Preparing formative assessment literate primary school teachers: A blurred snapshot from Italy

<i>Editorial</i>

Formative assessment has become a most discussed topic when many countries recognized the importance of assessment for learning in enhancing students’ holistic development. Most of the times, teachers are not quite clear with the differences between assessment of learning and assessment for learning. In Malaysia, teachers still feel uncomfortable with the implementation of formative assessment compared to summative assessment due to the heavy workload to prepare the tests by themselves. Hence, this study was conducted to examine the role of leaders and how the leader’s role was associated with teachers’ formative assessment practices in schools. An online questionnaire was administered to a total of 198 randomly selected teachers from 25 public primary schools in Petaling. A descriptive correlational research design was employed to identify the relationship between these two variables. The findings indicated that there was a moderately strong linear relationship between the role of the leaders and teachers’ formative assessment practices in schools. The study also revealed that the role of leaders has significantly predicted the teachers’ formative assessment practices with 20.4% of contribution. The findings showed that teachers’ practices in formative assessment process still far from much desired, and leaders still need to further enhance their implementation of formative assessment in school. Overall, this study has its contribution for the enrichment of the body of knowledge of formative assessment and provided insights for the improvement of the implementation of formative assessment in schools.

This study responds to critical knowledge gaps evident in current literature about how formative assessment is enacted by foundation phase teachers in mathematics in South African public schools. Furthermore, the literature study revealed that most of the current research conducted in public primary schools focused on learner performance with emphasis on summative assessment, hence delimiting the importance of formative assessment as a strategic tool in improving learner performance. The aim of this study was to explore how grade three teachers enact formative assessment in mathematics teaching. I therefore investigated teachers’ understanding of formative assessment, what teachers know about how children learn mathematics, how teachers use their knowledge of children’s thinking to plan and enact formative assessment and what support is needed by grade three teachers to enact formative assessment in mathematics classrooms. Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) as propounded in third generation activity theory (AT) by Engeström (1987) served as the analytical framework for this study. Third generation AT which focuses on the interaction between a person or group (subject), a goal, motivation, or problem (object) and mediational interaction with (tools) as well as the intersection with the activity system leading to (outcome/s). This heuristic assisted me to conduct a systemic analysis of all inter-dependencies that had a bearing on how grade 3 teachers enacted formative assessment and what additional support they required to enact formative assessment in mathematics classrooms. This study followed a case study research design through a qualitative research approach. I started with a sample of 12 teachers in a selected school district in Tshwane in the Gauteng Province. The teachers were selected through a convenience sampling technique. The data was collected through two focus group interviews from these twelve teachers (divided into six each) as a pilot exploration. I then selected four teachers through purposive sampling. Data was collected through lesson observation, document analysis and four stimulated recall interviews from these four teachers. The data was analysed through content analysis technique, utilising Microsoft Macros which assisted me to segment all the data. I thereafter conducted pattern matching of the data. Finally, the data was coded, categorised and thematised. The core finding demonstrated that,although teachers know about how children learn and that they can align their teaching to how children learn, they struggle to enact formative assessment effectively. Furthermore, while teachers recognise the importance of formative assessment, they do not implement formative assessment skills in an integrated way. The core finding of the study was that teachers’ formative assessment practices are constrained by tensions of the activity system. This study contributes to the body of knowledge of formative assessment by highlighting relevant discords around challenges and successes pertaining to the enactment of formative assessment. The study also contributes to the research methodological body of knowledge on classroom observation of formative assessment where researchers will be able to replicate this study in different contexts. Finally, the study contributes by way of recommending strategies to policy makers and curriculum designers and education planners on the need to integrate formative assessment in a balanced way focusing on assessment for learning to enhance the quality of teaching and learning, hence improving learners’ performance.

