CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED
At the start of a new school year, I was suddenly tasked with conducting benchmark assessments for my incoming kindergarten students—something that had previously been handled by paraprofessionals. As the teacher of record, I relied on various data points for differentiated learning, but with a new principal, the responsibility shifted to me. The entire process was unsettling, and the results were far from reliable. In this post, I’ll share why this assessment experience became one of my worst.
A Bad experience
My worst experience involved administering an educational assessment called benchmarking. It happens as soon as the kindergarten students, many of whom were experiencing organized academic lessons for the first time, arrive during the first week (sometimes two) of school. These young learners come with unique expectations, varying readiness levels, and diverse backgrounds that make such assessments unreliable. Benchmarking tools often fail to capture the true developmental needs of young learners. Using the results of an assessment to determine where the student should be placed (i.e. the low learner’s group or high learner’s group) can be seen to align with a Taylorism management theory in education. Since this theory focuses on standardized learning outcomes and quantification of time on tasks, it creates a less than desirable structure for flexibility in learning and stifles differentiation.
Why so Bad
Benchmarking in kindergarten is often used to organize students into groups to align with a standardized curriculum and facilitate desired learning outcomes. However, these benchmarks can include built-in inequities, failing to account for essential aspects of a child’s emotional experience. For example, I wanted to take time to learn how my students felt about leaving home each day to come to a large, unfamiliar building filled with new faces. I wanted them to share their thoughts about the classroom, their peers, and me as their teacher, and I aimed to explain the structure of our day and my expectations clearly. Unfortunately, none of these important elements aligned with the assessment procedures. This disconnect highlights that culturally responsive teaching—understanding and addressing each child’s unique background and experiences—is crucial as an antidote to inequity, by design (edthena, 2021).
Kindergarteners Don’t know what they don’t know
I questioned the value of the benchmarking assessments. I didn’t feel they had an epistemological foundation. In the context of assessments for lower elementary learners, epistemology examines how students acquire and demonstrate knowledge. Understanding these perspectives helps shape assessments—whether they focus on memorization, critical thinking, or experiential learning. For instance, an epistemological approach might challenge traditional assessments, advocating instead for evaluations that emphasize deeper comprehension and creativity. Students are shaped by the intersectionality of their culture, parents, community, and academic structures. Each of these areas weigh heavily on how they are developing as young learners. Montenegro et al. (2017)
The worst assessment I administered lacked this depth, relying on rote recall, which failed to capture my students’ true learning potential at such an early stage. The experience left me thinking about the backward design framework. That is to say, I wanted to begin with determining what I wanted my little learners to leave kindergarten with as they moved into first grade.
Final Thoughts
the scientific approach to teaching and learning through assessments often mirrors Taylorism’s management theory, focusing on efficiency, standardization, and measuring specific outputs. This rigid method, centered on data collection and benchmarking, excludes the valuable teaching framework of backward design, which emphasizes starting with learning goals and designing assessments to meet those outcomes. My worst experience with assessments stems from this misalignment, as these methods failed to consider how knowledge is truly acquired and demonstrated by young learners. Instead, I prefer an epistemological framework, which values deeper comprehension, creativity, and real-world application—aligning more closely with my vision for meaningful assessments.
References
Edthena. (2021, August 23). Zaretta Hammond: Culturally responsive teaching 101. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxhF7TZqDyA
Montenegro, E., & Jankowski, N. A. (2017). Equity and assessment: Moving towards culturally responsive assessment. (Occasional Paper No. 29). University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA)
Image inlay used under license from Adobe/stockbusters – stock.adobe.com
