Fill in the blank with the first word, words, or phrase that comes to mind.
For the longest time over the course of my career, there were the big two:
- Assessment of learning
- Assessment for learning
It was clear that the terms “assessment of” and “assessment for” learning were intended to describe distinct purposes, and we devoted a lot of resources to defining the processes, tools, timing, contexts, etc. under which each occurred.
We also spent far too much time debating whether the same assessment tool(s) could and/or should be used for both purposes. At one extreme were those ensconced within the trappings and framework of “assessment of learning” who claimed that their tools could serve both purposes. At the other extreme, we find advocates for “assessment for learning” claiming that tools used “for learning” should never serve the other purpose. In between, we have the messy middle, the gray areas, and complex contexts where the truths usually reside.
From Of and For to As
Early in the 21st century the term “assessment as learning” was added to the conversation. As is the norm for our field, the term was used in reference to two somewhat related, but at the same time distinct concepts.
One use of the term emerged from the “student-centered” teaching/learning school of thought. It positions students as central and active participants in their own learning. In that capacity, students are self-assessors, monitoring their own progress, and applying feedback to inform next steps.
A second use of the term “assessment as learning” has its roots in cognitive neuroscience. In overly simplistic terms refers to the ways that students actively engaging in the assessment process effects the brain in ways that strengthen the learning process. One can argue that both uses of the term “assessment as learning” much more than both the “of” and “for” concepts shift the focus of assessment from the outcomes of learning to the mechanisms of the learning process itself.
In The Service Of
The newest phrase likely to fill in our blank is “assessment in the service of learning” a concept that emerged from the work of the Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment in Education and its 2013 report. Simmering on low heat for a half-decade or so, the ideas and recommendations began to gather steam in the wake of the events and assessment reckoning of 2020. In 2025, this concentration of energy resulted in the publication of the massive 3-volume, 1300+ page, open-access, Handbook for Assessment in the Service of Learning.
They talk of “transforming educational assessment into a catalyst for learning,” an “integral component of pedagogy that informs the processes for learning,” and the “inseparability of assessment, teaching, and learning. The seven principles of “assessment in the service of learning” are described as follows:
- Assessment Transparency
Ensure that the purpose, criteria, and expectations of an assessment are clear to all learners. This builds trust and helps students understand how their work is evaluated - Assessment Focus and Purpose
Align assessments with clear learning outcomes and intended purposes. They should be intentional, starting with the end in mind and measuring performance against defined goals. - Assessment Support of Learning Processes
Use assessments to foster attention, motivation, engagement, effort, and metacognition. They should help students reflect on their learning and strategies - Assessment Modeling of Expectations and Desired Learning Over Time
Show learners how their work fits into a broader learning journey, modeling the expectations and progression toward mastery. - Assessment-Linked Instructional Support Including Feedback
Provide timely, descriptive, and actionable feedback that connects directly to instruction. This creates a feedback loop that guides improvement. - Assessment Equity with Attention to Learner Variation
Design assessments to be fair and accessible for all learners, recognizing and addressing differences in ability, background, and learning needs. - Assessment Quality and Validity
Ensure assessments are valid, reliable, and credible, producing evidence that is meaningful to both learners and teachers. This involves careful development and validation of assessment tools.
Assessment in the service of learning doubles down on the student-centered focus of assessment as learning. Perhaps due to the continued use of “assessment” as a noun, it’s not clear how much assessment in the service of learning ultimately will advance the concept of assessment as an ongoing process rather an even or tool.
The Other Side of the Street
The “fills-in” discussed to this point have come from the assessment side of the street and even in contrasting assessment of learning with assessment for learning are based on a fairly positive perspective on the role of assessment. Obviously, there are others who hold a much more negative view of the effects on learning of assessment, assessment policy, and/or the use of assessment. There are those who decry policies whose consequences (intended or unintended) define learning solely in terms of test scores. There are others who are uncomfortable with the disproportionate role that standardized assessment plays in the process of instruction, learning, and assessment.
One can argue that at a minimum the goal of “assessment in the service of learning” is to erase that perception (and reality) of the relationship between assessment and learning.
The goal is to move from the end of the continuum where assessment is a barrier to learning to the opposite end where assessment is part of the process that supports and improves learning.
We likely all agree that, ultimately, the focus must be on learning and not on assessment.
But what do we mean by learning?
Learning about Assessment and Learning
Despite its central role in education and gobs of research devoted to learning theory, learning itself might be the most invisible of all of the elusive constructs that we have ever attempted to measure. It is as tough to nail down as validity and fairness.
At best on tests measuring outcomes, we look for evidence that learning has occurred based on a change in student status between two test administrations.
Similarly, with formative assessment we are often seeking information that will inform the instructional process in order to improve the likelihood that learning will occur or to increase the rate of learning, but learning is still defined in terms of subsequent changes in outcomes.
An increased focus on assessing 21st skills will address more directly indicators that a student is likely to be a “proficient learner” but will still fall short of directly assessing the learning.
We may never be able to get any closer to directly measuring or assessing learning than identifying if and when learning has occurred, but that may be all that we need to do. What’s important, however, as suggested by the 7 principles above, is that we are transparent and straightforward about what we are assessing and why. That’s true whether we are assessing what the student has learned at two (or more) points in time or we are assessing student mastery of skills positively associated with learning.
My best educated guess is that most of the advances in assessment in support of learning that we will see in the short term will be related to better measuring indicators/predictors of learning in various content and skill areas – and while some of those will be common across areas, undoubtedly there will be others unique to learning in a particular area.
Despite the potential promise of personalization, I am less confident that it will result in significant changes in our estimates of student achievement and/or inferences about learning.
We have a lot to learn about assessment, a lot to learn about learning. But let’s not make assessing learning any more complicated than it has to be.
Image by Myriams-Fotos from Pixabay
Embrace the Absurd 