This semester I am teaching two sections of ancient world history. Surprisingly, after six class meetings, the those classes were still proceeding almost identically. But that all changed on day 7 when the theme of the lesson was “What can we learn from Thermopylae?”

We had begun the semester watching, discussing, and researching issues inspired by 300, The 300 Spartans, and The Last Stand of the 300 as a way to learn how to think like historians. The question with which I began the seventh class was not meant to get at specific details about the Battle of Thermopylae. Instead, I wanted students to reflect on the thinking skills we had been developing as we have considered various versions of the battle.

When I taught the lesson to the first section, it went even better than I had anticipated. Students were able to develop a comprehensive list that showed they clearly understand the skills I had been trying to teach. Unfortunately, this was not the case with the second class. Even after some prodding on my part, the students were unable to come up with issues such as avoiding ethnocentrism, the problem with N=1, or any of the other important concepts we had covered.

The problem was not that the students in the second section had not learned the material. The difficulty was with the assessment tool I had developed; the same one that had worked so well the day before. As the second class concluded its discussion of Thermopylae, I considered alternative ways to make sure that students could articulate the learning that had taken place.

During a ten minute break, I cobbled together a worksheet based on Nero or the Fall of Rome a silent film from 1909. I showed the film to the students and then asked, “Based on what we had learned this semester, how would you proceed with a research project inspired by the film?” As they considered research questions and how to address them, the students came up with a nearly identical list of issues as the class had the day before.

What did I learn from Thermopylae?

First, we need to realize that just because students “fail” an assessment does not mean that they have not learned the material. Possibly, it is the assessment tool that has failed them. Were I content to have a one size fits all assessment, I would have incorrectly concluded that I had a group of brilliant students in one section of ancient world history and a group of dunces in the other.

Although the students in the second section approached the question of what they learned from Thermopylae very differently than the first class, their different approach did not show a lack of learning. Instead, they demonstrated that they understood the facts about Thermopylae and could make connections between the ancient to the modern world. The “problem” was that they took a different approach to the question than the one I intended.

When I took a different approach to the assessment, the students were able to demonstrate “success” as to what I wanted to test. It is for this reason that I prefer to give students flexibility by teaching research projects rather than research papers in my history classes. All students do research, but I have no one right way for them to demonstrate their learning.

The issue of what it means to be a teacher is also important; especially in this political climate where the value of teachers is under attack. Good teaching is not a process of imparting facts to students that they can then spit out on multiple choice exams. It is not using a pre-defined syllabus that assumes that all students learn the same way and at the same pace. Instead, good teachers are the ones who know how to be nimble in the classroom so that they are responding to students in the best way possible for the students to learn.

I do not assume ill intent when looking at some of the rhetoric concerning measuring skills and making sure that students are learning in their classes. Education is expensive both students and the public deserve assurances that their money is being well spent. However, I fear that too many proposals take such a simplistic approach to assessment that we will come up with meaningless measurements that will actually fail our students.

–Steven L. Berg, PhD

Photo Caption: Jacques-Louis David’s Leonidas at Thermopylae, 1814.