1
Formative Assessment
Formative Assessment: A Closer Look at Assessments for Learning
by
Olivia Byerly and Kevin Spainhour
A paper
submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements of the Term Project for LSA5900
Appalachian State University
May 2, 2012
Formative Assessment: A Closer Look at Assessments for Learning
Review of Literature
High-stakes testing is what drives many instructional policies and practices in education today. Standardized testing, at both the state and national level, places pressures on educators to devise pedagogical strategies that increase test scores, as school and teacher effectiveness are measured by the public and by government systems based upon student performance on these tests. The idea of “no child left behind” and the current assessment practices in education seem to be failing a large majority of students. According to Stiggins (2002), the “harm arises directly from our failure to balance our use of standardized tests and classroom assessments in the service of school improvement” (p. 758). With the unavoidable demands of standardized testing, teachers must implement strategies of formative assessments to inform their day-to-day instructional practices and ensure that student learning is maximized within the classroom.
What is Formative Assessment?
Feedback from standardized tests at the district, state, or national level is often delivered infrequently and the focus of the feedback is too broad. Evidence that promotes learning must come “moment to moment through continuous classroom assessment” (Stiggins & Chappuis, 2005). Formative assessment strategies help teachers create opportunities that maximize learning moments (Brookhart, Moss, & Long, 2008). Popham (2009) defines formative assessment as a “planned practice” in which evidence provided by assessments is used by teachers to modify instructional practices or by students to alter learning strategies (p. 3). In other words, assessments become formative in nature when their evidence is used to “adapt the teaching work to meet learning needs” (Black et al. 2002 as cited in Black, 2007, p. 1). Formative assessments occur more frequently in instructional practicethan summative assessments. Teachers use these assessment strategies to gauge understanding and mastery as well as to reflect upon and adapt their own practice. The purpose of the results of such assessments is not to assign grades, but rather promote learning, provide feedback, and engage students.
Formative vs. Summative Assessment
Within the classroom there are two types of assessment practices: summative and formative. While both types of assessments have value in education, it is important for educators to recognize the differences between the two practices and distinguish between appropriate assessment types based upon the desired feedback from the test. Summative assessments serve the purpose of “evaluating academic progress at the end of a specified time period” (Dunn & Mulvenon, 2009, p. 1). Summative assessments are also referred to as assessments of learning. They typically occur at the end of an instructional unit, at the end of the school year, or the end of a particular course. They are often what informs our decisions regarding accountability and tell us the extent of student mastery, whether curriculum standards were met, and the effectiveness of educators (Stiggins, 2002).
Formative assessments are assessments for learning. These strategies are used by students and teachers to “adjust teaching and learning” (Dunn & Mulvenon, 2009, p. 2). The use of formative assessment is a “process, not a test” (Popham, 2009, p. 1). It is more than ranking students or assigning a grade based upon the results of a test. Rather, formative assessment involves using assessment results to modify and adjust how teachers teach and how students learn (Popham, 2009). An assessment may be designed for formative or summative purposes. However, “it is the actual methodology, data analysis, and the use of the results that determine whether an assessment is formative or summative” (Dunn & Mulvenon, 2009, p. 2).
Benefits of Formative Assessment
When teachers use the formative assessment process and the data regarding student progress that it provides in an effort to enhance learning, there are many resulting benefits. Formative assessment involves the use of valuable feedback. Not only is teacher-to-student communication involved in the process, but student-to-teacher communication is an integral practice as well. “Formative assessment contributes to student ownership of learning more than any other classroom-based practice” (Brookhart, Moss, & Long, 2008, p. 54).
Essentially when teachers effectively incorporate formative assessment and assessments for learning into instructional practice, students become active participants in the learning process. Students view assessments and the accompanying feedback or results as learning opportunities rather than influencing factors of grades. “Assessment begins to look like instruction when we deeply involve students in the process” (Chappuis, 2004, p. 21). Formative assessments according to Chappuis (2004):
- Help students make connections with learning expectations
- Require students to reflect upon their progress and communicate their understanding
- Provide descriptive feedback rather than evaluative feedback
- Gather frequent data regarding student achievement in an effort to modify instruction
The incorporation of formative assessments into instruction provides a valuable intervention system for struggling learners (Stiggins& Dufour, 2009, p. 640). Many of the studies outlined by Black and Wiliam (1998) support the concept that formative assessment benefits the low-achieving students and helps to close achievement gaps.
