Dear Colleagues, 

Having given some of the background to adult basic skills in England,
here are a few words on the English case studies. At this stage I have
included only a general introduction and some thoughts about the
strengths and weaknesses of the formative assessment practices observed.
John may want to add to this, and I think he may want to give details of
each of the three sites visited. (If not, I will later on today.)

I am sure my three English colleagues will want to make contributions.

Nomenclature

Before I begin a word about nomenclature. In our case study report, and
below for ease of reference, we refer to 'adult basic skills'. But: 

1. 'Basic' has connotations many of us are unhappy with. One alternative
is 'adult literacy, language and numeracy'. 
2. As Jan Eldred and others repeatedly and rightly say, the differences
between each of these three are so significant as to raise the question
whether we should treat them under a single rubric. That is relevant to
this discussion because we can't assume that formative assessment
practices found to be successful in a literacy context will also or
equally be found to be successful in a numeracy context. Which takes us
on to the question how far the success of formative assessment practices
are dependent on context. 

The Case Studies

Three adult basic skills programmes were the subjects of the case
studies.  One is in London; one in the city of York (200 miles north of
London), and one is in the London Borough of Croydon (10 miles south of
the centre of London). These three sites were picked as exemplary
programs by the England-based author. The choice of these three
programmes was based, in part, on the personal experience of the author,
but his selection was checked with others who have a wide experience of
programmes in England.  The choice also was influenced by a desire to
have a range of different types of programmes and to have programmes
that could be visited within a limited time period. 

All of the programs provided inspection reports from the last visit of
teams from the Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI). All three ALI reports
were positive.  Both instruction and management received a positive
rating on the ALI scale, usually receiving one of the top two grades.
Programme leaders suggested two reasons why their programmes were able
to achieve and maintain a level of instruction that would lead to being
chosen as an exemplary programme. The first was the quality of their
teachers, and the second was their staff's regular reflection focused on
programme improvement.

Since these were all exemplary programmes, we asked the Heads of
Department at each of the 3 sites about the factors that most support
good teaching and learning. Whilst there was not a consensus, there was
broad agreement that each of the following were important, and in
roughly this order:  
*	Well qualified, committed and enthusiastic tutors; staff with
substantial hours who are willing to attend meetings, training and to
generally 'go the extra mile' 
*	Regular feedback and reviews of learner progress
*	Opportunities for continuing professional development 
*	Good resources, including e-learning resources; activities and
resources of interest and relevance to the learner
  
The influence of these factors on good teaching and learning will depend
in part on the value each learner places on them. But respondents agreed
that well qualified, committed and enthusiastic tutors help motivate and
stimulate learners, inspiring them to do their very best and helping
them to overcome often long held barriers to learning and personal
success. Regular feedback and reviews of learner progress are also
extremely important, for this is how learners will know whether they are
heading in the right direction. Constructive feedback is also invaluable
at points when learners are beginning to struggle, not only for the
direct assistance that the tutor is able to provide but also because
constructive on-going assessment promotes learners' motivation and
persistence. Formative assessment also provides an opportunity for the
tutors themselves to receive feedback on the teaching and learning
process, identifying changes that need to be made. 

Respondents agreed that activities and resources that are of interest
and relevance to the learner help engage the learner, maintaining
motivation and supporting the natural learning process. Finally, there
was general agreement that levels of funding and frequent redefining of
priorities are the factors that most threaten good Skills for Life
teaching and learning, together with an increasing administrative
burden.

Because of the national character of the system, initial assessment,
instruction, formative assessment, and summative assessment look similar
in all three.  However, they are by no means the same. Each programme
uses different types of assessment; teachers draw on their experience
and training as well as their knowledge of their learners to design
courses and teaching strategies that work best in their context; and
learners have a range of summative tests they can take to secure the
same qualification. In addition, different types of institutions
(nonprofit, further education college, and local government programme)
are featured in our case studies and different types of classes (ESOL,
numeracy, and adult literacy) were observed at each site.


Some strengths and weakness: observations

Strengths
*	A focus on small increments of learning - something that is
manageable for learners who may otherwise be overwhelmed by the demands
of a course. 
*	Learners and teachers are encouraged to reflect and modify
learning goals and aspirations.
*	Formative assessment encourages teachers to support learners,
and to assist learners in learning how to learn.
*	Teachers are able to bring their own experience and training to
the learning process. 
*	Formative assessment encourages dialogue between teacher and
learner, and amongst learners. 
*	Teachers are encouraged to understand how learners learn best,
and at what rate.

