Formative assessment

Learning objectives

By the end of this session participants will have…..

• Understood the following assessment terms:

  • Summative versus formative

  • Norm referencing versus criterion referencing

  • Diagnostic

  • Evaluative

• Understood the relationship between these and five kinds of tests discussed in a session on “Exam Preparation”

Learning Objectives 2

• Become aware of formative assessment in the UK known as “Assessment for Learning” (AfL)

• Considered ways of responding to errors in writing

• Related these to the research on feedback

• Discussed ways of giving feedback on writing and speaking

• Understood ways of helping pupils to benefit from feedback

• Understand a simple model of effective assessment.

Definitions

The Summative Function

The purpose of summative assessment is to grade or certify the learner, often at the end of a course or major part of a course. It is a broad assessment of the extent to which a student has succeeded in attaining the broad aims of a whole course or a large part of it.

The Evaluative Function

The purpose of evaluative assessment is to find out to what extent the course or programme of teaching and learning is achieving its aims and to make necessary developments or improvements.

The Formative Function

The purpose of formative assessment is to benefit learning. However, it can be argued that effective formative assessment is more than something that just contributes to learning; it should be regarded as an essential, integral and inseparable part of the teaching and learning process.

The Diagnostic Function

The purpose of diagnostic assessment is to identify strengths and weaknesses.

The most productive diagnostic assessment in schools has the following features:

• It is formative

• It focuses on individual learners

• It provides detailed information about skills, sub-skills and areas of knowledge and understanding

• The quality of information leads to “recipes for action” by teacher and/or pupil

• It is for all pupils, not just those with special difficulties

• It is criterion referenced.

   

  Norm referencing versus criterion referencing

   

  When the performance of one student is compared with that of other students, and a judgement is passed on the basis of that comparison, a norm-referenced evaluation is being made.

   

  When we compare a measurement, not with other measurements, but with some objective criterion, we are making a criterion-referenced evaluation.

What kind of assessment improves learning?

A comprehensive international survey of research suggests the following.

What works: Formative and Diagnostic Assessment, Assessment for Learning that includes:

• Regular classroom testing + action
• Enhanced feedback (oral and written)
• Active involvement of pupils
• Furthering motivation and self-esteem
• Self-assessment

What doesn’t work:

• Tests of superficial/rote-learning

• Lack of collaboration and review

• Marks and grades versus advice

• Competitive purpose

• Managerial function versus learning

   

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

   

  Putting a policy of AfL into practice might involve:

   

• Sharing objectives with pupils
• Sharing assessment criteria
• Jointly developing assessment criteria
• Self-assessment
• Peer assessment
• Feedback by marking
• Comment only marking (no grade or mark)
• The formative use of summative tests
• New questioning techniques
• • To explore deeper thought and understanding
  • “real” questions!
  • Longer wait time

A review of the research on feedback to students’ writing suggests the following:

Generally

• Formerly writing tended to be assessed summatively as a product
• Nowadays writing is generally assessed formatively as part of the writing process
• Therefore drafting => feedback => conference => redrafting is important

Poor quality feedback

• Poor quality feedback may be vague, inconsistent, too directive, too concerned with error and may be misunderstood or ignored by pupils
• Feedback on error may be discouraging and may not lead to improvement in writing
• Too much negative feedback in general may be discouraging and affect confidence and fluency
• BUT undeserved praise and too much ‘hedging’ may confuse students and discourage revisions

High quality feedback (combined with classroom discussion)

• Can improve subsequent drafts
• Can improve accuracy
• Even this may need time and repetition
• Pays attention to form and content

“Indirect” versus “Direct feedback”

• Both can be useful

• Especially if related to instruction

• Direct feedback seems to lead to immediate improvements in drafts

• Indirect feedback seems to help development over time

• Students are often positive about indirect feedback

  Formative assessment: handout Checking drafts: editing strategies for students to use (adapted from Gianfranco Conti)

   

1. Pay attention to form (grammar monitoring)
2. Use the error-targeting checklist, concentrating on one item at a time
3. Check the little words at the end
4. Look for other errors you usually make (e.g. verb endings, articles, word order, tenses)
5. Check that what you write makes sense
6. Long or complex sentences may trick you into making basic mistakes so pay special attention to these. Breaking them up into shorter units may help!
7. Translate back into your native language while you check, as it might help identify missing words or things that don’t make sense
8. Check that your writing does not sound too like your native language. If it does use a dictionary to double check
9. Have you used the dictionary enough?
10. Have you doubts about anything? Double check or circle the item and put a note for the teacher
11. Don’t always trust your instinct! Double check!

ERRORS                                                      STRATEGY