A recent discussion with a colleague has me again wondering how best to assess differentiated tasks, though really, it’s not so much assessment, but grading, that I have a problem with. If we give students a choice of tasks, differentiated according to prior learning and understanding, basically by content, rather than by interest or presentation style, should a student who does ‘easier’ work be able to get the same marks as a student who does ‘harder’ work?

If we are encouraging students to complete what can be referred to as ‘just right’ tasks, should they be penalised because what has just enough challenge for them is too easy for another student? If we are trying to encourage students to know that they are capable of making progress in Maths, then I don’t think so. At our school we still test students formally with common tests for each topic and a half year exam, which together represent 80% of their overall assessment. I think that allows plenty of room to give equally high marks to students who produce high quality work that demonstrates their personal progress, even if students are at different places in their learning.

The main dilemma for me is what if a student chooses the task that you know is too easy for them, that requires no thinking or demonstrates no new learning? Should they be given a high mark for successful completion? Generally most students do take up the challenge and chose a task that demonstrates new learning, but what if they make errors? Should they end up with a lower mark than a student who doesn’t challenge themselves?