Formative Assessment Practices
The multitude of formative assessment strategies that teachers can choose to incorporate into their instructional design must have one common theme: student involvement. This process starts with clearly defined learning targets that are easily understood by students (Stiggins & DuFour, 2009). Another essential element is the use of self-assessment by students that includes information regarding the desired goal, present position, and a way to advance that position to meet the goal (Black & Wiliam, 1998).
The teacher’s role in formative assessment involves incorporating strategies that provide data and evidence that shape instruction. These assessments can occur spontaneously as a teacher feels they are necessary during a lessonor they can be planned. The planned assessments can be as simple as preparing questions to ask students during a presentation that will invoke thought and provide insight into understanding or they can be assessments that are planned at strategic points such as at the end of a lesson or unit (Heritage, 2007). The key to effective formative assessment practice is that the students and teacher are involved in the process and open communication and involvement is encouraged through the use of feedback and reflective thought.
Conflicting Practices of Formative Assessment
While there is much evidence that supports the benefits of formative assessments, practical implementation seems to be based on “limited understanding and superficial adoption” (Black, 2007, p. 1). Many misconceptions have been observed in classroom practices. One such misunderstanding is the notion that frequent testing is equivalent to formative assessment. Unless these outcomes are followed by a “learning action,” these tests are considered frequent summative assessment (Black, 2007, p. 1). Another weakness found in the practices of formative assessments occurs in the area of questioning. When a teacher poses a question, sufficient time needs to be given for students to think and respond with more than just a one-word answer. Often teachers accept such responses, giving a verbal reward for correct answers and ignoring the wrong answers. Such practices do not include valuable “formative dialogue” that is valuable to assessing understanding (Black, 2007, p. 1).
In addition, a misconception that teachers have regarding formative assessments is the notion of grades. Our assessment culture has produced teachers who believe every assignment should be graded and students who believe their intelligence in a subject can be described by the grade they earn. Comments and feedback, in fact, are much more powerful instructional tools than grades. Descriptive feedback can be a useful tool for students to use in an effort to improve their work (Black, 2007). Much of the research of recent years reflects that teachers have tried to adapt summative assessments for formative purposes. This practice tends to yield evidence that describes where students currently are as opposed to guiding how to advance their knowledge (Wiliam, 2006).
Conclusion
It is important to keep in mind that experiencing complete success with formative assessment takes time. These strategies often require a complete restructuring of instructional practices. Support and training provided by school administration is also a key contributor to success. Professional learning communities can also serve as an avenue of support for improving instruction and achievement. A strategic approach involving focused professional development opportunities along with continued support throughout the process will encourage teacher buy-in. Ultimately, formative assessment is a teaching strategy with its effectiveness reliant on the teacher in the classroom. Although the pressures of high-stakes testing continue to direct many teaching methods, it is vital that assessments for learning become woven into the educational fabric. As teachers implement more formative assessment practices, student performance will motivate, encourage and transform the classroom.
References
Black, P. (2007). Formative assessment: Promises or problems? The Journal for Drama in
Education, 23(2), 37-42.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through
classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 81-90.
Brookhart, S., Moss, C., & Long, B. (2008). Formative assessment that empowers. Educational
Leadership, November, 52-57.
Chappuis, S. (2004). Leading assessment for learning: Using classroom assessment in school
improvement. Texas Association of School Administrators professional Journal-INSIGHT, Winter 2004, 18-22.
Dunn, K., & Mulvenon, S. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The
limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.
Popham, J. (2009). Our failure to use formative assessment: Immoral omission? Obtained from
Stiggins, Richard J. (2002). "Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning." Phi
Delta Kappan. June, 758-765.
Stiggins, R., & Chappuis, J. (2005). Using student-involved classroom assessment to
close achievement gaps. Theory Into Practice, 44(1), 11-18.
Stiggins, R., & DuFour, R. (2009). Maximizing the power of formative assessments. Phi Delta
Kappan, 90(9), 640-644.
Wiliam, D. (2009). Formative assessment: Getting the focus right. Educational Assessment, 11(3
& 4), 283-289.