0958517960070202
Hargreaves, E. (2005). Assessment for Learning? Thinking outside of the
(black) box. Cambridge Journal of Education, 213-224. doi:
10.1080/03057640500146880
Pollard, A., & Filer, A. (2001). The myth of objective assessment An
analysis in relation to primary education. Education 3-13, 29(3), 4-8.
doi: 10.1080/03004270185200291

3 Hargreaves (2005) calls this alternative assessment as co-constructivist model

which according to her is the outside of the box assessment model.