Reflections of a Teacher About Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI and Student Assessment (Part 3)
(Part 3 of 3)
By Dr. Susan Neimand and Erika Twani
Special thanks to Dr. Thomas Uhle, Jr., professor, Miami Dade College School of Education
“Amateurs practice until they get it right. Professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong.” - Peter Voogd, author.
Assessment is a simple yet powerful tool that measures what students “know” and “can do.” There is a significant difference between knowing and doing in every profession. You might know the steps to bake a cake, but producing a delicious gastronomic delight is a distinct challenge. This is the difference between amateurs (know) and professionals (“know” and “can do”). There is nothing wrong with being an amateur; in fact, it is the first step towards becoming a professional. The key difference is that professionals strive for excellence and will work relentlessly until it is achieved.
This is true in education. Teachers might know how to plan, set up a culturally responsive classroom, select engaging lesson activities, and conduct formative and summative assessments. But what can they do? Can they get organized, deliver the lesson, oversee student self-management and self-regulation, and assess student learning during and after the lesson? Can they do this in a classroom with 25 diverse students?
AI tools assist teachers and students in accelerating the “know” and the “can do” processes. AI can provide the “know” part of the assessment, but it takes a knowledgeable, experienced, caring educator to assess the “can do” part of the assessment.
AI offers a multitude of benefits in efficiency, productivity, and personalization when it comes to diverse types of assessment. Educators can explore automated grading (multiple-choice questions, true-or-false statements, short answers), natural language processing (written responses, essays), adaptive learning systems (differentiated assessments based on ability), identification of learning gaps, predictive analytics, strengths and weaknesses analysis, and peer review assistance, all of which significantly enhance the assessment process.
The metrics produced by these assessments are extremely important. For educators, these data provide information about their effectiveness in the classroom and indicate whether the instruction supports students’ mastery of concepts. Since assessment drives curriculum, this information provides educators guideposts for reteaching, refinement of instructional methods, individualized instruction, further coaching and mentoring, and tutoring.
Assessment information is also significant and essential for students’ self-awareness, personal growth, and cognitive development, where the human touch makes the difference. Providing unbiased evaluations enhances students' problem-solving and decision-making skills, especially if students revisit areas of error. Constructive criticism can also improve students’ ability to accept others’ suggestions and ideas, improving their emotional intelligence. If provided effectively and with sensitivity, assessment can display teachers’ empathy, understanding, and communication skills and impart these as social-emotional guidance. Learning to accept criticism given with the intent to nurture students can model how to process emotions successfully and not see it as a failure. Combining the human touch with AI data can significantly improve both “know” and “can do” efficiency.
Assessing the “can do” part is more of a challenge than the “know” part of the assessment. For authentic information, I asked my talented colleague and friend, Dr. Thomas Uhle, Jr., professor of teacher preparation at Miami Dade College School of Education. He supervises faculty of student-teaching internships and residency programs during the last semester of students’ preservice training. After student-teaching, the students get jobs and their classrooms; therefore, this process is critical in refining their skills.
Dr. Uhle indicated that the most important and effective assessment method of assessing preservice teachers is through direct observation in the classroom. Miami Dade College School of Education faculty developed observation documents in alignment with the best practices of effective teachers as indicated by the National Council on Teacher Quality Miami-Dade County Public Schools Instructional Performance Evaluation and Growth System (IPEGS) and the Florida Department of Education Florida Educator Accomplished Practices. The document contains indicators of successful practices (what the preservice “can do”) and areas for improvement.
Dr. Uhle’s observations provide preservice teachers with practical, high-quality, actionable feedback. His individualized approach allows preservice teachers to gauge their effectiveness and future impact on student learning once they are teachers. Dr. Uhle also provides support through suggestions, resources, and recommendations. His sensitive and insightful comments about the process are significant. Only a wise professor with years of classroom experience and excellent emotional intelligence can remediate the preservice teacher and offer this balanced and sensible perception in gauging what preservice teachers “can do.”
AI knows that assessment can help close the achievement gap by providing a more equitable and inclusive approach to evaluating student learning. By focusing on mastery, personalized feedback, and cultural responsiveness, teachers “can do” a fair approach to assessment.
AI knows and can itemize successful practices and current knowledge that have effectively closed the achievement gap and what equitable resources marginalized communities need. Teachers “can do” it! Teachers can use guidance from AI to set up relationship-based, culturally responsive experiences for the students. Teachers who include students in the decision-making processes of learning, their needs, interests, styles and profiles, and assessment methods see students thrive. Human interaction, communication, and collaboration result in opportunities to succeed.
With AI strategies and methodologies at their fingertips, every teacher “can do” the work that transforms students’ lives. Even without computers in each classroom, teachers can utilize best practices to access information for practice, bringing AI to the students via their activities and lesson plans.
Since this is the last in the series of articles on “Reflections of a Teacher about AI,” it was time to assess ChatGPT, a generative AI, to learn what it knows and what it “can do.” I am a doctorate-awarded educator with 50 years of experience. I have taught every grade level, from four-year-olds through doctoral students, and have written curriculum and assessments for the classroom and preservice teachers. So, I challenged ChatGPT!
The process was as follows: I wrote well-articulated prompts that clearly defined what I sought as taught by Erika Twani, an AI expert. Then, I answered the prompts, using only my brain and no other resources. After generating my list, I asked ChatGPT to address the prompts. Then, I compared the two lists.
In every case, whether it was reading comprehension activities to differentiate learning for fifth graders, examples of authentic assessment, why language developed in humans, a lesson plan on the rock cycle for seventh graders, or interview questions for a professor on the use of AI, both AI and I know a lot and the lists were almost identical. Almost identical! This confirmed my original assertion that AI is the collective wisdom of the brightest and most experienced educators who have worked in classrooms with students for years. We encourage you to try this exercise for yourself.
In one case, I asked about studies on how the brain is changing because of AI. ChatGPT indicated that it was programmed until 2022 and did not have information beyond that. And therein lies the rub. AI did not know. But I can continue researching, reading books and scholarly articles, and speaking to other education and technology professionals. I do not have to wait to be programmed.
While AI can produce great lists, I “can do” much more in a classroom. I can give the authentic, genuine praise, smiles, fist bumps, and “attaboy”s that students need to succeed. I can respond with hugs when the light goes on in students' eyes when they finally master a difficult concept. I can commend and applaud students and watch their body language change as their brains fill with endorphins and serotonin!
Inasmuch as I love ChatGPT and can see its real uses in saving teachers time, I know it is a tool. Teachers “can do” the work that changes the human brain as it seeks meaning and opportunities to gain experience, grow, and develop. I am happy to have learned about ChatGPT and am thrilled to have an active, productive brain that knows and “can do.”
Cheers!
