Changing practices: Influences on classroom assessment

Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 239-264

  Tierney, Robin D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 39049155660     PISSN: 0969594X     EISSN: 1465329X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09695940601035387     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Bailey, B., 2000. “ The impact of mandated change on teachers ”. In The sharp edge of educational change: teaching, leading, and the realities of reform, Edited by: Basica, N., and Hargreaves, A., 112–128. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
2. Barootchi, N., and Keshavarez, M. H., 2002. Assessment of achievement through portfolios and teacher-made tests. Educational Research, 44(3): 279–288.
3. Biesta, G. J. J., and Burbules, N. C., 2003. Pragmatism and educational research., Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
4. Black, P., and Harrison, C., 2001. Feedback in questioning and marking: the science teacher’s role in formative assessment. School Science Review, 82(301): 55–61.
5. Black, P., and Wiliam, D., 1998. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1): 7–74.
6. Boardman, A. G., and Woodruff, A. L., 2004. Teacher change and ‘high-stakes’ assessment: what happens to professional development?. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(6): 545–557.
7. Borko, H., Davinroy, K. H., Bliem, C. L., and Cumbo, K. B., 2000. Exploring and supporting teacher change: two third-grade teachers’ experiences in a mathematics and literacy staff development project. Elementary School Journal, 100(4): 273–306.
8. Brighton, C. M., 2003. The effects of middle school teachers’ beliefs on classroom practices. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3): 177–206.
9. Briscoe, C., and Wells, E., 2002. Reforming primary science assessment practices: a case study of one teacher’s professional development through action research. Science Education, 86(3): 417–435.
10. Carless, D., 2005. Prospects for the implementation of assessment for learning. Assessment in Education, 12(1): 39–54.
11. Cheung, D., 2002. Refining a stage model for studying teacher concerns about educational innovations. Australian Journal of Education, 46(3): 305–322.
12. Coffey, J. E., 2003. “ Making connections: students engaging in and with assessment ”. In Digital Dissertations (UMI No. AAT3085273).
13. Cousins, J. B., 1998. “ Organizational consequences of participatory evaluation: a school district case study ”. In Organizational learning in schools, Edited by: Leithwood, K., and Louis, K. S., 127–148. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
14. Cousins, J. B., Goh, S., Clark, S., and Lee, L., 2004. Integrating evaluative inquiry into the organizational culture: a review and synthesis of the knowledge base. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 19(2): 99–141.
15. Cousins, J. B., and Leithwood, K. A., 1993. Enhancing knowledge utilization as a strategy for school improvement. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 14(3): 305–333.
16. Cuban, L., 1990. Reforming again, again, and again. Educational Researcher, 19: 3–13.
17. Datnow, A., 2000. “ Gender politics in school reform ”. In The sharp edge of educational change: teaching, leading and the realities of reform, Edited by: Basica, N., and Hargreaves, A., 131–155. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
18. Davies, P., 2000. The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice. Oxford Review of Education, 26(3&4): 365–378.
19. Delandshere, G., and Jones, J. H., 1999. Elementary teachers’ beliefs about assessment in mathematics: a case of assessment paralysis. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(3): 216–240.
20. De Waal, C., 2005. On pragmatism, Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
21. Dori, Y. J., 2003. From nationwide standardized testing to school-based alternative embedded assessment in Israel: students’ performance in the Matriculation 2000 project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1): 34–52.
22. Earl, L. M., Data, data everywhere (and we don’t know what to do): using data for wise decisions in schools. Paper presented at the Empirical Issues in Canadian Education Conference. November22–24, Ottawa, Ontario.
23. Earl, L., and Fullan, M., 2003. Using data in leadership for learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3): 383–394.
24. Earl, L., and Katz, S., 2000. “ Changing classroom assessment: teachers’struggles ”. In The sharp edge of educational change: teaching, leading, and the realities of reform, Edited by: Basica, N., and Hargreaves, A., 97–111. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
25. Evans, J., and Benefield, P., 2001. Systematic reviews of educational research: does the model fit?. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5): 527–541.
26. Fullan, M., 1993. Change forces: probing the depths of educational reform, London: The Falmer Press/Taylor & Francis.
27. Fullan, M., 2003. Change forces with a vengeance, London: RoutledgeFalmer.
28. Gilsdorf, J. G., 2000. “ Accountability and the classroom: a study of selected beliefs and practices of Nebraska public school teachers and principals concerning student classroom assessment and grading ”. In Digital Dissertations (UMI No. AAT 9991988).
29. Gorard, S., 2002. The role of secondary data in combining methodological approaches. Educational Review, 54(3): 231–237.
30. Hall, K., and Harding, A., 2002. Level descriptions and teacher assessment in England: towards a community of assessment practice. Educational Research, 44(1): 1–15.
31. Hammersley, M., 2001. On ‘systematic’ reviews of research literatures: a ‘narrative’ response to Evans & Benefield. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5): 543–554.
32. Hand, B., and Prain, V., 2002. Teachers implementing writing-to-learn strategies in junior secondary science: a case study. Science Education, 86: 737–755.
33. Hargreaves, A., Earl, L, and Schmidt, M., 2002. Perspectives on alternative assessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1): 69–95.
34. Hayward, L., and Hedge, N., 2005. Travelling towards change in assessment: policy, practice and research in education. Assessment in Education, 12(1): 55–75.
