When Assessment Misses the Mark - a reflection on alignment, equity and cultural responsiveness

Image created using Gemini Pro

When I think about my worst assessment, I return to university and the final exam for my Crime Scene Investigation course. Throughout the year, the course was immersive and engaging. We alternated between lectures and simulated crime scenes, applying theory in authentic contexts. Weekly lab notebooks gave us feedback, and instructors scaffolded our practice with both support and challenge. Even the midterm was a short test followed by a three-hour practical which felt aligned, asking us to demonstrate reasoning and applied skills in realistic ways.

The final exam, however, was a sharp change. For four hours, we faced a single written question: describe, step by step, how you would process a crime scene. No visuals, no evidence to analyze, no authentic scenario, just blank spaces (maybe Taylor Swift was in the room) . I remember writing, erasing, and starting over, unsure of the grading criteria. Did sequence matter? How much detail was expected? Without a rubric, it was impossible to know.

Looking back, I can see that the exam may have addressed the stated learning objectives, knowledge of crime scene procedures, sequencing, and reasoning, but it did not align with the class activities and practices that had built those skills. All year, we had worked collaboratively, learned by doing, and relied on feedback. So to suddenly be evaluated through an isolated, abstract writing task created a jarring misalignment.

Image comparing course work and final exam. Create on Gemini Pro

Montenegro and Jankowski (2017) emphasize that culturally responsive assessment requires transparency and alignment with authentic practices. This exam privileged one narrow mode, extended academic writing, while disregarding the collaborative, applied, and multimodal learning that defined the course. From a Universal Design for Learning perspective, it also narrowed rather than expanded pathways for demonstrating knowledge (CAST, 2018). A hybrid or practical task could have offered multiple means of expression while still assessing the same objectives.

Culturally responsive teaching reminds us that rigor comes from meaningful and authentic engagement (Hammond, 2015). In the real world, crime scene investigation is never a solitary writing exercise; it is a collaborative, evidence-driven process. As Zaretta Hammond points out (Edthena, 2021), culturally responsive practice requires designing tasks that reflect how knowledge is actually used and shared, not just how it can be memorized. By stripping away the authentic practices that made the course powerful, the exam left students disconnected and frustrated.

I passed, but not with the success I had shown in practicals. More importantly, the experience reshaped how I think about assessment. The “worst assessment” wasn’t just unpleasant, it showed me how assessments can fail when they measure objectives in ways that misalign with learning, neglect inclusivity, and erode trust.

Image: Cycle of thinking when creating assessments. Create using Gemini Pro

References:

• CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org

• Edthena. (2021, August 23). Zaretta Hammond: Culturally responsive teaching 101 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxhF7TZqDyA

• Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin.

• Montenegro, E., & Jankowski, N. A. (2017). Equity and assessment: Moving towards culturally responsive assessment. (Occasional Paper No. 29). University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA).

Tell me about a time that you felt the assessment didn't align with the course.

Change Image

• Poll_Editor_Answer_Placeholder