Weaknesses
*	The amount of time taken up in recording the process, time taken
away from instruction.
*	Whilst formative assessment procedures are supportive of
learning, if a class meets two hours per week for 12 weeks, and a
learner has missed two classes, the total time-on-task is only 20 hours.
Even an hour taken out of this time could affect learning. 
*	Each formative assessment task, therefore, should be justified
by evidence that it is supportive to learning.  The time required of
tutors by the writing up of formative assessment activities takes away
from their preparation for instruction. This time should be justified by
its impact on learning. 

Comment

A few further thoughts, which go beyond evidence from the case studies
themselves, and beyond, perhaps, what John C would want to say.  

1. The weaknesses observed above might be said to lie not in the
formative assessment process per se, but in the (chosen means of)
writing it up. But it is not easy to think of far less labour intensive
alternatives, once they become embedded in an institutional system. Some
form of authoritative report seems necessary to meet even minimal
demands of accountability. This takes us onto the terrain of
professional judgement, and reliance on that, and also onto questions
about accountability systems. I'm sure Jay Derrick will want to come in
here.  

2. One theme which Kathryn Ecclestone has brought to our attention is
the relation between assessment and personal autonomy: how far do
formative assessment practices contribute to the development of the
personal autonomy of the learner, encouraging her to take responsibility
for her learning, to understand how she learns and how she is most
likely to progress? And how far might the outcome only serve to inhibit
or neglect autonomy, perhaps because formative assessment is inexpertly
practiced, or because these practices are adhered to only mechanically,
or because the interests of formative assessment become subverted to the
demands of summative assessment? 

3.  I think David is right to raise the question how far formative
assessment can be disentangled from the practices that make up good
teaching generally. Many items listed under 'strengths' would appear in
any initial teacher training programme. I think there is truth in what
John B says, that formative assessment is partly to be characterised by
reference to attitude: by the attitude of looking at the teaching and
learning process from the learners' point of view, of drawing attention
to how the learner is progressing, and giving priority to how best to
support her. But I can hear teacher trainers say - and I have! - that '
we do all of that anyway'. Perhaps much (not all) of what is new is less
at the level of general principle and more in the details we are
uncovering about how best to apply those principles in particular
contexts.  But I expect Kathryn will want to disagree with that?

More soon.

John Vorhaus





> -----Original Message-----

> From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov 

> [mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of David J. Rosen

> Sent: 26 February 2008 06:00

> To: specialtopics at nifl.gov

> Subject: [SpecialTopics 759] Formative assessment in adult 

> foundation skillsin England

> 

> Colleagues,

> 

> Although Janet Looney will still be answering the (very many) 

> questions I asked, and other questions from discussion 

> participants, let's also move on to the first set of case 

> studies, from England. I have asked John Vorhaus and John 

> Comings if they could:

> 

> 1. give a short overview of the national adult basic skills 

> context in England, particularly noting any features or terms 

> of the context that may be unfamiliar to a U.S. audience and 

> that are important to understand the case studies;

> 

> 2. describe the three case studies; and

> 

> 3. describe what are the most interesting, significant 

> findings and also explain how the case studies might be a 

> good example of formative assessment.

> 

> It would be helpful if, in describing teacher formative 

> assessment practices in England, you could describe or give 

> examples of what goes beyond usual good practice in teaching 

> and learning, what, in particular, is good practice in 

> formative assessment. That is, some may wonder if formative 

> assessment is just a different name for good teaching? Is it 

> really something new? Is it really a discrete set of 

> practices? If, as Black and Wiliam's research shows, it makes 

> a difference in students' learning in elementary and 

> secondary education, what about formative assessment makes 

> that difference? Why is formative assessment such a powerful 

> set of strategies, so effective?  I believe that some of our 

> subscribers are still trying to understand of these issues; 

> perhaps the case studies in England might shed some light on them.

> 

> David J. Rosen

> Special Topics Discussion Moderator

> djrosen at comcast.net

> 

> 

> 

> -------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Special Topics mailing list

> SpecialTopics at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please 

> go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/SpecialTopics

> Email delivered to j.vorhaus at ioe.ac.uk

> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20080226/4e0e7fd9/attachment.html