The quotation in the title highlights the experience of many students of summative assessment as the dominant mode of assessment in most South African schools. As a result, students enter university ignorant of good formative feedback and they are therefore often unable to recognise its value and may even be traumatised by the presence of so much ink on the page. This situation indicates a need for explicit focus on formative assessment and its usefulness for EAL university students in South Africa. This article is based on focus group interviews, which formed part of an ongoing critical action research project exploring formative assessment in an academic writing course for disadvantaged access students at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. In previous stages of this research, Wilhelm Meyer and Penny Niven have explored their identity as writing teachers giving feedback on student essays and attempted to implement the principles of good formative assessment developed as a result. In this phase of the research project, the students were given explicit instruction on summative, formative and criterion-based assessment, in a series of classes developed by Penny Niven. At the end of this series, Wilhelm Meyer conducted focus group interviews with twelve students in an attempt to assess the success of the experiment in creating a heightened awareness of formative criterion-based assessment practices in order that they would understand and therefore utilise formative feedback on their writing.

Preface Section I. Foundations of Formative Assessment 1. An Introduction to Formative Assessment: History, Characteristics, and Challenges, Gregory J. Cizek 2. An Integrative Summary of the Research Literature and Implications for a New Theory of Formative Assessment, Dylan Wiliam 3. The Practical Implications of Educational Aims and Contexts for Formative Assessment, James McMillan Section II. Formative Assessment Methods and Practice 4. Peers as a Source of Formative Assessment, Keith J. Topping 5. Formative Assessment Applications of Culminating Demonstrations of Mastery, Jill Davidson and Jay Feldman 6. Students as the Definitive Source of Formative Assessment: Academic Self-Assessment and the Self-Regulation of Learning, Heidi L. Andrade 7. Formative Assessment: The Contribution of Benjamin S. Bloom, Thomas R. Guskey 8. Technology-Aided Formative Assessment of Learning: New Developments and Applications, Michael K. Russell 9. Formative Assessment, Motivation, and Science Learning, Maria Araceli Ruiz-Primo, Erin Marie Furtak, Carlos Ayala, Yue Yin, and Richard J. Shavelson 10. Research and Strategies for Adapting Formative Assessment for Students with Special Needs, Stephen N. Elliott, Ryan J. Kettler, Peter A. Beddow, and Alexander Kurz 11. Research and Recommendations for Formative Assessment with English Language Learners, Jamal Abedi 12. Moment-by-moment Formative Assessment of Second Language Development: ESOL Professionals at Work, Carla Meskill 13. Formative Assessment Practices that Maximize Learning for Students At-Risk, Gerunda B. Hughes 14. Essential Formative Assessment Competencies for Teachers and School Leaders, Rick Stiggins 15. Research on Characteristics of Effective Professional Development Programs for Enhancing Educators' Skills in Formative Assessment, M. Christina Schneider and Bruce Randel Section III: Challenges and Future Directions for Formative Assessment 16. Mixing It Up: Combining Sources of Classroom Achievement Information for Formative and Summative Purposes, Susan M. Brookhart 17. Psychometric Challenges and Opportunities in Implementing Formative Assessment, Walter D. Way, Robert P. Dolan, and Paul Nichols 18. Strategies and Policies for Incorporating Formative Assessment into Comprehensive and Balanced State Assessment Systems, Doug A. Rindone and Duncan MacQuarrie 19. Keeping the Focus, Expanding the Vision, Maintaining the Balance: Preserving and Enhancing Formative Assessment in Nebraska, Chris W. Gallagher 20. Summing Up and Moving Forward: Key Challenges and Future Directions for Research and Development in Formative Assessment, Heidi L. Andrade About the Authors Author Index Subject Index

