Assessment in Geographical Education: An International Perspective

This introductory chapter, written by two of the editors of this volume, surveys the landscape of assessment in geography education. After initially outlining the purposes of geography education and reviewing critical terminology with regards to the concept of assessment, the chapter that follows is divided into three sections. In Section I, a recap of the findings of a review of papers associated with assessment in geography education published between 2000 and 2016 is provided. Then, the review is updated to include publications between 2016 and the present. Analysis of this new literature in Section II reveals shifts around both assessment type and the scale of the research—what we have referred to as binaries. This section also illuminates the silences in geography education research. The chapter proceeds to argue that these binaries and silences need to be addressed if the field of assessment in geography education is to move forward in meaningful ways. Finally, Section III showcases the chapters that make up this volume, work that has already gone some way to working through the existing binaries and silences.

On the grounds that geography is a system science, systems thinking or system competence is considered a fundamental concept of the school subject in the German Educational Standards in Geography. Accordingly, the Earth is understood as the biggest possible system consisting of a countless number of (geographical) complex, dynamic sub-systems. In contrast to non-systems thinking, a systems thinker takes superordinate principles of systems into account in the cognitive analysis and mental representation of geographical phenomena. This principle-led perspective provides deeper understanding of the internal and external interplay and complexity of systems, which may prevent human interference in such systems having unpredictable and unwanted adverse effects. In order to know what dimensions the construct ‘systems thinking’ consists of and which proficiency levels students can reach, there is a need for corresponding theoretical and empirical foundations and an assessment instrument for diagnosing, for example, whether certain interventions effectively promote systems thinking or not. This chapter primarily explains how a normative theoretically derived structure and stage model of geographic system competence was empirically validated. Finally, three item response models are evaluated, of which a two-dimensional model with the dimensions ‘System organization and System behavior’ and ‘System-adequate intention to act’ showed the best fit according to quality criteria. This provides a valid and reliable assessment tool for future diagnosing and promoting geographical system competence.

This chapter aims to (1) introduce the methods that are commonly used in learning progression (LP) research and (2) discuss how an assessment is applied to empirical LP research in geography education. The first step in identifying an LP is to define what students know and can do at different levels of their learning of a concept. This study selected six map elements—contour lines, distance, location, map projection, orientation, and scale—as essential concepts in map understanding based on an extensive review and analysis of prior studies. A hypothesized LP on map understanding was proposed, and a map understanding test using ordered multiple-choice items to measure students’ LP was developed. The knowledge and skill descriptions presented in the hypothesized LP were transformed into choices for each question item. After the main test was conducted, the coded students’ response data was analyzed by the partial credit Rasch model. The research methodology and the assessment tool introduced in this chapter will provide a foundation for developing assessment tools to identify LPs in other areas of geographic knowledge, skills, and practices.

The acquisition of spatial skills/thinking is essential for both everyday functioning and academic purposes; therefore, valid and reliable assessment of this capability is an important task. However, to date, there have been few assessment instruments developed for spatial skills/thinking, and measures and approaches vary across disciplines and from study to study. The goal of this chapter is to review and synthesize peer-reviewed articles on the measurement/assessment of spatial skills/thinking. A search informed by systematic literature review protocols was conducted using Web of Science and Google Scholar as well as a manual search of well-known journals. A total of 19 papers were selected for full review with four broad trends in research identified: (1) measuring spatial skills/thinking on a small scale without any specific context, (2) measuring spatial skills/thinking on an environmental scale in everyday life contexts, (3) measuring spatial skills/thinking on a geographic scale in geoscience contexts, and (4) spatial skills/thinking self-assessments in everyday life contexts. This review broadens the understanding of spatial skills/thinking assessment across disciplines and provides directions for future research.

Assessing international fieldwork provides a series of challenges and opportunities that frames the student experience. In this case study students are presented with a task to deliver an assessed presentation and an activity based on a research topic of their choice to their peers in situ. Students are assessed and gain formative and summative feedback through multiple stages of the fieldtrip module from an initial group project proposal, a group presentation, an individual fieldwork diary, a reflective essay on their student-led experience, and an essay based on an overarching research theme. The chapter reveals that assessment and feedback are inextricably linked with one stage of the process informing another. Direct experiences of being on fieldwork stimulates the affective domain, with resulting emotional responses and behavior influencing performance (in assessment) and participation in students’ communities of learning (including group dynamics). This highlights the importance and role of (self-)reflection in assessment. Further consideration is made to adapt the approach to assessing international fieldwork at other levels and scales of geographical education.

In balancing the role of assessment as an integral part of the curriculum and teaching process and that of a measurement and reporting tool, practitioners are often challenged to design good assessment tasks that fulfil these purposes as well as developing cognitive skills and abilities. While there are many research studies on inquiry in fieldwork and on assessment in geography education, there is little recognition on how the whole process of inquiry acts as a form of fieldwork assessment within geographical education. This chapter proposes that inquiry can be a mode of assessment for and as fieldwork and need not be solely administered at the end of fieldwork activities.

