Formative Assessment in EFL Writing: An Exploratory Case Study

In second‐language writing, assessment has traditionally focused on the written products and how well (or badly) students perform in writing. Teachers dominate the assessment process as testers, while students remain passive testees. Assessment is something teachers ‘do to’ rather than ‘with’ students, mainly for administrative and reporting purposes (i.e. summative). Such assessment, being more retrospective than prospective, holds little value for teaching and learning. In recent years, with a major paradigm shift in assessment and evaluation in English language teaching, writing assessment informed primarily by a product and summative orientation, is considered increasingly inadequate. Such assessment, which focuses on measurement – i.e. marking, monitoring and checking, fails to capture the formative potential of assessment for promoting learning. A formative approach to assessment, on the other hand, focuses more on inquiry – i.e. discovering, diagnosing and understanding, as well as the opportunities assessment provides for improving teaching and learning. To harness the potential of formative assessment in the writing classroom, it is axiomatic that classroom assessment practices be geared towards maximizing student learning. This provides the impetus for my study, which investigates an EFL teacher's attempt to implement formative assessment in her writing classroom and its impact on her classroom practice and students' beliefs and attitudes to writing.     

Incorporating formative assessment in Iranian EFL writing: a case study

Undergraduate students' experience of assessment in universities is usually of summative assessment which provides only limited information to help students improve their performance. By contrast, formative assessment is informative and forward-looking, possessing the leverage to inform students of their day-to-day progress and inform teachers of how to better tailor their instruction to students' immediate learning needs. Despite these potentials, studies carried out on the use of formative assessment in English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts are somehow rare. The current study reports on incorporating formative assessment in an L2 writing course in Iran. The analysis of data from pre- and post-study writing tasks, pre- and post-study questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews revealed that first-year undergraduate students were offered opportunities to improve various aspects of their writing and to develop positive attitudes toward writing as well as formative assessment. However, the students reported several challenges that could have implications for the further implementation of formative assessment in similar contexts.     

Toward a Framework for Using Student Mathematical Representations as Formative Assessments

This article explores how students' mathematical representations can be used as formative assessments. We introduce a framework for teaching and learning that integrates representations as instructional and assessment tools, and illustrate these uses of student representations with reference to a study conducted with 250 5th-grade students. This study focused on students' ability to recognize and use a variety of representations of the fraction concept. Finally, we discuss the implications of the framework for teacher knowledge and classroom practice.     

Formative and Summative Assessment in the Classroom

In this article, we provide brief overviews of the definitions of formative and summative assessment and a few examples of types of formative and summative assessments that can be used in classroom contexts. We highlight the points that these two types of assessment are complementary and the differences between them are often in the way these assessments are used. We also list several resources that may be useful for teachers who wish to know more about using formative and summative assessments in their classrooms.     

英语分级教学模式下评价体系的构建与研究

在进行分级教学模式的改革实践中,构建了以促进学生发展为目标、反复循环的动态评价体系,该体系采取形成性评价与终结性评价相结合的形式.其中,形成性评价占40％,终结性评价占60％.形成性评价由课堂表现、网络自主学习、作业、月考和竞赛构成,各指标分别占20％.评价体系实施后,学生在英语学习兴趣、学习态度、学习策略以及自信心方面都得到了明显提升和改进.     

Using summative and formative assessments to evaluate EFL teachers’ teaching performance

Using classroom observations (formative) and student course experience survey results (summative) to evaluate English lecturers’ teaching performances is not new in practice, but surprisingly only a few studies have investigated this issue in a higher education context. This study was conducted in an English department of a large university in Vietnam. The data include: (1) semi-structured interviews with all the full-time lecturers, (2) two department heads and (3) course experience surveys from English as a foreign language (EFL) students (N?=?2886). Three lessons can be learned: (1) formative assessments do not seem to have an effect on promoting better teaching practices when their feedback is not helpful in improving high-stakes summative assessment results, (2) without sharing a common definition of good teaching practices among assessors, summative assessments appear to make the feedback from formative assessments less meaningful and applicable, and (3) as a result, the combination of formative and summative assessments tends to make EFL lecturers’ self-assessment practices less effective.     

基于翻转课堂的“工程地质”课程教学设计与评价

在总结"工程地质"课程特点的基础上，将翻转课堂引入"工程地质"课程教学中，开展基于翻转课堂的"工程地质"课程教学设计，构建形成性学习评价和考核体系。翻转课堂教学模式将线上与线下教学有效融合，提高了课堂效率，增强了学生学习的主动性和课堂的参与度，有助于培养学生解决工程地质问题的综合能力。学生成绩对比分析结果表明，翻转课堂教学班期末考核成绩明显高于传统教学班；学生满意度问卷调查结果表明，学生对翻转课堂教学环节、考核体系和教学效果的满意度均超过90%，对翻转课堂教学模式给予了充分的肯定。     

The relationships between elementary students' knowledge-in-use performance and their science achievement

This longitudinal study examines the relationship between students' knowledge-in-use performance and their performance on third-party designed summative tests within a coherent and equitable learning environment. Focusing on third-grade students across three consecutive project-based learning (PBL) units aligned with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), the study includes 1067 participants from 23 schools in a Great Lakes state. Two-level hierarchical linear modeling estimates the effects of post-unit assessments on end-of-year summative tests. Results indicate that post-unit assessment performances predict NGSS-aligned summative test performance. Students experiencing more PBL units demonstrate greater gains on the summative test, with predictions not favoring students from diverse backgrounds. This study underscores the importance of coherence, equity, and the PBL approach in promoting knowledge-in-use and science achievement. A systematically coherent PBL environment across multiple units facilitates the development of students' knowledge-in-use, highlighting the significance of designing science and engineering practices (SEPs) and crosscutting concepts coherently and progressively, with intentional revisitation of disciplinary core ideas (DCIs). The study also investigates how the PBL approach fosters equitable learning environments for diverse demographic groups, offering equitable opportunities through equity-oriented design. Contributions include a coherent assessment system that tracks and supports learning aligned with NGSS, emphasizing the predictive power of post-unit assessments, continuous monitoring and tracking. The implications of context similarity and optimal performance expectations within units are discussed. Findings inform educators, administrators, and policymakers about the benefits of NGSS-aligned PBL systems and the need for coherent and equitable learning and assessment systems supporting knowledge-in-use development and equitable opportunities for all learners.     

案例讨论法在开放教育护理伦理学教学中的应用

选择安徽电大开放教育2013秋季学期护理学本科专业A班26人为对照班,在护理伦理学教学中采用讲授和案例分析为主的传统教学方法;2013秋季学期B班29人为实验班,采用案例讨论法进行教学。采用形成性考核、期末终结性考核、问卷调查等方法对教学效果进行评价。结果显示,实验班学生面授课到课率较对照班高34.1％;实验班学生的形成性考核作业案例分析成绩和期末终结性考核案例分析成绩显著高于对照班（P ＜0.01）;绝大多数学生认为案例讨论教学法能提升学习主动性、自主学习能力、学习态度、课堂学习效率、沟通能力、语言表达能力、参与意识、对护理伦理问题的敏感性以及分析和解决问题的能力;学习效果满意度达84.0％。     

促进学生学习和发展的课堂评价——2011课堂评价国际研讨会会议综述

课堂评价作为一种典型的形成性评价,与学校的教学和学生的学习有着紧密的关系,当前在我国教育领域内却备受冷落。本次国际研讨会从课堂评价、课程标准与外部考试一致性;课堂评价设计和实施的理论和技术;学习进展、学生发展与课堂评价系统的设计;课堂评价与教师专业发展;促进学习的课堂评价:学校经验报告等五个方面进行了深入研讨,以期引起教育领域内对课堂评价的关注,提升课堂评价的研究质量,促进学生学习和发展。     

Reclaiming an Important Teacher Competency: The Lost Art of Formative Assessment

We live in an era in which standardized assessments play a necessary and important role in the mission of our public schools to provide equal and equitable educational opportunity to all students. However, our focus on summative accountability measures often has an eclipsing effect on the equally important role of formative assessment practices in the classroom. This article describes why and how formative assessment should be integral to classroom teaching, and it suggests the importance of focusing on teachers’ instructionally-based, formative assessment competencies through our teacher evaluation systems.     

Welche Rolle spielt Kompetenzdiagnostik im Rahmen von Lehr-Lernprozessen?

Competence assessment can support evidence-based teaching and learning. Depending on its specific purpose, competence assessment can be applied at the individual, the classroom or school level as well as on a national level. Large-scale-assessments are typical examples for system monitoring. Competence assessment on the individual level can provide important information with respect to individual qualification and learning outcomes. Typically, competence assessment uses psychometric models from Item-Response-Theory (IRT). However, until present, competence assessment still struggles to tap its full potential regarding feedback and individual support. Teachers often have difficulties to interpret results from competence assessments that are based on IRT. Thus, it is crucial to support teachers in using these results to improve classroom teaching. One of the main challenges of educational measurement is to align everyday classroom teaching with formative and summative assessments and to establish competence models as a common ground. Process-orientated, formative assessment can inform criterion-based feedback and, consequently, promote teaching on the basis of educational standards that were defined on the system level. However, more work needs to be done with respect to research on assessments as well as their communication and implementation into teaching practice.     

Formative assessment in primary science

This action learning study in a year three classroom explored the implementation of five formative assessment principles to assist students' understandings of the scientific topic of liquids and solids. These principles were employed to give students a greater opportunity to express their understanding of the concepts. The study found that the principles of formal assessment worked well in concert with the pedagogical framework of the interactive teaching model.     

Analysis of assessment practice and subsequent performance of third year level students in natural sciences

Abstract

Summative assessment qualifies the achievement of a student in a particular field of specialization at a given time. Questions should include a range of cognitive levels from Bloom's taxonomy and be consistent with the learning outcomes of the module in question. Furthermore, a holistic approach to assessment, such as the application of the principles of the Herrmann Whole Brain Model, needs to be used to accommodate learning style diversity. The purpose of this study was to analyse, assess and compare the summative assessment of two third year level modules in the Bachelor of Science degree programme, namely Biochemistry and Zoology as part of action research with a view to enhancing the professional development of the lecturers involved. The questions posed in summative assessments were classified in terms of Bloom's differentiation of cognitive levels and the four different learning styles determined by Herrmann. Spearman's non-parametric analysis indicated that no correlation existed in this study between cognitive level and student performance based on achievement. In addition, there was not much difference between the cognitive levels and student performance between the two disciplines. Although the students seemed to do better at application level questions, the authors need to reflect on whether the assessments were valid with respect to the learning outcomes, methods of facilitating learning, and the assessments based on cognitive levels and learning style preferences. We conclude that continuous action research must be taken to improve the formulation of learning outcomes and students' achievement of these outcomes and quality of student learning – the main aim being the successful completion of the modules.     

A Case Study of Systemic Aspects of Assessment Technologies

Current designs and classroom uses of assessment technology do not adequately reflect or support human practices that produce meaningful information about student learning. We base this argument on findings from a study of the diverse practices making up an assessment system in a fifth-grade mathematics classroom where students have extensive access to personal computing. Videotaped records of classroom activities, reflecting both teachers' and students' perspectives on the classroom, are analyzed with teachers to develop a grounded theoretical framework for describing assessment practices. We present the framework, use it to compare different examples of assessment activities, and propose new criteria for designing systemically valid assessments as kinds of technology that support and extend existing classroom practices.     

Summative and Formative Style Anatomy Practical Examinations: Do They Have Impact on Students’ Performance and Drive for Learning?

Anatomical knowledge is commonly assessed by practical examinations that are often administered in summative format. The format of anatomy practical examination was changed at the Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine in Singapore from summative (graded; must pass) to formative (ungraded; no pass/fail) in academic year (AY) 2017–2018. Both assessment formats were undertaken online, but the formative mode used a team-based learning activity comprising individual and team assessments. This gave an unique opportunity to investigate: (1) the impact of two different online assessment formats on student performance in practical examination; (2) the impact of new formative practical examination on students’ performance in summative examinations; and (3) students’ opinions of these two practical examination formats. The class of 2021 perceptions was obtained as they experienced both formats. A retrospective cohort study was also conducted to analyze the Year 2 students’ performance in anatomy practical and year-end summative examinations of cohorts AY 2015–2016, AY 2016–2017 (summative format), and AY 2017–2018 (formative format). There were no significant differences in students’ performance between two practical examination formats. The cohort who experienced the formative format, performed significantly better in summative examinations (mean ± SD: 82.32 ± 10.22%) compared with the cohort who experienced the summative format (73.77 ± 11.09%) (P < 0.001). Students highlighted positive features of the formative practical examination, including team reinforcement of learning, instant feedback, and enhanced learning. These findings indicate that students continue to study for anatomy practical examination without the need for external drivers. The team-based learning style practical examination enhances students’ performance in summative examinations.     

Using Assessment for Learning and Learning from Assessment

Innovation in assessment is no longer an option in higher education in Britain if we examine the aims and the claims that are being made. From the Dearing Report to our module guides, we claim to wish to support independent and life-long learning, put the students at the heart of the learning process and to help students take responsibility for their own learning. This cannot be done without including students in mainstream summative assessment and without reconciling the contradictions that currently contribute to impeding the students this access. This article will look briefly at the aims of higher education, provide an overview of current thinking on student learning and formative assessment as a framework for offering one possible practical solution to the problem. This possible solution is Taras's (2001) version of student self-assessment which works within the theoretical framework of Sadler's (1989) theory of formative assessment and of what we know about student learning.     

Informal formative assessment: The role of instructional dialogues in assessing students’ learning

This paper focuses on an unceremonious type of formative assessment - informal formative assessment - in which much of what teachers and students do in the classroom can be described as potential assessments that can provide evidence about the students’ level of understanding. More specifically, the paper focuses on assessment conversations, or dialogic interactions or exchanges, which continuously happen in the classroom and that are at the center of informal formative assessment. It is argued that assessment conversations make students’ thinking explicit in an unobtrusive manner, and when students’ thinking is explicit, it can be examined, questioned, and shaped as an active object of constructive learning. The paper conceptualizes informal formative assessment at the center of effective instructional activities with the use of instructional dialogues as assessment conversations, a typical informal formative assessment practice. The paper then presents a discussion about the evidence on the effect of assessment conversations on student learning.