The paper discusses formative and summative assessment practices by teachers in ECE Centres in Lusaka, Zambia. The study used a mixed methods design by utilizing a concurrent triangulation design which enabled the researchers to converge quantitative and qualitative data. In addition, the design helped to confirm and cross-validate the study findings. Qualitative data was prioritised over quantitative data. Probability and non-probability sampling techniques were used to sample one hundred and two (102) teachers, ten (10) head teachers and one hundred and twenty-five (125) parents. Questionnaires were used to gather data from teachers and parents, Focus Group Discussion Guides (FGDs) were used to interview teachers whilst Interview guides were used to interview head teachers. A Documentary Analysis Guide and an Observational Checklist were used by the researcher to obtain additional data on assessment practices by teachers from a documentary and observational point of view. Descriptive statistics were computed to analyse quantitative data whilst thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data using a framework approach of qualitative data analysis. Results revealed that the most predominantly implemented summative assessments in ECE Centres were mid-term tests and end of term tests. Teachers also used formative assessments such as homework, oral questioning, collection of samples, portfolios and interview guides. However, teachers failed to adhere to the actual norms of formative assessment such as tracking of individual children’s development, learning needs and achievements so as to adapt instruction accordingly. Consequently, the assessment results were often compromised. Finally, the study recommends that Ministry of General Education should conduct capacity building training programmes for teachers on formative and summative assessment practices in ECE to ensure effective implementation of both formative and summative assessment in ECE Centres. Article visualizations:

Background: Teachers who engage in formative classroom assessment using practices that accurately measure student learning should be better positioned to diagnose the instructional needs of their students and to act on that information. For this reason, there has been increased interest in formative classroom assessment in recent years. Although some researchers have found indications that some assessment practices may raise student achievement, evaluations of professional development programs designed to increase teacher assessment skill have not found differences in student performance. However, few studies of this type have been performed. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of a professional development program in formative classroom assessment on teacher assessment knowledge and their students’ achievement. Setting: The professional development program was implemented in state-identified, low performing middle schools from November 2005 through April 2008. Intervention: Researchers investigated a professional development program for teachers designed to increase their skill in creating and using assessments to support student learning. In Year 1, the professional development was implemented by an assessment coach in the treatment schools. No professional development was provided in the control schools. In Years 2 and 3, levels of treatment were investigated such that the professional development was implemented by an assessment coach or a relatively untrained facilitator. Research Design: Year 1 involved a multi-site, cluster randomized trial where schools were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group. Year 2 and Year 3 involved a quasi-experimental design. Data Collection and Analysis: Researchers collected pretest and posttest teacher measures and analyzed the data using a split-plot ANOVA each year. Summative large scale assessment data was collected for students and analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM). Findings: Findings from this study indicate that the professional development program increased teacher assessment skill regardless of whether the program was implemented with a trained assessment coach or a relatively untrained facilitator. However, students of teachers participating in the professional development tended to demonstrate lower achievement than a matched set of students whose teachers did not receive the professional development. Implications for how teachers use assessment data to guide reteaching are discussed. Keywords: formative assessment; classroom assessment; student achievement

This study used hierarchical linear modeling to examine the relationship between data from an internet-based mathematics formative assessment and data from a mathematics summative assessment for primary grade learners (ages 5-7). Results showed a positive relationship between formative assessment data related to the concepts of counting and decomposing numbers and summative data. This relationship was stronger in classrooms where students demonstrated lower average performance on the formative assessment data. The results suggest that formative assessment can be more beneficial to encourage low-achieving students in primary-grade mathematics classrooms. Therefore, we recommend teachers use formative assessment practices more frequently in low-achieved primary grade classrooms. The formative assessment process includes the cycle of data collection, data analysis, planning future instruction, and examining the impact of that instruction through cycling back to data collection. This study contributes to the field by providing more empirical data about the relationship between formative and summative assessment with primary grades’ learners.

The debate between summative and formative assessment is creating a situation that increasingly calls to mind the famous slogan in George Orwell’s (1945) Animal Farm – ‘Four legs good, two legs bad’. Formative assessment is increasingly being portrayed in the literature as ‘good’ assessment, which tutors should strive towards, whereas summative assessment is ‘bad’ assessment on which tutors should minimise their focus, instead moving towards formative assessment (Taras 2005). By revisiting the origins of formative assessment, this article aims to bring back to light that summative and formative assessment are connected at their inception. It highlights how research in the literature has unintentionally created a harmful dichotomy between summative and formative assessment, and it identifies some attempts in the literature to re-connect formative and summative assessment. This paper challenges the dichotomy in the literature and invites those in higher education to consider the fundamental idea that formative and summative assessment need to work in harmony and should not be seen as contrary to each other.

