Adjusting Assessments
Since MI is the way participants demonstrate what they know, MI is a perfect match for assessment. How we ask participants to "show what they know" has multiple effects:
- How authentic the assessment is (i.e., how realistic is it that the skill will be used in this way)
- How much learners "buy into" the assessment (i.e., how much they will commit and what value they perceive)
Assessment occurs any time we find out about our participants' understanding of content. These assessments could be formative (meant to help us know what the participant knows and adjust instruction to improve understanding, but not included in the final grade) or summative (meant to provide a grade...an "end of the unit" type of assessment).
Our goal is to create assessments that are both authentic and MI friendly. Creating an authentic assessment means that the final product is created in a format that reflects how the skill or content will be used in the world. In other words, asking a participant to take a test on the subcapacities of each intelligence would tell us how much they know about the words on the page, but would not be authentic. A more authentic assessment would ask participants to choose two struggling students in their classes, consider the subcapacities those students display, and postulate on ways to use those students' dominant intelligences to help them better demonstrate an understanding of content.
When working with any group of participants, there will be a variety of intelligence strengths represented. When teaching and creating assessments that are MI friendly, it is important to remember the following:
- Every person possesses all eight intelligences.
- Most people can develop each intelligence to an adequate level of competency.
- Intelligences work together in complex ways. There are many ways to be intelligent within each intelligence (i.e., the subcapacities).
Every assessment in your course cannot provide an option for every intelligence. However, many assessments can provide options that make them friendly to more than just one intelligence. By consciously incorporating multiple intelligences into the assessments in an online course, participants are able to more comfortably and effectively demonstrate their understanding of content.
When revising or creating assessments, the first step is to review the objectives/outcomes of the course as a whole and the assessment specifically. The objectives should not change with the addition of MI or the move toward a more authentic assessment.
Process and Product
Incorporating the intelligences into an assessment may take place in the process (the actions needed to complete the assessment) or the product (the result...the "thing" that gets turned in for grading).
For example, an assessment might ask a participant to read an article and then respond to that article by writing a review, including a summary and participant agreement or disagreement on particular points. The process could be adapted by providing choice, including video or audio links. Participants could find their own resource (article, video, podcast, etc.) on a specific topic. The product could be adapted by providing options on how the reflection takes place. Rather than a written review, the participant could submit a pod- or vodcast. The participant could interview experts in the field, or even the article author and provide commentary. The participant could create a graphic representation of the article and how it melds (or doesn't) with his/her beliefs.
It is not necessary to modify both process and product. The important thing is to provide choice when possible, and also incorporate authenticity. Focus on the objectives and learning that need to be demonstrated.
Review the articles for this module to consider both authentic assessment and ways to incorporate intelligences into assessment. Check the Assessment Ideas Key Info for more suggestions.