The Extent, Nature and Effectiveness of Planned Approaches in ...

assessment as measures of instructional need, as well as growth. The advantages of using traditionalassessment, as either pre- or post-assessment measures, are outlined by Callahan (2001c) and centrearound the ease of administration.However, if the outcomes of learning are in-depth, complex understandings or integrated knowledge,alternative assessments are suggested in the literature (Callahan, 2001c; McAlpine, 2000a;Winebrenner, 2000; Callahan & Moon, 2003; Van Tassel-Baska, 2002). Furthermore, they state thatsometimes the performance of a task is more important than ‘knowing’ something, in which casealternative assessment is more appropriate. Finally, they describe the need for alternative assessmentin the measurement of real-world applications of ideas and information to real tasks and situations.Riley (1997) states that when differentiating, appropriate performance-based assessment methodsshould be utilised, and these include rubrics, portfolios, and checklists based on the products created.Performance-based assessment for gifted and talented learners may range from unstructured andlargely student determined to highly structured and largely based upon a teacher-directed set of goalsand objectives (Callahan & Moon, 2003). McAlpine (2000a) discusses the use of portfolio, authentic,and self-assessment within the New Zealand context, stating that these are appropriate for gifted andtalented students given their focus upon higher level thinking, self-reflection, metacognition, goaldirectness,and preferred learning styles.Callahan and Moon (2003), Callahan (2001c), Stephens and Karnes (2001) and Van Tassel-Baska(2002) recommend the use of rubrics for assessing student outcomes. These allow for a range of tasksand criteria for assessment. As Van Tassel-Baska (2002) explains, “In contrast to a conventional ratingscale, a rubric is intended to give a more descriptive, holistic characterization of the quality ofstudents’ work” (pp. 68-69). Callahan and Moon (2003) outline two steps in designing a rubric forgifted and talented students: determining the dimensions for scoring the task; and setting performancelevels from highest to lowest. However, as Van Tassel-Baska (2002) makes clear, the purpose here isnot to simply give students quantitative feedback, but to provide an avenue for highly informative anduseful verbal discussion between the teacher and student. Callahan (2001c) states, “… students areentitled to feedback about their growth and achievements in response to the learning activities and inrelation to expected outcomes and levels of performance” (p. 255).Portfolios are another alternative assessment measure appropriate for gifted and talented students(Callahan, 2001c; McAlpine, 2000a; Van Tassel-Baska, 2002). McAlpine (2000a) states that the mostcommon type of portfolio used in New Zealand schools is a student portfolio, or working portfolio,which places emphasis upon students’ best performances. In relation to portfolios, Van Tassel-Baska(2002) states, “… they can serve as a basis to examine effort, improvement, processes, andachievement, as well as to meet accountability demands” (p. 69). Furthermore, she believes that aportfolio can assist in the identification of individual student’s strengths and needs, particularly if thecriteria for making judgements of the students’ work are utilised.The use of self, peer and teacher rating scales of student products is another method of assessmentdescribed in the literature (Callahan, 2001c; McAlpine, 2000a; Renzulli & Reis, 1985; Van Tassel-Baska, 2002). McAlpine (2000a) believes that the use of rating scales by different individuals (i.e.,teacher, peer, and self) is enhanced when used in combination, or triangulation, with one another.Stephens and Karnes (2001) suggest that other people might also rate student products andperformances, and these may include audience members, topic experts, parents, mentors, or schooladministrators. Renzulli and Reis (1985) provide a Student Product Assessment Form (SPAF) whichprovides an overall assessment of the quality, aesthetics, utility and function of students’ products.Similarly, Callahan (2001c) has created a student self-assessment rating scale.Finally, the assessment approach should be developed at the same time as the outcome in order tomaintain unity of purpose and to ensure that the proposed outcome can in fact be satisfactorilyassessed (Winebrenner, 2000). Incorporating assessment into the teaching-learning process is essentialto creating an authentic process (McAlpine, 2000a). Although assessment of gifted and talented144