Background Identifying students who are low scorers is essential for providing timely interventions and support. Traditional methods of identifying such students often rely on summative assessments, such as end-of-term exams. However, formative assessments offer valuable insights into students' understanding, strengths, and weaknesses. This study aimed to compare the predictive capabilities of formative and summative assessments in forecasting final university examination scores in physiology among first-year medical students.By employing a regression model, we aimed to develop a reliable predictor of final scores based on formative and summative assessments. Such a model would enable the early identification of students at risk of obtaining low scores in university examinations. Methods A cohort of 125 first-year medical students was evaluated. Scores from three formative assessments, three summative assessments, and the final university examination in physiology were collected. The formative assessments consisted of multiple-choice questions (MCQs), while the summative assessments and university examinations included a combination of MCQs and essay-type questions. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to determine the predictive power of these assessments. Results Data from 82 students were analyzed. The highest mean score was observed in the final university examination (63.28 ± 4.63), followed by the third summative assessment (62.45 ± 8.2). Significant differences were found among the scores across the various assessments (F (4.587, 371.5) = 61.14, p-value < 0.0001). Formative assessments and summative assessment scores can predict the university examination score (R = 0.764, R2 = 0.583, p-value < 0.0001). However, individually, only the second summative(t = 2.87, p-value = 0.005, 95% confidence interval = 0.038-0.21) and the third summative(t = 3.25, p-value = 0.002, 95% confidence interval = 0.086-0.359) significantly contribute to the model of prediction. Conclusion Students' performance in formative and summative assessments can predict success in university exams, with the second and third summative assessments being significant. These assessments, conducted later in the course, are more effective in identifying students likely to score lower in final exams compared to formative assessments.

The factor that ensures the effectiveness of educational assessment is the integration of its formative and summative assessment practices. The article presents the results of a survey of school teachers, the analysis of which confirms the need for teachers in detailed, theoretically substantiated recommendations that will improve the effectiveness of assessment activities. The purpose of this article is to present the author's point of view on the possibility of integrating the practices of summative and formative assessment of teaching mathematics to schoolchildren. Along with methodological recommendations reflecting possible ways of integrating formative and summative assessment, the article shows an example of the active participation of students in the development of descriptors. It is especially noted that the summative assessment should not be perceived by either the student or the teacher as the end of a certain stage of education, it should become the basis for formative assessment.

Incorporating formative assessment strategies in classroom instructional practices is challenging for teachers. This study investigates how a learning progression for the particle model of matter can be used to scaffold teachers in enacting formative assessment practices in their classrooms. Lesson observations of four teachers who participated in the study were conducted to capture teachers’ classroom practices. Also, semi-structured interviews were conducted with the teachers to determine their views and understandings of formative assessment, and to assess their views on using a learning progression to support the design of formative assessment. Thereafter, teachers participated in a professional development programme based on the Formative Assessment Design Cycle (FADC) that was aimed at empowering teachers with knowledge and skills to design and implement formative strategies in classrooms. Lesson observations were also conducted post-intervention to determine changes in teachers’ classroom formative assessment practices. The study found that teachers had limited understanding of formative assessment, had no knowledge of how a learning progression can be used to support design of formative assessment practices. While the teachers’ knowledge of formative assessment and their formative assessment practices improved after engaging in professional teacher development programme, there were still gaps in their knowledge and practices.