Administered by the National Center for Education Statistics within the US Department of Education, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) programme provides statistically representative studies of what elementary and secondary students know and can do in different subject areas. NAEP results are reported as aggregated scores for student groups and as percentages of students that reach three achievement levels—Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. This chapter explores the performance of 8th grade (13–14 years old) students who participated in the 2018 NAEP geography assessment in relation to each achievement level. Examples of geography items at each level are provided to illustrate what geography students who perform at different levels are likely to know and understand. The chapter then proceeds to analyze the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of students who score at a given NAEP achievement level. Results of NAEP geography assessments indicate no overall change in student achievement and persisting achievement gaps over a 25-year period. Implications of NAEP findings for research and practice in geography education are discussed in the context of curriculum theory advanced by the GeoCapabilities project and the results of other NAEP social studies assessments.

After becoming a democratic country in 1994, South Africa set a course to overhaul all aspects of society. Education had a transformational agenda to overcome inequalities: first, removing apartheid influences, and second, in being responsive to local requirements of an equal education for a diverse population. To achieve quality education, school curricula were transformed from the introduction of an initial democratic curriculum in 1997 to the recent Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) which forms part of the National Curriculum Statement. Preparing learners to acquire skills to be part of a rapidly advancing technology-driven world has led to recent changes. In high school geography, the CAPS document includes the theme Geographical Information Systems (GIS) from Grades 10 to 12 and is tested in the Grade 12 exit examinations. While previous work has critiqued an earlier geography curriculum using ‘continuity’ and ‘progression’ as markers of quality education, the geography CAPS has not been analyzed using these concepts. Hence, in this chapter I analyze the assessments in GIS, contending that some quality markers which articulate continuity, sequencing, and progression in assessments are evident. However, despite attention to quality, historical inequalities in public schools linger, subverting the intended curriculum. Learners in disadvantaged schools where resources (teacher training and tools) are absent/inadequate are taught ‘about GIS’ and not ‘through GIS’, undermining teaching, learning, and assessment in GIS.

The dispersion of new technologies into education opens up new perspectives for the assessment of students’ performance, not only in their knowledge but also in their skills. One of these perspectives is the use of systems that enable adaptive assessment, i.e., personalized (mostly online) assessment according to the actual position of each student in the knowledge or skills hierarchy. The general presumption of this approach is that each student solves tasks according to his/her previous success—if the student fails, then s/he is presented with lower-level tasks; if s/he succeeds, s/he proceeds to more complicated tasks. Students’ progress is supported by the hints available and in particular by the structure of tasks, as easier tasks support the solution of the more complicated ones according to the theory of pedagogical scaffolding. The chapter first discusses a general framework for the use of adaptive assessment and then presents a practical example of the use of the framework to assess the level of map skills—the online adaptive application Mapwork.education. Following a general description of the application, various possibilities of its use in geography lessons are outlined.

This chapter provides a theoretical and critical exploration of how different discourses of assessment standards relate to teacher use of criteria and standards-based rubrics in geography classrooms. Fundamentally, this work responds to concerns raised in the higher education literature that the critique of standards can be lost in the context of accountability and audit. Geography has a privileged place in the school curriculum in many countries across the world; hence, this standing in the curriculum provides an opportunity and scope for educators to critique how their understandings and philosophies impact geography assessment. A social realist lens is used to explore how three philosophies of geography standards (1) representational; (2) sociocultural; and (3) sociomaterial, relate to the use of rubrics in geography assessment. The theoretical critique provides a framework for teachers to engage with ‘conceptual acrobatics’ to understanding the philosophies and structures that influence the development of the reconceptualization of assessment literacy in teaching practice. Every teacher has a philosophy of assessment standard that influences the way they interpret the standards and develop rubrics. The chapter concludes with questions aimed to develop teacher assessment literacy by considering how their assessment philosophy relates to their interpretation of assessment standards and rubrics. These questions support teachers in engaging in conceptual acrobatics that uncovers how teacher interpretations of standards relate to different philosophies to develop assessment literacy. Further empirical research is required to explore how geography teachers’ philosophies of assessment standards are interpreted in assessment rubrics and how assessment literacy in practice might be further developed.

Assessment is a significant element in the planning, teaching, assessing, and reviewing cycle of classroom practice in all subjects, including geography, in primary schools. Geography is one of the many subjects taught by primary teachers, a circumstance which may well impact on their assessment of their class’s geographical learning. However, while there is some expert guidance on why and how to undertake assessment in geography, almost nothing is known about what primary teachers in fact do in their geography assessment practices. Their experiences are not shared in teaching and academic geography education journals which, furthermore, report no research into what primary teachers do. Drawing on a number of guidance texts about primary geography, the humanities, and social studies, several dimensions of primary geography assessment are identified, though not to promote particular approaches and benefits or limitations. The dimensions discussed are: the purpose of geography assessment; understanding what children know about at the start and during a geography topic; planning and assessment; progression and assessment in geography; approaches and activities which teachers might use to undertake assessment; recording children’s learning and assessment in curriculum; and teaching accountability. Given the lack of research, what emerges are suggested research questions to gain insight into the practices of teachers and schools, so as to effect improvements. These questions form a significant agenda for research into primary geography assessment. Four priorities are highlighted: primary teachers’ intentions in their geography assessment; how their assessment practices aide children’s learning in geography topics; how their assessment intentions and practices relate effectively to the geography curriculum topics they teach; and how what teachers do and learn about their children’s geographical understanding enables them to improve their teaching and children’s learning of geography.