Dear Marie,
Thank you for your questions.  I've provided some rather detailed answers
here to be sure that the concepts are clear in this initial phases of the
discussion.
 

> "The study shows how teachers have addressed barriers to systematic  

> practice, and how school and policy leaders may apply the  

> principles of formative assessment to promote constructive cultures  

> of assessment and evaluation throughout education systems."

 

> Specifically:

> Can you discuss further how formative assessment is not practiced  

> systematically in secondary schools?  Does this refer to certain  

> schools using the practice and others not, or rather, that  

> formative assessment is used for certain purposes within a school  

> or school system, but is not practiced in all aspects of the school  

> (system)?

 
 
When we talk about the "systematic" practice of formative assessment, we are
talking about formative assessment as an integrated part of teaching and
learning in classrooms.  Many (probably most) teachers often incorporate
aspects of formative assessment - for example, finding new ways to explain a
concept when a student does not understand.  But as teachers in our own case
studies noted, prior to establishing formative assessment as an overall
framework for teaching and learning, these kinds of interactions were
somewhat haphazard.   Many of the teachers in our case study schools said
they had made fundamental changes in their approaches to teaching - in their
interactions with students, the way they set up learning situations and
guided students toward learning goals - even in the way they thought about
student success - when they started to use formative assessment
systematically.
 

> Formative assessment is an excellent approach for informing the  

> teaching and learning process.  Can you discuss how formative  

> assessment is also useful at the evaluation level - for example,  

> for purposes of examining success on the program or system level?

 
In our study, we distinguish between assessment and evaluation. The term
"assessment" is used to refer to judgments of student performance, and the
term "evaluation" to refer to judgements of programme or organisational
effectiveness.  
 
Ideally, information gathered in assessments and evaluations is used to shape
strategies for improvement at each level of the education system. At the
classroom level, teachers gather information on student understanding, and
adjust teaching to meet identified learning needs. At the school level,
school leaders use information to identify areas of strength and weakness
across the school, and to develop strategies for improvement. At the policy
level, officials use information gathered through national or regional tests,
or through monitoring of school performance, to guide investments in training
and support for schools and teachers, or to set broad priorities for
education. In this way, summative information is used formatively at each
level of the system. Teachers, school leaders and policy officials are more
likely to use assessment information when assessments are well coordinated,
and it is clear why and how the information is relevant to their work. 
 
One very valuable example of how formative principles can be applied at
school and system level is found in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.  Since
2001, schools in this province have been developing action plans based on the
provincial test results. School boards manage the planning process. Each
school board brings principals together for two days. Consultants from the
Department of Education review all test results with the district programme
staff and school principals. Through this review and subsequent discussions,
principals identify learning needs and incorporate them into their school
development plan. The consultants are then available to help plan and
implement teacher professional development programmes for schools that have
identified teacher training as part of their action plan.
 
Another example may be found in Finland.  Finland does not have an
inspectorate, and does not sponsor national examinations, except for the
matriculation examination at the end of upper secondary general education.
Instead, the National Board of Education tracks school quality through random
sample evaluations of different subjects in each comprehensive school every
third year. The results of these evaluations provide information on the
quality of learning outcomes, and are utilised in ongoing development of the
education system and core curricula, as well as in practical teaching work.
 
 

> I'm not sure how the systems you studied are funded/supported, but  

> is formative assessment used for reporting purposes to funders or  

> government agencies?  How is this achieved?

 
Formative assessment within the classroom is used to inform teaching and
learning and is not be used for reporting purposes in any of the systems we
studied.  I would classify information used in this way as "summative
assessment". 
 
 

> In the systems that you researched, how are formative assessments  

> developed and used?  Are they uniform or standardized?  Are there  

> guidelines for development?  Who develops the assessments?  Is  

> special training involved for administrators, teachers, or others  

> using the assessments?

 
We found a variety of strategies for promoting formative assessment.  I'll
provide just a few examples to illustrate the range of approaches (note that
this is by no means a thorough list of each country's approach): 
*	legislation promoting and supporting the practice of formative
assessment and establishing it as a priority.   Italy first introduced  the
national "valuation form" in national legislation in 1977. Teachers are
required to use the valuation form to compile data on their students,
including information on what has been taught, any discipline issues, and
results of assessment (including social, behavioural, cognitive and
metacognitive factors). The form, which has been revised several times since
1977, is intended to facilitate communication between school leaders,
teachers and students.
 
·         efforts to encourage the use of summative data for formative
purposes.  In Canada, all provinces and territories participate in a national
programme to assess student achievement in mathematics, reading and writing,
and science on a four-year cycle. Each province and territory receives its
own results as well as an analysis by sub-test. Provinces may then conduct a
secondary analysis to shape teaching practices. The three Canadian provinces
participating in the OECD study, Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan, and
Québec, encourage schools to use school-level data in school planning. 
 
In the early 1990s Her Majesty's Inspectors of Education in Scotland
published school self-assessment and development planning guidelines that
schools could use on a voluntary basis. Since 2001, all schools have been
required to use these guidelines to develop school plans. The plans are to
refer to data on student performance as gathered in national examinations for
16-year-olds and on attainment levels for students between the ages of 5 and
14 (as established in official targets). School plans are expected to
evaluate teaching and learning practices and to include strategies for
improvement. The plans are shared with parents and published in school
outreach materials and on websites.
 
·         Guidelines on effective teaching and formative assessment have been
embedded in the national curriculum and other materials. 
In 2000, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) in England introduced
the Assessment for Learning (AfL) programme, targeting pilots to Key Stage 3
schools - that is, lower secondary schools. AfL provides teachers, school
leaders, local education authorities and other stakeholders with guidance and
resources on the principles of good classroom assessment, as supported in
research. DfES promises also to provide a repertoire of teaching strategies
and tools from which schools and teachers may choose, based on students'
needs and the school's goals and priorities.
·         provision of tools and exemplars to support effective formative
assessment. 
The New Zealand Ministry of Education has also supported the development of a
number of tools for formative assessment. These include Assessment Tools for
Teaching and Learning (asTTle) for assessing literacy and numeracy from years
5 to 10, in English and te reo Maori, and national curriculum exemplars for
students in years 1-10 in all curriculum areas. The asTTle are a key
component of both the government's literacy and numeracy assessment
strategies. Teachers use the tools to evaluate the impact of teaching
approaches on student achievement, and when necessary, to adjust teaching to
better meet student needs. The national exemplars include annotated work
samples and feature sample teacher-student dialogues and written teacher
comments, showing how teachers might assess the student work in a formative
manner, and in a way that is sensitive to different learning and
communication styles of students. They are available in print form and
on-line. Many are also supported by video clips.
 
·         investments in special initiatives and innovative programmes
incorporating formative assessment approaches. 
 
Several schools included in the case study countries participated in pilot or
other special projects before deciding to adopt formative assessment teaching
methods. Certainly, their participation in special projects signals that
these are schools that are more open to innovation and change, and is likely
one of the reasons the schools have come to the attention of researchers.
Their participation in these projects also helped to prepare the ground for
further change. 
 
·         Investments in teacher professional development for formative
assessment. 
 
Queensland has a variety of in-service workshops and professional development
opportunities for teachers on assessment. At the senior secondary school
level, professional workshops assist teachers in implementing assessment in
the subjects they teach. Teacher practice is supported by strong professional
networks and professional subject-based organisations. Service on moderation
panels (discussed above) is recognised as providing powerful professional
development for panellists, and many schools encourage their staff to seek
panel membership. Feedback from moderation panels to schools involves
teachers in discussions on their assessment practices, both within their
school and with the relevant panel. Being wholly responsible for student
assessment, teachers continually reflect on their assessment practice and
consider how it can be improved. Assessment practice is therefore always
evolving. 
 
 
	-----Original Message-----
	From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Marie Cora
	Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 11:28 PM
	To: specialtopics at nifl.gov
	Subject: [SpecialTopics 174] Questions on formative assessment
	
	
	Ms. Looney,
	 
	Thank you so much for taking the time to share your findings and
respond to some of our questions.  This is an extremely timely topic for us
to explore here in the U.S.  I am very interested in hearing you discuss in
some detail these two points of the study:
	 
	"The study shows how teachers have addressed barriers to systematic
practice, and how school and policy leaders may apply the principles of
formative assessment to promote constructive cultures of assessment and
evaluation throughout education systems."
	 
	Specifically:
	Can you discuss further how formative assessment is not practiced
systematically in secondary schools?  Does this refer to certain schools
using the practice and others not, or rather, that formative assessment is
used for certain purposes within a school or school system, but is not
practiced in all aspects of the school (system)?
	 
	Formative assessment is an excellent approach for informing the
teaching and learning process.  Can you discuss how formative assessment is
also useful at the evaluation level - for example, for purposes of examining
success on the program or system level?  
	 
	I'm not sure how the systems you studied are funded/supported, but is
formative assessment used for reporting purposes to funders or government
agencies?  How is this achieved?  
	 
	In the systems that you researched, how are formative assessments
developed and used?  Are they uniform or standardized?  Are there guidelines
for development?  Who develops the assessments?  Is special training involved
for administrators, teachers, or others using the assessments?
	 
	Thank you for your responses.
	 
	Marie Cora
	 
	 
	Marie Cora
	NIFL Assessment Discussion List Moderator
	marie.cora at hotspurpartners.com
	Coordinator, LINCS Assessment Special Collection
	http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/assessment/
	 
	 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20060905/539df9e2/attachment.html