As assessment plays an important role in the process of teaching and learning, this research explored the impacts of formative and summative assessments on academic motivation, attitude toward learning, test anxiety, and self-regulation skill of EFL students in Iran. To fulfill the objectives of this research, 72 Iranian EFL learners were chosen based on the convenience sampling method assigned to two experimental groups (summative group and formative group) and a control group. Then, the groups took the pre-tests of test anxiety, motivation, and self-regulation skill. Then, one experimental group was trained by following the rules of the formative assessment and the other experimental group was taught according to the summative assessment. The control group was instructed without using any preplanned assessment. After a 15-session treatment, the post-tests of the test anxiety, motivation, and self-regulation skill were administered to all groups to assess the impacts of the instruction on their language achievement. Lastly, a questionnaire of attitude was administered to both experimental groups to examine their attitudes towards the impacts of formative and summative assessment on their English learning improvement. The outcomes of one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni tests revealed that both summative and formative assessments were effective but the formative one was more effective on academic motivation, test anxiety, and self-regulation skill. The findings of one sample t-test indicated that the participants had positive attitudes towards summative and formative assessments. Based on the results, it can be concluded that formative assessment is an essential part of teaching that should be used in EFL instructional contexts. The implications of this study can help students to detect their own weaknesses and target areas that need more effort and work.

Background: Formative assessment is a pedagogical practice that improves teaching, as well as students' learning. There is a multitude of research demonstrating interest in this practice in the field of education. However, this assessment practice is poorly integrated by teachers despite its great pedagogical potential, in addition to the tensions existing between formative and summative assessment that its implementation is more formal by the institutions. Objective: The purpose of this research is to explore, as a first step, how nursing teachers conceptualize formative assessment and how they judge its usefulness in the teaching/learning process. Secondly, the study seeks to identify the main challenges that could influence the practice of formative assessment in the context of nursing education. Methods: The study used a descriptive quantitative research design. The target population of the study was composed of nursing teachers (N = 50) from the Higher Institute of Nursing and Health Techniques of Casablanca (ISPITS). This target population includes all permanent nursing teachers working at the ISPITS of Casablanca, divided into the various existing fields. They are responsible for the initial training and practical supervision of nursing students and health technicians enrolled in the cycles of the professional license. To meet our research objective, we conducted a survey using a questionnaire with 37 items divided into five dimensions based on William and Thompson's (2007) model of formative assessment. Results: The results revealed that, in teachers’ practice, the informal approach to formative assessment takes precedence over formal approaches based on planned assessment tools. In addition, their perception of the usefulness of formative assessment is oriented towards a diagnostic function of students' learning difficulties rather than a function of teaching guidance. Furthermore, the study showed that the time commitment of formative assessment and the diversity of activities required of teachers might be obstacles to a broader practice of formative assessment. Conclusion: This study offers suggestions that may help teachers facilitate and innovate the implementation of formative assessment in the field of nursing. Our research perspective is to demonstrate the effect of formative assessment on student learning outcomes through the implementation of a field experiment in collaboration with nursing teachers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the improvement in the scores of summative assessment after formative assessment practices as well as expectation and satisfaction level of students with formative assessment in subject of the science of Dental Materials. METHODOLOGY: It was a longitudinal study with pre-post design that was conducted on second-year BDS students over a year. Students were selected by non-probability, convenience sampling technique from a private dental college. Summative assessments conducted at the end of semester III were considered pre-intervention tests. Semester IV was planned with formative assessment and feedback sessions after every topic and summative assessments conducted at the end of semester IV were considered Post-intervention tests. The summative assessment was done by Multiple Choice questions and a structured practical exam. A structured close-ended questionnaire was administered to record Students' level of expectation and satisfaction. The analysis was performed by using SPSS version 20. Quantitative analysis was reported by means and standard deviation. Furthermore, paired sample t-test was performed to analyze students' scores before and after formative assessment. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for the number of responses to each item in the questionnaire. RESULTS: Performances of students in semester III (before formative assessment) with semester IV (after formative assessment) were compared with paired-sample t-test results showed a significant increase in the scores of students before (M=62.74, SD±14.72) to after (M=67.16, SD ±14.53). KEYWORDS: Expectation, satisfaction, formative assessment, Summative Assessment, Science of dental materials.