When it comes to planning instruction, the ADDIE model (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) is arguably the most prominent instructional design model developed, but many others have since been developed and promoted. There are differences in the models, but there are three broad activities an instructional designer must accomplish.

Three Essential Tasks in the Instructional Design Process

1) Establish the learning objectives for the instruction.

2) Decide how to assess the expected learning outcomes.

3) Design and develop instructional activities to facilitate the desired learning.

Why start with the Assessment

Wiggins and McTighe (2005) popularized this idea by coining the term Backward Design or starting with the end in mind. Their book Understanding by Design includes the following steps: Identify the desired results, determine acceptable evidence that the expected learning outcomes have been met, then plan learning experiences and instruction to facilitate the expected learning. This approach of establishing learning objectives and creating assessments before creating learning activities was not a new concept, but Wiggins and McTighe effectively rebranded the ideas of Tyler, Gagné , Mager, and others – concepts that were the foundation of most Instructional Systems Design (ISD) models developed in the 1950s and 1960s. As a result of Wiggins and Mctighe's work, present-day educators and instructional designers have been reintroduced to this critical concept.

The issue with basing an exam on what is being taught is that some important learning goals may be overlooked. Instructors often possess strong content knowledge, but they may have a bias toward teaching their favorite topics, neglecting less engaging but essential subjects or those they are less familiar with.

By planning and creating the assessment first, educators can align their instruction with all the learning goals. Creating the test beforehand provides a clear roadmap for designing instruction. So let's begin.

Test Planning

Many instructional designers skip this step, but it is crucial to create a test plan with clear learning objectives before creating an assessment (i.e., writing the test items). Creating a test plan helps ensure that the test is designed to measure what learners are expected to know and be able to do after completing a training or learning program.

There are many ways to plan a test. A test plan need not be complicated, but there are a few specific details the plan should address.

1. Test Purpose. The purpose of the assessment should be established. This will include an indication of who will take the test and how the results will be used. 
2. Test Format and Administration. The most appropriate test format should be selected based on the objectives and target audience. You need to determine what kind of test will most appropriately measure the selected learning objectives. Decide on how the test will be administered.
3. Learning Objectives. Identify what knowledge, skills, or abilities you aim to measure. A test plan with clear learning objectives helps focus the testing process.
4. Content Outline. Describing the content to be tested helps the test creator understand the skills or knowledge that learners will need to demonstrate. This will be needed when writing test items.
5. Test Specifications Table. A table of specifications helps test creators make decisions about the number of items to include. It helps them align test items with the content and the learning objectives or constructs being assessed. Using a specification test can also help validate an assessment by providing a visual representation of the content and construct coverage. 

1. Purposes for Assessment in Education

An essential aspect of the test plan involves specifying the purpose and the intended audience. This is a simple yet important requirement. Understanding who will take the test, why you are administering the test, and how the results will be used is essential when creating test items and choosing a test format. 

Your test plan should indicate the reason you are creating the assessments. Assessments can serve multiple purposes in education; however, rarely will an assessment be valid for more than one purpose. The design of an assessment should align with its purpose.  

Common Purposes for Assessment in Education

Placement Tests: used to evaluate a student's readiness to take a course or to determine eligibility for advanced placement.

Formative Assessment: used throughout the learning process to monitor student progress and inform instructional decisions to enhance learning outcomes.

Diagnostic Assessment: administered to identify the underlying reason for a student's learning challenges or unsuccessful mastery of content, enabling educators to address specific barriers and provide appropriate support.

Summative Assessment: a comprehensive evaluation administered at the end of a learning unit, course, or program to measure student achievement and determine the extent to which learning objectives have been met.

A placement test is an evaluation used to determine an individual's current level of knowledge, skills, or abilities in a specific subject area or domain. It is an evaluation in that the results will be used either to judge the student's readiness to engage in the planned instruction or to determine if the student should be awarded advanced placement. These assessments are administered before the start of a course or program.

Suppose the purpose of the test is to determine readiness. In that case, the assessment will focus on essential prerequisite knowledge, skills, and abilities the student needs in order to accomplish the learning goals of the upcoming course or program. If the assessment results indicate a student does not possess the requisite knowledge or skills, remediation may be recommended.

Sometimes, placement tests are used as evidence that a student has already accomplished the expected learning goals of a course. In this case, the assessment results are used to determine whether the instruction is needed (i.e., waiving a course requirement or award advanced placement). In this case, the placement exam would need to be more comprehensive as it is essential to ensure students have mastered the content and skills covered in the course.

Formative assessments in education are designed to provide ongoing feedback and support to students and educators throughout the learning process. They are conducted regularly to monitor student progress and inform instructional decisions.

Some key characteristics of formative assessments include:

Feedback-Oriented: Formative assessments are typically not graded; their primary purpose is to enhance learning rather than to evaluate it for a final grade. They focus on providing timely and constructive feedback to help students understand their strengths and areas for improvement. Results from formative assessments are intended to inform instructional adjustments, enabling educators to adapt their teaching to meet the diverse needs of individual students.

Informal and Flexible: These assessments can take various forms, such as quizzes, discussions, observations, and peer reviews, and are often less formal than summative assessments. They are usually brief and target specific learning objectives, allowing for more frequent and targeted feedback.

Student-Centered: Formative assessments encourage active student involvement in learning, promoting self-assessment and reflection on their learning. They help students set specific learning goals and track their progress toward achieving them. These assessments often involve collaboration between students and teachers, fostering a supportive learning environment. These assessments aim to promote content mastery by allowing students to learn from their mistakes and improve continuously.

Diagnostic assessments are conducted after a formative assessment has identified a learning deficit. While a formative assessment might identify a learning gap, the purpose of this additional testing is to identify the underlying reasons for a student's learning challenges or unsuccessful mastery of content. These assessments are crucial for pinpointing specific barriers to learning and providing tailored support. They help educators understand the root causes of learning difficulties, whether they stem from gaps in prior knowledge, misconceptions, or other factors.

Key characteristics of diagnostic assessments include:

Detailed Analysis: Diagnostic assessments are highly focused and aim to determine why students fail to master specific skills, concepts, or learning objectives. They are designed to identify precise areas of strength and weakness rather than providing a broad overview of a student's performance. These assessments often involve detailed and comprehensive evaluation methods, such as carefully designed quizzes, interviews, or performance tasks, to gather nuanced information about a student's thought process, abilities, and challenges.

Individualized: Diagnostic assessments are typically administered to individual students or small groups of students with similar learning profiles. This approach allows educators to gather specific information about each student's unique needs and tailor their support accordingly. By identifying the precise nature of a student's difficulties, educators can design personalized instructional strategies and supports to address these issues effectively.

Early Detection: Diagnostic assessments are typically administered early in the learning process when a learning issue is first suspected. Early detection of learning challenges allows for timely intervention, preventing further difficulties and promoting better learning outcomes.

Summative assessments are evaluations conducted at the end of a learning unit, course, or program to measure student achievement and determine the extent to which learning objectives have been met. Some key characteristics of summative assessments include:

Comprehensive and Cumulative: Summative assessments cover a broad range of content and skills learned throughout the instructional period. They aim to assess students' overall understanding and mastery of the subject matter taught during that time.

Evaluative: The primary purpose of summative assessments is to evaluate student learning and assign grades or scores that reflect their level of achievement. These assessments are often used for high-stakes decisions like course placement, promotion, or graduation.

Formal: Summative assessments are typically formal, structured, and sometimes standardized. They may include exams, essays, projects, presentations, or portfolios administered under controlled conditions and graded using predefined criteria or rubrics.

Limited feedback: Unlike formative assessments, which provide ongoing feedback for improvement, summative assessments typically offer limited feedback to students. The focus is on measuring achievement rather than guiding learning.

While many value the information provided by summative assessments, the overreliance on summative high-stakes testing in education has been a topic of criticism among educators, researchers, and policymakers. Critics argue that excessive focus on high-stakes testing can narrow the curriculum. Because standardized tests are misused as a measure of teacher quality, educators are often forced to "teach to the test" to ensure students do well on these exams so they are not judged poorly as teachers. Critics also point out that standardized summative assessments for a few key subjects provide an incomplete or inaccurate picture of student learning (i.e., the whole person problem), particularly for those who may not perform well under the pressure of high-stakes testing. Given the fact that most public schools maintain a social pass policy and that summative assessments are often used only to hold schools accountable for demonstrating students have learned, critics argue that the use of end-of-year standardized testing has little educational value.

Moreover, an overemphasis on summative assessments can contribute to student anxiety and stress, as well as a decreased motivation for learning. Summative assessments often fail to accommodate diverse learning styles and needs, leading to an inequitable assessment environment where some students are unfairly disadvantaged. Additionally, the emphasis on summative assessments can overshadow the importance of formative assessments, which provide ongoing feedback and support for student growth. Still, rightly or not, standardized summative assessments are valued by policymakers, who find them to be a cost-effective way to hold schools accountable for student learning.

2. Test Format and Administration

Once you have specified the purpose of the test, your test plan should include how the test will be administered and the format you intend to use. The purpose and learning objectives you are measuring will largely determine this. In your test plan, you should specify whether the test will be a traditional objectively scored assessment, an alternative assessment (e.g., presentation, project, demonstration), a performance assessment, or something else. Your test plan should also indicate the test conditions you require for the assessment, e.g., timed test (i.e., speed or power).

3. Learning Objectives

Once you have identified the reason for creating a test, you must clearly specify the learning objectives or expected learning outcomes you plan to assess. These often will be derived from educational standards. 

Standards-based Reform 

In the 1990s, educational reform efforts began emphasizing a standards-based approach that aligns curriculum, instruction, and assessment with clearly defined academic expectations. The goal of standards-based reform is to ensure that all students, regardless of their background or location, have access to a high-quality education that prepares them for success in college, career, and life.

Key components of standards-based reform include:

1.      Academic standards: The development and adoption of clear, rigorous, and measurable academic standards that define what students should know and be able to do at each grade level and in each subject area.

2.      Alignment: The alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment with the academic standards to ensure that students are being taught and assessed on the knowledge and skills outlined in the standards.

3.      Assessment: The use of standardized assessments to measure student progress and proficiency in relation to the academic standards. Assessment results are used to inform instruction, identify areas for improvement, and hold schools and educators accountable for student learning.

4.      Accountability: The establishment of accountability systems that hold schools, districts, and states responsible for student performance and progress toward meeting the academic standards. Accountability measures may include rewards for high-performing schools and interventions for low-performing schools.

5.      Professional development: The provision of ongoing professional development and support for educators to help them understand and effectively implement the academic standards and align their teaching practices accordingly.

The rationale behind standards-based reform is that by setting clear and high expectations for all students and aligning all aspects of the education system to these expectations, student achievement will improve, and educational equity will be enhanced. However, the implementation of standards-based reform has been met with both successes and challenges, including concerns about the emphasis on standardized testing, the narrowing of curriculum, and the need for adequate resources and support for educators and students.

Some well-known examples of standards-based reform initiatives in the United States include the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, which required states to develop academic standards and assess student progress annually, and the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) initiative, which aimed to establish consistent and rigorous academic standards across states. 

Content and Performance standards

You will often hear people talk about educational standards in a general sense and maybe a bit confused about what they mean. Content and performance standards are two distinct but related components of educational standards. Here's a description of the difference between the two:

Content Standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that students should acquire in a particular subject area at each grade level. They outline the essential content that students should learn and understand. Content standards are typically broad statements that describe what students should know and be able to do in a specific academic discipline.

For example, a content standard in English language arts might state that students should be able to "analyze how complex characters develop over the course of a text, interact with other characters, and advance the plot or develop the theme."

Performance Standards, on the other hand, define the level of proficiency or mastery that students should demonstrate in relation to the content standards. They describe the expectations for student performance and provide clear benchmarks for assessing student achievement. Performance standards often include specific criteria or indicators that students must meet to demonstrate their understanding and application of the content standards.

For instance, a performance standard related to the above content standard might require students to "write an essay analyzing how the protagonist's actions and interactions with other characters contribute to the development of the theme, citing specific evidence from the text to support their arguments."

Key differences:

1. Focus: Content standards focus on the subject matter knowledge and skills, while performance standards focus on the level of proficiency or mastery expected from students.

2. Scope: Content standards are generally broader and more comprehensive, outlining the essential learning objectives, while performance standards are more specific and measurable, defining the criteria for assessing student achievement.

3. Application: Content standards guide curriculum development and instruction, while performance standards guide assessment and evaluation of student learning.

In summary, content standards define what should be taught in schools, while performance standards describe how well students should demonstrate what they are taught. Both content and performance standards work together to create a comprehensive framework for teaching, learning, and assessment in education.

Creating Learning Objectives

No set of grade-specific standards can fully reflect the great variety of abilities, needs, learning rates, and achievement levels of students in any given classroom. Importantly, the standards provide guidelines for what curriculum experts feel are important to help students toward the goal of college and career readiness for all students. Often, the standards are quite broad and tend to describe content to be taught not specific learning to be assessed. This is where learning objectives are important.  Two of the most commonly used formats for creating learning objectives are Behavioral and Grondlund's formats. 

Behavioral Learning Objectives

Robert Mager's Behavioral Learning Objectives emphasize clarity and specificity in educational goals, deeming them essential tools for effective teaching and assessment. Mager's approach insists that learning objectives should be precise and observable. Each objective must specify the desired behavior, the conditions under which the behavior will be performed, and the criteria for acceptable performance. By detailing what students should be able to do, under what circumstances, and how well, Mager's method ensures that both instructors and learners clearly understand the expectations. This structured format aids is intended to help create focused lesson plans and provide measurable outcomes that facilitate accurate evaluation of student progress.

Examples

Objective:  Ninth-grade students will solve quadratic equations using the quadratic formula. 

Behavior: Solve quadratic equations using the quadratic formula.

Conditions: Given a set of quadratic equations on a worksheet.

Gronlund's Guidelines:

1. Start with a General Instructional Objective (GIO): Outline a broad goal that reflects the desired understanding or ability.

2. Specific Learning Outcomes (SLO): Break down the general objective into specific, observable, and measurable outcomes. These outcomes clarify what students might do to demonstrate mastery of the general objective.

3. Use action verbs: Each objective should use specific action verbs like "identify," "explain," or "evaluate," which describe observable student behaviors that align with the appropriate levels of cognitive complexity in Bloom's Taxonomy. Verbs should indicate specific, measurable, and observable behaviors. They should not describe a process (e.g., students will think about …) but rather an outcome (e.g., students will explain … ).

4. Align SLOs with GIO: Ensure that the specific learning outcomes collectively support and collectively define all the essential aspects of the general instructional objective.

5. Ensure Measurability: Make sure each specific learning outcome can be assessed through observation or measurement.

Example

General Objective: Effectively communicates ideas.

Specific Learning Outcomes:

1. Identifies the key elements of verbal and non-verbal communication.
2. Demonstrates active listening skills in a conversation.
3. Judges the effectiveness of different communication strategies in a given scenario.
4. Provides a persuasive argument using clear and coherent speech.

Observable evidence that the SLOs have been accomplished ensures that the broad educational goals have been achieved.

Examples of General Instructional Objectives for Bloom Levels

In summary, to create a valid test it is crucial to identify the purpose and specify the learning objectives or expected learning outcomes, which are often derived from educational standards. In the 1990s, educational reforms emphasized a standards-based approach, aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment with clear academic expectations to ensure high-quality education for all students. Key components of this reform include the development of rigorous academic standards, alignment of educational practices, standardized assessments, accountability systems, and professional development for educators. Standards-based initiatives like the Common Core State Standards aim to improve student achievement and educational equity. Educational standards are composed of content standards, which define essential knowledge and skills, and performance standards, which describe the level of proficiency expected. Effective learning objectives, often created using Behavioral or Gronlund's formats, are essential for guiding instruction and assessment, ensuring alignment with desired educational outcomes. Regardless of the format you might use, establishing clear learning objectives is required before creating the assessment.

4. Content Outline

A content outline describes the topics to be covered in a course. This may differ from course to course based on the grade level of a course or the purpose for the course. For example, the learning objectives may state that student will know and understand terms, definitions, and concepts, but the content oultine specifies which terms, definitions, and concepts are to be tested.

The level of detail included in the outline will depend; however, the outline should be detailed enough  to adequate describe what should be tested. An example of an English course might include:  

English 201   

 Grammar and Vocabulary

·         Parts of speech (nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc.)

·         Sentence structure (simple, compound, complex sentences)

·         Punctuation and capitalization

·         Common grammatical errors and how to avoid them

    Writing Skills

·         Structure of a paragraph (topic sentence, supporting details, concluding sentence)

·         Types of paragraphs (narrative, descriptive, expository, persuasive)

·         Structure of an essay (introduction, body paragraphs, conclusion)

·         Types of essays (narrative, descriptive, expository, argumentative)

·         Writing process (prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, publishing)

·         Thesis statements and supporting arguments

·         Citing sources and avoiding plagiarism

    Literary Analysis

·         Elements of a short story (plot, setting, character, conflict, theme)

·         Analysis of selected short stories

·         Character analysis and development

·         Literary devices (e.g., symbolism, foreshadowing, irony)

·         Writing a short story response essay

5. Table of Specifications

Reverse Engineering 

It may be the case that the exam has already been created without a test plan. In this case, you may want to reverse engineer the table of specifications. This involves evaluating each item on the test and placing it in the table. This can be useful in identifying gaps in the content coverage or missing learning objectives.

Overall, an effective assessment plan should begin with a clear statement of purpose, outlining the goals and objectives of the assessment. The next section should detail the learning outcomes to be assessed, aligning them with relevant educational standards and Bloom's Taxonomy levels. Following this, the plan should describe the assessment methods to be used, including any rubrics needed to accomplish the assessment. It should provide an outline of the content to be covered and a table of specifications to provide a visual representation of how the items on the test align with the content being assessed. 

References

Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1916). The development of intelligence in children (E. S. Kite, Trans.). Williams & Wilkins. (Original work published 1905)

Eisner, E. (1997). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. New York: Merrill Publishing Company.

Mager, R. F. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction (3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: Center for Effective Performance.

Gronlund, N. E., & Brookhart, S. M. (2009). Gronlund's writing instructional objectives (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.