Tensions in Assessment for Learning (AfL) at the transition from primary to secondary school
Dr Jane Jones and Dr Mary Webb, King’s College London
Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Institute of Education, University of London, 5-8 September 2007
Abstract
Whilst issues of transfer and transition have been well researched and continuities and discontinuities identified in terms of subject, gender and transfer procedures inter alia (Galton, Morrison and Pell, 2000), this paper looks at transition in one very specific context of research, drawing on our ongoing work over three years on the island of Jersey. We suggest that the extensive investment in formative practices generally and in AfL in the primary school especially at Key Stage 2 could be of enormous benefit for the learners in secondary education. This is true in particular where a culture of learning exists that seeks to build upon explicitly and progress these experiences. The development of formative assessment practices with teachers in Jersey led to the adoption of the new term, Assessment for Learning, that emphasised the purpose of formative practices and could be used meaningfully by teachers, students and parents. It is defined by Black et al. as‘… any assessment for which the first priority in its design and practice is to serve the purpose of students’ learning’ (2002:1.)
Whilst AfL is immediately memorable and meaningful and focuses on learning, formative assessment can encourage teachers to examine their practices by asking in what way their practices are formative and can progress learning.
We discuss evident tensions, contradictions and discontinuities that appear to inhibit progression and constrain the relatively successful primary school formative experiences of the students, and illustrate these data from discussion groups and interviewswith Year 6 and 7 students and their teachers. After a period of prolonged settling, discontinuities and accommodating multiple and varying demands, the students in this study showed the ability to bridge the transition gap using AfL techniques and skills they had acquired and practised at primary school, regardless of the extent to which secondary school teachers consolidate these skills.
The findings of this small-scale illuminative study highlight the need to plan for progression in a more coherent cross-phase dialogue about learning between primary and secondary school teachers, and also for secondary teachers to consider a more learner- focused perspective to students to bridge this transition gap.
Introduction and overview
The JAFA (Jersey Actioning Formative Assessment) Project is a professional development programme on assessment for learning (AfL) for all teachers on the Channel Island of Jersey. In a study of primary school teachers who were engaged in this programme from its outset in January 2004, reported at BERA 2006, we found that, for teachers, change was characterised as a process of expansive learning (Engestrom, 2001) motivated by a contradiction between the teachers’ beliefs about learning and the existing culture in the classroom. Development of formative assessment practices had wider implications for participating schools and led to a necessary culture change in the complex classroom system. Thus the transformation in the activity system of the classroom associated with formative assessment produced a change in classroom culture to one with a learning orientation (Dweck, 2000) in which mutual support, honesty, risk-taking, trust and a shared language of assessment and feedback were established (Webb & Jones, 2007).
The current study has focused on students’ experiences, perceptions and behaviours during their transition from Year 6 classes, where formative assessment was embedded, into Year 7 where they moved into new schools and new classes taught by a range of different teachers who were at various stages of awareness and development of formative assessment. Given our belief that an AfL approach can help students to learn independently (Jones and Webb, 2006), the main focus of our research for the current study was to look at if and to what extent these students’ attitudes and beliefs about learning are maintained and supported during this transition and at the tensions, contradictions and discontinuities that influence their attitudes and beliefs. Data from focus group discussions with students at the end of Year 6, who had benefited from consistent formative assessment practices over a sustained period, revealed that these learners were enthusiastic about the AfL approach, confident in their manner, proficient in the discourses of AfL and were able to identify and act upon modest targets for improving their learning.
In follow up focus group discussions in Year 7 in the autumn term, some of the students claimed that they had forgotten the AfL practices but, when prompted, had good recall. Generally the intensity and consistency of the AfL approach experienced at primary school was not progressed explicitly nor sufficiently at secondary school and the majority of teachers were unaware of the students’ primary experiences. In contrast to this the students claimed that in the absence of transparent learning intentions and success criteria being made available to them in many of their lessons, they could establish these for themselves with a bit of thought. Noticeably less forthcoming about how they could improve their work, some of the Year 7 had developed a dependency on their teachers for approval of their work and for the next steps in their learning. In subsequent focus group discussions held in the summer term, the same students now at the end of Year 7, having got over the trauma of transition to new sites, teaching styles and organisational arrangements, appeared to have settled into patterns of working that enabled them to focus more on progressing their learning, recognising strengths and areas for development concordant with the AfL approaches which they remembered with more clarity than in the interviews in the autumn term.
The data from our visits at the end of primary school, during the first term of secondary school and at the end of Year 7 show that at the end of Year 6 the students were AfL literate and very capable of applying their knowledge to their work and learning. In contrast to this, at the beginning of Year 7 this knowledge was present while the students were preoccupied with settling into their new environment, but used in classes where they could identify it. At the end of Year 7, the students, now settled into their new schools and adapted to new teachers and subjects, were able to articulate the teachers’ and their own use of AfL in a mature way – building on the skills they had acquired in primary school.
