Mounik Shankar Lahiri “There can be infinite uses of the computer and of new age technology, but if teachers themselves are not able to bring it into the classroom and make it work, then it fails.” – Nancy Kassebaum The adage that ‘change’ is the only permanent thing in society can be no truer than it is for school education in the 21st Century with technology being increasingly marketed as a saviour for falling educational standards in schools and classrooms. The number of businesses and service providers today who engage themselves with school education, whether it be in testing, assessment, or classroom learning processes have increased exponentially with many for-profit start-ups and established businesses looking to capture this market. These organizations do not always have experienced teachers or experts in cognitive science, but are more frequently staffed by data crunchers. Additionally, most of these organizations see it as an extremely lucrative market that promises good returns on investment. Despite this, the crucial question to be asked, with respect to educational quality is, have increased technology and outsourced classroom processes of devising assessment modules and assessing student performance really improved the quality of education in our schools? Indian school education, in many ways, has been at the cornerstone of two significant developments. First, it is faced with a demand from a lot of new generation parents and in limited ways, educational boards, for incorporating progressive pedagogy that improves student interactions and learning outcomes, especially the demand to move to more inclusive processes. The second development is that there is an increased availability and demand for integrating technology in the classroom, most of which is presumably to improve pedagogic standards and processes. It is therefore important to critically examine the extent to which technology in the classroom helps learning outcomes, especially when viewed through the prism of outsourced grading and assessments. The main impetus to the outsourcing of assessment modules comes from a remarkable paradigmatic shift in educational policy in India, especially through the ‘Right to Education Act’ mandated ‘Continuous and Comprehensive Assessment’ (CCE). The stated aim of this shift is to be able to assess every aspect of the child’s presence in a school and not just subject a child to periodic examinations that attempt to test a year of classroom learning and instruction delivery. It is believed that this will reduce the burden on every child before the examination as the overall assessment period is spread out across many different small tests, which will in

Ritesh Khunyakari The wide coverage of students’ achievements in news media, advertisements, and reports after the board exams underscores the significance that society attributes to one-time performance. Appearing for an exam, visits to classrooms or schools, meetings in institutions give an impression of inspection and judgment. One wonders why we are not able to relate assessment to the delight of knowing what we know and what we need to know in order to work better or create spaces for enhancing learning. This article emphasizes the need for re-thinking assessment to make it informed, productive and enrich the learning experience for all involved. Unpacking the notion of assessment First, let us distinguish “assessment” from a related but conceptually distinct term “evaluation”. According to Rossi, Lipsey, and Freedman1 (2004), evaluation involves “a systematic process of gathering, analyzing and using information from multiple sources to judge the merit or worth of a program, project, or entity”. While evaluation enables informed judgments about programmes, their improvement, and implementation, assessment serves in decision-making by measuring performance on task, activity, project, or any specific engagement. Russell and Airasian2 (2012, p3) define assessment as the “process of collecting, synthesizing, and interpreting information to aid the teacher in decision-making.” Thus, individual or group performances are assessed and academic programmes are evaluated. According to Tanner and Jones (2006)3, assessment is a continuous process involving three kinds of purposes: managerial, communicative, and pedagogical. Based on its purposes, assessment caters to different stakeholders – students, parents, policy makers, etc. As visualized in Figure 1, assessment is at the inter-junction of these three primary purposes. Often, some purpose gets emphasized while others get compromised. A balance between purposes needs to be sought, which perhaps could be built on an understanding of the forms of assessment. Forms of assessment: A bird’s eye-view If we were to consider the different ways of assessing, we find ourselves to be struggling with dichotomies. Table 1 captures the various schemes and ‘dichotomies’ in use. The bi-directional arrow indicates continuity and variation within a scheme. Often, there is a confusion between a scheme and a form which leads us to mixed ideas. Making explicit the feature underlying a scheme and its corresponding dichotomous forms clarifies at least two things: (a) the assessment forms (represented as ‘defining dichotomy’) mirror the underlying feature (purpose), and (b) the continuity between a dichotomy implies that items representing both forms can be used in the same assessment tool. Let us tease out the meaning we relate with each

Shravan Kumar Pendyala How do we assess art? This is a common and difficult situation for every person concerned about art education, whether they are educationists, curriculum designers, or practicing teachers. The art teacher is a ‘constant’ between the art work and the student in an art class where he/she has full autonomy and is accountable for his/her actions and assessment of students. The assessments carry messages for what count as ‘good’ or ‘desirable’ outcome, an evidence of progression, a certain acknowledgment of quality of skill and competency in comprehending art concepts. Hence, the marks, grades, or annotations on artworks of students play a deep, standing effect in the context of classroom learning. To understand and make sense of such dynamics, I had, as part of my M.Phil. Research, studied teacher practices of visual arts and design in middle schools in Hyderabad. Some of the interesting ideas concerning assessment that emerged in teachers’ discourses have been discussed here. An observation around practice To share and mention the crux of assessing, I had an experience with a pupil of class two. It was a regular art class scheduled in the afternoon. All of them were excited, though I saw a few enthusiasts and a few pupils lost in their own world. At the start of the class, the art teacher made a small drawing on the white board with a marker. The drawing was a representation of ‘BUS’ form, juxtaposed with English lettering within the form. The children were instructed to copy the same on to their drawing books or sheets; and later colour according to their choice, within the outlines. As a usual practice, everyone drew half an inch border on the paper, a few pupils used rulers while others didn’t. One enthusiastic student, who was in a hurry to act according to instructions took the pencil and finished the drawing in three to four minutes free-hand, and was in front of the art teacher with his drawing. The teacher asked, “What is this? – Wrong – see properly on the board – give here (teacher took the book)”. The student silently bowed down, disappointed, and looked at the researcher while handing over his book to the teacher. The teacher took the student’s drawing and drew a new one beside it and put his signature; the teacher said, “Ok, Now go and sit, don’t talk.” I, as a researcher, could not utter a word, being a silent spectator. The student took his book, went back