by Greg VanHorn
A properly done assessment can be a powerful tool to improve student learning and help teachers refine lessons and feedback to students. The key challenge for teachers and school leaders is addressing some of the most common misconceptions about assessment and creating better understanding of the proper use of assessment to improve performance. Let’s dive into some of the misconceptions and how we can turn those around.
Misunderstanding #1: Longer tests yield better information. Virginia was one of the first states to adopt academic content standards and implement statewide tests, several years before No Child Left Behind was passed. But in a September 29, 2025, article (https://virginiamercury.com/2025/09/29/education-department-pushes-back-on-claims-of-stalled-assessment-plan/) by Nathaniel Cline, it is clear that a vast gulf remains between different visions of effective assessment. While teachers have long complained that too much class time is devoted to administering tests and preparing students for them, there is a legislative mandate to create a new state test that meets the rigorous standards the state has adopted.
Solution #1: Assessment quality comes from alignment, timeliness, and instructional use, not test length. Longer tests often delay feedback, consume instructional time, and blur rather than clarify which standards students have mastered. A well-designed assessment does not need to measure everything at once; it needs to measure the right things clearly and efficiently.
Misconception #2: Rigor is defined based on analyzing how few students pass the test. Fifty states claim to have a “standards-based” assessment, meaning student success is based on meeting the standards. If teaching is successful, the results of standards-based tests should improve yearly. In response to political demands for greater rigor, many states increased the cut scores on state exams so that a student deemed “proficient” last year will, with the same test performance, be deemed not proficient in future years. This approach confuses difficulty with rigor and failure rates with standards.
Solution #2: Know and understand the intended level of rigor for the standard and define proficiency at the beginning. In a truly standards-based system, proficiency should mean that a student can demonstrate the knowledge and skills described in the standard—regardless of how many students are able to do so. This requires shared understanding among educators of what proficient work looks like, supported by common tasks, exemplars, and calibration.
Misconception #3: A test not administered at the end of a marking period is “formative.” This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what the term “formative” means. An assessment is only formative if it informs teaching and learning. Students and teachers can ask, “Based on the results of the formative assessment I administered on Tuesday, how will teaching and learning be better on Wednesday?”
Solution #3: Use the data immediately – the same day or the next day – to make appropriate adjustments in teaching and learning strategies.
Misconception #4: The test must address every academic standard. This is a prescription for vast amounts of wasted time and delays the time by which students and teachers will get the results they need for improvement.
Solution #4: I have long advocated “Power Standardsä” – narrowing the focus to only those that provide leverage, endurance, and are essential. That is, a single standard that crosses over multiple disciplines, occurs over many years, and is necessary for the next course or grade level of instruction.
Misconception #5: The purpose of assessment is evaluation, which is then reflected in student grades. I dissent. The purpose of assessment and grading is to provide feedback to students and teachers to improve performance, day by day, week by week. Once students and teachers know that the initial assessment is the first round of feedback and not the final judgment, students will more likely respect and apply teacher feedback because they know that every student is expected to use that feedback to improve performance.
Solution #5: Never give “one-shot assessments,” but always have a clear expectation that students show respect for teacher feedback by resubmitting work. Moreover, grades should reflect student achievement at the end of the marking period – never the average performance throughout the semester.
Assessment and other forms of feedback are some of the most powerful teaching practices. Yet much of the work that goes into creating and marking assessments is wasted because neither students nor teachers use assessment results to improve performance. After administering “micro-assessments” – very short “5-7- question assessments” on the learning objectives from that week – we have observed teachers who can provide feedback immediately – ideally in the same class period-resulting in students leaving every class knowing they are better than when they walked in. That’s real learning.