The transition from primary to secondary school, and there has long been an awareness of the unsettledness and concomitant anxieties of students at this stage (Measor and Woods, 1984), is an unsettled period during which maturational changes in the students themselves can clearly be seen. It is a period which requires many adaptations on the part of the students to restore a sense of equilibrium and to build a sense of coherence across the sites of learning.
Methodology
We selected two primary and two of their ‘feeding’ secondary schools with which there are well established transition procedures. These include mutual visits, the transfer of basic documentation and some auditing of students’ primary curriculum coverage. Opting for a qualitative approach, we chose to observe, listen and hear what was going on regarding transition and employed focus discussion groups with 6 students in May 2006, and again in their secondary school in May 2007, that is at both ends of the transition. These were interspersed with interviews with the students divided into groups of 3 in November 2006 and interviews with their teachers of the semi-structured kind, lesson observations and the examination of documentary evidence such as students’ books and lesson plans. We used the same questions with minor adaptation and provided continuity of discussion for the students, which we considered an important factor for the students, given their perceived discontinuity of the transition year. The key question in the focus groups (with probes as necessary) on which this paper focuses is:
· What and how they learnt differently at secondary school
and, in association,
· what they remembered from primary school about AfL techniques and how they used these in their learning at secondary school.
We present our data as a small scale study that sheds light on key issues in the ongoing research of transition in its broadest sense and can be interpreted as a ‘telling case’ that shows ‘how general principles deriving from some theoretical orientation manifest themselves in some given set of particular circumstances ‘(Mitchell 1984:239) .Given our research focus and our concern with the transfer of AfL learning skills, we have sought to show how students have, after intensive AfL practice in their primary schools, been supported-or not- to sustain and progress their learning in the context of AfL principles in Year 7. Whilst this paper represents our interpretation of the findings based on all the data sets, students have done much of the ‘telling’ themselves and their own perception of changing circumstances thus have a privileged voice in the following discussion. In some instances, the students expressed themselves forcefully and colourfully and we concur with Flutter and Ruddock that ‘pupils of all ages can show a remarkable capacity to discuss their learning in a considered and insightful way, although they may not always be able to articulate their ideas in the formal language of education’ (2004:7).
In the summer of 2006, the first focus group discussions were held with six Year 6 students in their primary schools. In this pilot and the following focus group interviews the following format was applied: one researcher acted as moderator while the other observed the interactional dynamics, made notes and ensured recording took place as well as contributed to the discussion, probing deeper on certain issues of interest. The students were invited to bring samples of their work and to identify, show and explain to the group why they were proud of the selected pieces of work. They were asked how they had come to produce the work, what skills they had used, whether the work was produced aided or unaided and if and how they thought it could be further improved. We also asked them to explain to us their perceptions of how AfL was used in the classroom, in which ways it helped them to learn and how they thought their learning differed to previous years.
We revisited the students in the first term in their Year 7 and on this occasion interviewed them in groups of 3s, with the intention of probing in more detail how they had been able to transfer their AfL learning techniques and skills and, specifically to show us and talk about work they were proud of, how it had been produced and how they might be applying AfL techniques learnt in Year 6 in Year 7. In addition, we also interviewed the teachers after the lessons we had observed to discuss the formative assessment they identified in their own lessons and the learning profiles of the student who were members of our focus groups. All interviews were recorded and transcribed and analysed using open-coding basis and NVivo.
We held focus group discussions with the same students in May 2007 at the end of Year 7 and once again used the same range of questions and looked at examples of work selected by the students. On all three visits, we observed the students in lessons with a view to identifying any formative practices and how the student might react. Based on ‘AfL’ criteria of, for example, quality questioning, evaluating lessons from a formative perspective is feasible. Studying the students’ reactions however does not readily yield information given Macaro’s reflection (2001:6) on his research with students and learner strategies about ‘the difficulty of trying to ‘get inside the learner’s head’’. For this reason, it was important to pursue issues arising in lessons in the student discussion groups after the lessons had taken place.
The students, intrigued by our continuing interest in their progress, participated in the interviews with verve and honesty, and were keen to show work they were ‘proud of’. Cognisant of the need to ensure that the students felt comfortable at all times, we cultivated good relationships with the students, always knowing their names, validating their work and enjoying shared moments of humour and a very positive and a constructive relationship developed with the students over the course of the year. Nonetheless, we agree with Fairclough (1989) who suggests that interviews are always ‘unequal encounters’ in terms of context, social relations and subject positions and we endeavoured to validate the student voice and to allow the students free reign in their response and expression about their perceptions of transition and the impact it did have on their progress. The only stipulation was that they talked only in terms of subjects, teaching and learning styles and not individual teachers, as we wanted them to focus on their learning at either side of the transition period.
Transitions
In Jersey there is currently a cross-phase discourse in which primary and secondary school teachers in Jersey in mixed primary and secondary school clusters have been engaging to consider the implications of transition for all parties concerned. As we show later on, there is particular concern about progression at this crucial transition. When transition is thought of and discussed, there is a tendency to focus on one - the transition from primary to secondary phase. There are, in fact, as one primary school deputy head with responsibility for early years cited by Jones and Coffey pointed out, many points of transition in a child’s schooling trajectory: