What Exactly Is "Understanding?" And How Do We Assess It?

Terry Heick's article on the subject of defining and assessing understanding definitely piqued my interest especially with the discussions in class on types of assessment, testing to teach, and learner diversity. The comments made by others further highlighted the point that there really is no test that is one-size-fits all, unfortunately there will be students whose true capabilities or understanding of a particular subject that won't be showcased to their full potential. A couple of comments that I could relate to were:

"As I was reading this article, it reminded me of when I was in high school. I would study and study for a test and still get a B would walk away thinking "But I know this stuff." Sometimes just giving students a paper and pencil test, doesn't give them the opportunity to show us what they really did learn. Yes, it is important they are learning the main objectives and standards, but why limit them to just those. Allow students to show and demonstrate what they have learned instead of using so many "snapshots" to form a grade."-Nym

"...I had this little guy who the teachers claimed had a low IQ--whatever that means. He failed every test even though he seemed to be able to do the class work. When working with him one on one, I found him to be very quick at grasping concepts; he could not only reiterate what he learned, but often he could think deeper about what he was learning. However, this student did not make it past his sophomore year in high school. "School was not a good fit for him," some would say. Sad..."- mkpeterson

The consensus seems to be that a broader definition of understanding in education needs to established or allowed to positively engender the availability/diversity of quality assessments teachers can use to help their students. 

Parts of the article that got my attention:

"Alternatives to Bloom's Taxonomy

Of course, Wiggins and McTighe also helpfully provide what they call "6 Facets of Understanding," a sort of alternative (or supplement) to Bloom's Taxonomy. In this system, learners prove they "understand" if they can:

1. Explain

2. Interpret

3. Apply

4. Have perspective

5. Empathize

6. Have self-knowledge

Robert Marzano also offers up his take on understanding with his "New Taxonomy," which uses three systems and the Knowledge Domain:

1. Self-System

2. Metacognitive System

3. Cognitive System

4. Knowledge Domain

The Cognitive System is closest to a traditional taxonomy, with verbs such that describe learner actions such as recall, synthesis and experimental inquiry.

Solution

Of course, there is no solution to all of this tangle, but there are strategies educators can use to mitigate the confusion -- and hopefully learn to leverage this literal cottage industry of expertise that is assessment.

1) The first is to be aware of the ambiguity of the term "understands," and not to settle for just paraphrasing it in overly-simple words and phrases like "they get it" or "proficiency." Honor the uncertainty by embracing the fact that not only is "understanding" borderline indescribable, but it is also impermanent. And the standards? They're dynamic as well. And vertical alignment? In spots clumsy and incomplete. This is reality.

2) Secondly, help learners and their families understand that it's more than just politically correct to say that a student's performance on a test does not equal their true "understanding;" it's actually true. If communities only understood how imperfect assessment design can be -- well, they may just run us all out of town on a rail for all these years of equating test scores and expertise.

3) But perhaps the most powerful thing that you can do to combat the slippery notion of understanding is to use numerous and diverse assessment forms. And then -- and this part is important -- honor the performance on each of those assessments with as much equity as possible. A concept map drawn on an exit slip is no less evidence of understanding than an extended response question on a state exam.

In fact, I've always thought of planning, not in terms of quizzes and tests, but as a true climate of assessment, where "snapshots" of knowledge are taken so often that it's truly part of the learning process. This degree of frequency and repetition also can reduce procedural knowledge, and allow for opportunities for metacognitive reflection post-assessment, such as the "So? So What? What now?" sequence.

If you are able to show all assessment results -- formal and informal -- for the most visible portion of the learning process, the letter grade itself, learners may finally begin to see for themselves that understanding is evasive, constantly changing, and as dynamic as their own imaginations."

Full article at http://www.edutopia.org/blog/slippery-notion-assessing-understanding-terry-heick