1. bookVolume 72 (2019): Issue 1 (January 2019)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2657-3628
First Published
27 Feb 2019
Publication timeframe
1 time per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Teachers’ Conceptions of Assessment for Learning: What are the Implications for Children?

Published Online: 31 Mar 2020
Volume & Issue: Volume 72 (2019) - Issue 1 (January 2019)
Page range: 64 - 78
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2657-3628
First Published
27 Feb 2019
Publication timeframe
1 time per year
Languages
English
Abstract

This paper describes a multi-case study which linked conceptions and practices of assessment for learning to developing learner autonomy within UK primary mathematics classrooms. The project explored the use of assessment for learning in mathematics lessons with Year 5 (9–10 years old) children and their teachers. Four cases were studied in depth to understand how conceptions and practices impacted upon autonomy and control for teachers and learners. A typology of assessment for learning in mathematics is proposed, along with what this might mean for both teachers and learners in terms of the balance between control and autonomy. One case in particular, that of teacher Alex, is highlighted as it exemplified the expert teacher through the conceptions and use of assessment for learning, which led to the children becoming expert learners of mathematics. The class ethos was one of value for personal autonomy. Responsibility and control of learning was a shared endeavour within a community of learners. Community in this respect was broadened to include the environment and resources within the classroom and so demonstrated learners working within an expert classroom. This article was developed from a paper first presented at the ICME 13 conference (O’Shea, 2016).

Keywords

Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Wiliam, D., & Johnson, D. (1997). Effective Teachers of Numeracy: Report of a study carried out for the Teacher Training Agency. Report for University of London (London). Search in Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3 Search in Google Scholar

Bassey, M. (1999). Case Study Research in Educational Settings. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Search in Google Scholar

BERA (2018). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (4th ed.). Retrieved from: https://www.bera.ac.uk/ethical-guidelines-201 Search in Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment. London: King’s College School of Education. Search in Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5 Search in Google Scholar

Cowie, B. (2005). Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 137–15110.1080/09585170500135921 Search in Google Scholar

Dam, L., Eriksson, R., Gabrielsen, G., Little, D. Miliander, J., & Trebbi, T. (1990). Autonomy-steps towards a definition. In T. Trebbi (Ed.), Third Nordic Workshop on Developing Autonomous Learning in the FL Classroom. Bergen: University of Bergen. Search in Google Scholar

Dweck, C.S., & Master, A. (2008). Self-Theories Motivate Self-Regulated Learning. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, Research and Applications. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Search in Google Scholar

Ecclestone, K. (2007). Commitment, compliance and comfort zones: the effects of formative assessment on vocational education students’ learning careers. Assessment in Education: Principles. Policy & Practices, 14(3), 315–333.10.1080/09695940701591925 Search in Google Scholar

Hargreaves, E. (2005). Assessment for learning? Thinking outside the (black) box. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(2), 213–224.10.1080/03057640500146880 Search in Google Scholar

Harris, L. & Brown, G. (2009). The complexity of teachers’ conceptions of assessment: tensions between the needs of schools and students. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(3), 365–381.10.1080/09695940903319745 Search in Google Scholar

Hodgen, J., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Mathematics inside the black box: Asssessment for learning in the mathematics classroom. London: King’s College School of Education. Search in Google Scholar

James, M. (2007). Unlocking transformative practice within and beyond the classroom: Messages for practice and policy. In M. James, R. Mccormick, P. Black, P. Carmichael, M. Drummond, A. Fox, J. Macbeath, B. Marshall, D. Pedder, R. Procter, S. Swaffield, J. Swann, & D. Wiliam (Eds.), Improving Learning How to Learn: Classrooms, schools and networks. London: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

Klenowski, V. (2009). Assessment for learning revisited: an Asia-Pacific perspective. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 16(3), 263–268.10.1080/09695940903319646 Search in Google Scholar

Marshall, B., & Drummond, M.J. (2006). How teachers engage with Assessment for Learning: lessons for the classroom. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 133–149.10.1080/02671520600615638 Search in Google Scholar

O’Shea, A. (2016). Exemplifying the Expert Primary Mathematics Classroom: The Case of Alex and Assessment for Learning. 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education. Hamburg, July 24th–31st: ICME. Search in Google Scholar

Perrenoud, P. (1998). From Formative Evaluation to a Controlled Regulation of Learning Processes. Towards a wider conceptual field. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 85–102. Search in Google Scholar

Pintrich, P.R., & Zusho, A. (2002). What Do I Need To Succeed? The Development Of Academic Self-Regulation: The Role Of Cognitive and Motivational Factors. In A. Wigfield & J. Accles (Eds.), Development of Achievement Motivation. California: Academic Press. Search in Google Scholar

Ryan R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2006) Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1557–1585.10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x Search in Google Scholar

Saldaña, S. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage. Search in Google Scholar

Sinclair, B., McGrath, I., & Lamb, T. (Eds.). (2000). Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions. Harlow: Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Stiggins, R., & Chappuis J. (2005). Using Student-Involved Classroom Assessment to Close Achievement Gaps. Theory into Practice, 44(1), 11–18.10.1207/s15430421tip4401_3 Search in Google Scholar

Stobart, G. (2014). The Expert Learner: Challenging the Myth of Ability. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill Education, Open University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Swaffield, S. (2011). Getting to the heart of authentic Assessment for Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 433–449.10.1080/0969594X.2011.582838 Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, M. & Wiliam, D. (2007). Tight but loose: A conceptual framework for scaling up school reforms. Paper presented at a Symposium ‘Tight but loose: Scaling up teacher professional development in diverse contexts’ at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, City, April 9–11. Search in Google Scholar

Torrance, H. (2007). Assessment as learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post-secondary education and training can come to dominate learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 281–294.10.1080/09695940701591867 Search in Google Scholar

Wiliam, D. (2006) Formative Assessment: Getting the Focus Right. Educational Assessment, 11(3–4), 283–289.10.1207/s15326977ea1103&4_7 Search in Google Scholar

Willis, J. (2011). Affiliation, Autonomy and Assessment for Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 399–415.10.1080/0969594X.2011.604305 Search in Google Scholar

Yin, R.K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage. Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo