Research for the Classroom
In the second of our series of articles on classroom grouping we follow on from last month’s article that considered the optimal sizes for groups based on different learning tasks. This article looks at other issues to consider when thinking about grouping children in class.
Previous Articles:
Assessment for Learning - a return to the principles (October 2015)
|
David Godfrey
d.godfrey@ioe.ac.uk |
In the third article in our series on research for the classroom, we turn to the evergreen issue of Assessment for Learning. Arguably this is an area of practice that suffers from practitioners having a superficial grasp of the principles discovered from the research. The result of this is that numerous ‘AfL’ strategies are used - no grades, traffic lights, no hands up etc – often to relatively little effect. This article looks at what the research has shown about formative assessment and considers some issues of implementation for practitioners.
The Assessment Reform Group (ARG) provide the most commonly used definition of AfL:
“Assessment for learning is any assessment for which the first priority in its design and practice is to serve the purpose of promoting pupils’ learning. It thus differs from assessment designed primarily to serve the purposes of accountability, or of ranking, or of certifying competence.
An assessment activity can help learning if it provides information to be used as feedback by teachers, and by their pupils in assessing themselves and each other, to modify the teaching and learning activities in which they are engaged. Such assessment becomes ‘formative assessment’ when the evidence is actually used to adapt the teaching work to meet learning needs.”
Black et al (2004, pp 2-3)
Thus, the focus of AfL is on improving learning rather than assessing, quantifying or proving current levels of knowledge. In a sense, this definition of AfL sums up the central task that teachers are attempting to achieve when teaching, i.e. the effective advancement of pupils’ learning.
The Assessment Reform Group (ARG) provide the most commonly used definition of AfL:
“Assessment for learning is any assessment for which the first priority in its design and practice is to serve the purpose of promoting pupils’ learning. It thus differs from assessment designed primarily to serve the purposes of accountability, or of ranking, or of certifying competence.
An assessment activity can help learning if it provides information to be used as feedback by teachers, and by their pupils in assessing themselves and each other, to modify the teaching and learning activities in which they are engaged. Such assessment becomes ‘formative assessment’ when the evidence is actually used to adapt the teaching work to meet learning needs.”
Black et al (2004, pp 2-3)
Thus, the focus of AfL is on improving learning rather than assessing, quantifying or proving current levels of knowledge. In a sense, this definition of AfL sums up the central task that teachers are attempting to achieve when teaching, i.e. the effective advancement of pupils’ learning.
source: Flórez, M. T. and P. Sammons (2013)
An analysis of the four areas (ten principles) reveals links with other important areas in educational and pedagogical research:
For principles 1-3, there is a clear link with research on achievement orientation. Students can be motivated to compare their achievements with others – a Performance Orientation (PO) or to develop and master skills and competences – a mastery or learning orientation (LO). Much research shows that learning oriented pupils are more motivated, resilient in the face of failure and achieve better results than students with a performance orientation.
Principles 4-6 link to Dweck’s work on mindsets, in which she suggests that praise should be limited to students efforts and strategies rather than be evaluative of their abilities. The former encourages a growth mindset (a belief that ability can be much enhanced through one’s own efforts) and the latter encourages a fixed mindset (the belief that ability is a fixed and unchangeable characteristic of the person).
Principles 7-9 are resonant with much research on meta-cognition, meta-learning and learning oriented classrooms. The focus of this research is that learning and classrooms are much more effective when students are encouraged to reflect on and develop their skills of learning, i.e. they learn how to learn.
The last principle highlights a key concern of AfL research, which is that assessment practices must be seen as embedded within teaching and learning processes overall. Learning strategies is not enough; for implementation to be effective and lead to improved student learning (and therefore achievement), teachers must have a deep and reflective understanding of AfL principles.
Successful implementation of assessment for learning:
A 2008 Ofsted report stated that only 5 out of 43 schools they inspected had outstanding AfL practices. In those that did the following features were deemed necessary:
Schools are advised to conduct an audit of their current practices too look at how the school currently promotes learning among its students and how to build on this. Careful thought should go into how to find out what is currently happening and how to plan to build on this, respecting the current ‘distance’ between imagined, ideal impact and current practices of staff. How much does the school currently prioritise and value such objectives and how are these communicated?
For AfL to be introduced successfully, the following conditions need to apply:
Flórez and Sammons’ last point is that, while the overall strength of evidence for the effectiveness of AfL is strong, the same cannot be said for specific practices, such as ‘no-hands-up’ strategies.
From the perspective of teachers, a key message about implementation comes from Dylan Wiliam, one of the most influential researchers in this field. He states that:
“The general principles emerging from the research underdetermine action – put simply, they do not tell you what to do”
The key message appears to be that AfL cannot be boiled down to a series of strategies, rather it encompasses a set of deep seated principles that underlie effective pedagogy.
For principles 1-3, there is a clear link with research on achievement orientation. Students can be motivated to compare their achievements with others – a Performance Orientation (PO) or to develop and master skills and competences – a mastery or learning orientation (LO). Much research shows that learning oriented pupils are more motivated, resilient in the face of failure and achieve better results than students with a performance orientation.
Principles 4-6 link to Dweck’s work on mindsets, in which she suggests that praise should be limited to students efforts and strategies rather than be evaluative of their abilities. The former encourages a growth mindset (a belief that ability can be much enhanced through one’s own efforts) and the latter encourages a fixed mindset (the belief that ability is a fixed and unchangeable characteristic of the person).
Principles 7-9 are resonant with much research on meta-cognition, meta-learning and learning oriented classrooms. The focus of this research is that learning and classrooms are much more effective when students are encouraged to reflect on and develop their skills of learning, i.e. they learn how to learn.
The last principle highlights a key concern of AfL research, which is that assessment practices must be seen as embedded within teaching and learning processes overall. Learning strategies is not enough; for implementation to be effective and lead to improved student learning (and therefore achievement), teachers must have a deep and reflective understanding of AfL principles.
Successful implementation of assessment for learning:
A 2008 Ofsted report stated that only 5 out of 43 schools they inspected had outstanding AfL practices. In those that did the following features were deemed necessary:
- clarity about what and how they wanted students to learn
- careful, but also flexible, planning with objectives based on assessment evidence
- regular revisiting and reinforcement of objectives during lessons
- clear notion of what students could and could not do in order to help them to progress
- good questioning, including moments of the class for drawing learning together
- constructive feedback on students’ work.
Schools are advised to conduct an audit of their current practices too look at how the school currently promotes learning among its students and how to build on this. Careful thought should go into how to find out what is currently happening and how to plan to build on this, respecting the current ‘distance’ between imagined, ideal impact and current practices of staff. How much does the school currently prioritise and value such objectives and how are these communicated?
For AfL to be introduced successfully, the following conditions need to apply:
- Whole school commitment to the policy, including support from senior leadership
- Support should include concrete ways to allow time and space for teachers to reflect on practices and discuss with colleagues
- Whole school shift in assessment culture
- Clear guidelines on how the new AfL practices should work in tandem with marking and summative feedback policies
- Clear message about the benefits to teacher of a change in practices to classroom interactions
- Clear communication about changes to all stakeholders: teacher, parents, pupils. Certain beliefs about assessment can be barriers to change
- High quality professional development of teachers which encourages deep understanding of the principles of AfL rather than just the adoption of a series of techniques and tips
- Studying and learning from observations of students in relation to these practices to fine tune techniques
- Further research and enquiry into the effects of various AfL techniques on a variety of student outcomes
Flórez and Sammons’ last point is that, while the overall strength of evidence for the effectiveness of AfL is strong, the same cannot be said for specific practices, such as ‘no-hands-up’ strategies.
From the perspective of teachers, a key message about implementation comes from Dylan Wiliam, one of the most influential researchers in this field. He states that:
“The general principles emerging from the research underdetermine action – put simply, they do not tell you what to do”
The key message appears to be that AfL cannot be boiled down to a series of strategies, rather it encompasses a set of deep seated principles that underlie effective pedagogy.
Questions for your practice
- How much does assessment enable you to adapt your teaching to meet the needs of your learners?
- How strong is the culture of formative assessment throughout the school?
- Does you school’s marking and assessment policy integrate formative and summative assessment effectively?
Further reading
- Black, P., et al. (2003). "The nature of value of formative assessment for learning." Improving schools 6: 7-22.
- Flórez, M. T. and P. Sammons (2013). "Assessment for learning: effects and impact." London: CfBT.
- Watkins, C. (2010) Learning, Performance and Improvement, Research Matters, 34, pp.1-16. ISEIC: Institute of Education
- Wiliam*, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C. and Black, P. (2004). 'Teachers developing assessment for learning: Impact on student achievement'. Assessment in Education, 11 (1), 49-65.
| |||
Add your comments here
Comment Form is loading comments...
