Why Paired Assessments are Positively Awesome!

Gotcha!

Usually, when we administer a test in class, perhaps at the end of the week or after a unit of study, it is solely for the teacher's benefit. It gives us a snapshot of our students' level of mastery; it allows us to see what concepts we need to spiral back into our future lessons; it shows us whom to target for interventions; and sometimes, admittedly, it simply gives us a major grade for our grade book.

Those all are valid and meaningful reasons for giving an assessment, to be sure. However, truthfully, the students don't benefit directly from these tests, at least not immediately. For them, a test is added pressure, it's a "gotcha," it's a confidence-zapper, it's something to tarnish their report card, and, of course, it is a boring obligation with no real incentive attached.

I always hated testing days just as much as my students did -- I have to play Police Officer: The Quiet Police, The Eyes on Your Paper Police, The Nothing On Your Desk Police, The Why Didn't You Study Police. And then I spend my conference period lamenting over failing grade after failing grade.

A better way to test?

I began to wonder if these tests were worth the trouble, and couldn't there be a better way to achieve what I wanted? Sure, there are many ways to assess students, and I use other assessment methods often. But the traditional paper test is a necessity, at least every once in a while. Still, I wanted something more, something better. And I found it.

During my graduate school program, I came across an idea in a book (and I'm sorry to say that I cannot for the life of me remember which of the 200 books I found this idea in): paired assessments -- or allowing students to take a test with a partner. When I read about it, I thought fleetingly, Hmm, maybe I'll try that. And then I thought of all the things that could go wrong: One partner will do all the work while the other just nods and smiles; it will become loud and very un-testlike with students talking to each other; it will turn into everyone talking with everyone rather than just pairs talking to each other -- and because of all of those things, the test scores will be invalid and worthless.

The first time I tried this method of testing was a couple of years ago with a 7th-grade ELA class, and all of those things did happen, so I felt like it was a bit of a disaster. In hindsight, I identified some things I did wrong: I had had the desks arranged in groups of four all year long, and for the paired assessment, I didn't change the arrangement; I simply placed folder dividers in front of each pair. That wasn't good enough, because, as predicted, the pairs at each foursome did not keep their conversations strictly between themselves. Another thing I did wrong was I did not spend time to purposely and intentionally pair students who I felt would work well together; I just kept them in the groups they had been in, whether they worked well or not. Finally, I also did not prepare the students for this new and unusual method of testing; I just sprang it on them without giving them any rationale or parameters. Big mistakes -- you'd think I was a rookie.

Take 2

So last year I decided to try again. This time I was teaching at an all-girls leadership academy (a big plus for reduced behavior issues) and two of my classes were pre-AP classes (another huge positive). I made some changes to how I administered the paired assessment:
* First, I spent an evening poring over my rosters and deciding who should be paired with whom. I also gave students some say in this, because I wanted them to be in these pairs for a few weeks; therefore, they needed to be sitting with someone that they felt they could work well with. I gave everyone an index card and asked them to write down up to three names of students they wanted to work with and (only if needed) names of any students they felt they simply could not work with. I used their selections to help me make my decisions on pairings, but I also used my own judgment as well as past testing data.
* I put students in their pairs at the beginning of the unit, so that they would work with their partner for all of the unit activities and develop a strong partnership before the test.
* I kept the desks arranged in pairs (NOT groups).
* I told them from the beginning of the unit that they would be taking the test with their partner, and I explained why I wanted to do it this way, and I explained in very specific terms what I expected from them. I also explained that the grade they earned on the test would apply to both members of the pair.
* During the few weeks of the instructional unit, I reminded them verbally about the upcoming paired test as well as keeping it on the board as a visual reminder.
* The day of the test, I allowed each pair to study and reminded them about my expectations.

Success!

And now we get to the good part, the reinforcement, the proof that this method is fabulous. Here is what I saw during the test (For privacy concerns, I somewhat crudely covered up their faces, but I wish you could see their expressions!):

Here is what I heard during the paired test:
* Amazing collaboration between partners
* Justification of answer choices
* Respectful debate when partners disagreed on an answer
* Going back to the texts or using the dictionary together and fully discussing the questions and answers together

And these things didn't just happen in my pre-AP classes; they also happened in my on-level class. I walked around, watching them and listening to their conversations, and I must have had a goofy smile plastered on my face the entire time. I was so pleased with what I was seeing and hearing.

Proof is in the pudding

The real proof, though, is in the results, right? The most obvious evidence that this method is fabulous was in the results of one pair in my on-level class. (I've changed the names for anonymity.) Maria was an underachiever who had been removed from pre-AP and placed in regular ELA. Her grades were generally failing grades because she rarely turned work in on time, if at all, and her performance on tests was always mediocre at best. I paired her with Allison, a target intervention student who had never passed a reading STAAR (our state's standardized test) or a district reading assessment; she was reading at least two grades below level. I put them together because I felt that being able to help Allison would increase Maria's confidence and motivation, and Allison would of course learn from Maria but would not close down because she was so outgoing that she could match Maria's spunk with no problem. The two of them did work well together, and they earned an 83 on the test -- a higher grade than either of them had earned on any assignment so far that year.

Overall, most students did very well on that test. There were only a few pairs who didn't pass, and they were given opportunities to correct their answers after small-group interventions in class. One pairing, I discovered, was a mistake -- an all-A's student who was shy paired with an academically low student who was quite the opposite in personality -- and their grade was dismally low. I gave each one the opportunity to redo their test individually.

Increasing student achievement

What I loved about this paired assessment, and why I want to do this more regularly in the future, is simple: It benefits the students. It is not just a "gotcha," or a grade for the grade book. My students were collaborating and actually learning from each other during this test. They were using listening and speaking skills as well, as they had to really listen to each other and consider their partner's opinions, and they had to justify their responses to each other. This is a huge benefit to English language learners and those with learning disabilities. This method of testing also gave students a noticeable confidence boost. They were not as stressed out about it as they usually were with traditional tests; they recognized just as I did how well they worked with their partners, and they were proud of that -- not to mention they enjoyed it (How many times do you see a student actually enjoy taking a test?); and they were thrilled to see their good grades. I saw partners high-fiving each other and celebrating together. I saw them apologizing to each other for the questions they missed, afterward launching into a renewed debate about why they answered the way they did.

All in all, I see so many benefits to this type of testing. I know that it cannot be the only method used, but it certainly can be an oft-used tool in your teacher toolbox. If you've tried paired assessments, I'd love to hear what your experiences were, and if you haven't, I challenge you to try it -- then let me know how it goes!