35. Hayward, L., Priestley, M., and Young, M., 2004. Ruffling the calm of the ocean floor: merging practice, policy and research in assessment in Scotland. Oxford Review of Education, 30(3): 397–415.
36. Horn, R. A., 2002. Understanding educational reform: a reference handbook, Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
37. Ingram, D., Seashore Louis, K., and Schroeder, R. G., 2004. Accountability policies and teacher decision making: barriers to the use of data to improve practice. Teachers College Record, 106(6): 1258–1287.
38. Invernizzi, M. A., Landrum, T. J., Howell, J. L., and Warley, H. P., 2005. Toward the peaceful coexistence of test developers, policymakers, and teachers in an era of accountability. The Reading Teacher, 58(7): 610–618.
39. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. 2003. The student evaluation standards, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
40. Kehr, B. S., 1999. “ In their own words: what teachers say about the use of required portfolios in elementary classrooms ”. In Digital Dissertations (UMI No. 9926773)
41. Kyriakides, L., 2002. A research based model for development of policy on baseline assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 28(6): 805–826.
42. Landrum, T. J., Cook, B. G., Tankersley, M., and Fitzgerald, S., 2002. Teacher perceptions of the trustworthiness, usability, and accessibility of information from different sources. Remedial and Special Education, 23(1): 42–48.
43. Lee, D., and Gavine, D., 2003. Goal-setting and self-assessment in year 7 students. Educational Research, 45(1): 49–59.
44. Levin, B., August 2003. Helping research in education to matter more August, Available online at: http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/web/whatsnew/initiatives/transformation/ben_levin.pdf (accessed October 2003)
45. Lock, C., and Munby, H., 2000. Changing assessment practices in the classroom: a study of one teacher’s challenge. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 46(3): 267–79.
46. Lovett, S., and Gilmore, A., 2003. Teachers’ learning journeys: the quality learning circle as a model of professional development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14(2): 189–211.
47. Mabry, L., Poole, J., Redmond, L., and Schultz, A., 2003. Local impact of state testing in southwest Washington. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(22) Available online at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n22/(accessed 28 July 2004)
48. Mason, B., Mason, D. A., Mendez, M., Nelsen, G., and Orwig, R., 2005. Effects of top-down and bottom-up elementary school standards reform in an underperforming California district. The Elementary School Journal, 105(4): 353–77.
49. McDonald, M., 2002. The perceived role of diploma examinations in Alberta, Canada. Journal of Educational Research, 96(1): 21–36.
50. McMillan, J. H., Myran, S., and Workman, D., 2002. Elementary teachers’ classroom assessment and grading practices. Journal of Educational Research, 95(4): 203–213.
51. McMillan, J. H., and Nash, S., Teacher classroom assessment and grading practices decision making. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. April25–27, New Orleans.
52. McNair, S., Bhargava, A., Adams, L., Edgerton, S., and Kypos, B., 2003. Teachers speak out on assessment practices. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(1): 23–31.
53. Miller, L., 2005. Assessing assessment. Professionally Speaking,: 37–40.
54. Morgan, C., and Watson, A., 2002. The interpretive nature of teachers’ assessment of students’ mathematics: issues for equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(2): 78–10.
55. Ontario College of Teachers. September 2003. “ The state of the teaching profession in Ontario, 2003 ”. In Professionally Speaking September, 21–27.
56. Orsmond, P., Merry, S., and Reiling, K., 2002. The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4): 309–323.
57. Roos, B., and Hamilton, D., 2005. Formative assessment: a cybernetic viewpoint. Assessment in Education, 12(1): 7–20.
58. Sandelowski, M., Docherty, S., and Emden, C., 1997. Qualitative metasynthesis: issues and techniques. Research in Nursing & Health, 20: 365–371.
59. Schmidt, M. J., 2001. “ Toward teacher inquiry when implementing classroom assessment ”. In Digital Dissertations (UMI No. AAT NQ 63809)
60. Shepard, L., 2000. The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7): 1–14.
61. Simon, M., and Forgette-Giroux, R., 2002. Senior school board officials’ perceptions of a national achievement assessment program. Educational Policy Analysis, 10(46) Available online at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n46.html (accessed 28 July 2005)
62. Stephens, D., Pearson, P.D., Gilrane, C., Roe, M., Stallman, A. C., Shelton, J., Weinzierl, J., Rodriguez, A., and Commeyras, M., 1995. Assessment and decision making in schools: a cross-site analysis. Reading Research Quarterley, 30(3): 478–499.
63. Stiggins, R. J., 1994. Student-centered classroom assessment, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
64. Stiggins, R. J., 2001. The unfulfilled promise of classroom assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 20(3): 5–15.
65. Stiggins, R. J., and Chappuis, J., 2005. Using student-involved classroom assessment to close achievement gaps. Theory into Practice, 44(1): 11–18.
66. Sutherland, S., 2004. Creating a culture of data use for continuous improvement: a case study of an Edison Project school. American Journal of Evaluation, 25(3): 277–293.
67. Swanson, C. B., and Stevenson, D. L., 2002. Standards-based reform in practice: evidence on state policy and classroom instruction from the NAEP state assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1): 1–27.
68. Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., and Rodriguez, M. C., 2005. The CIERA School change framework: an evidence-based approach to professional development and school reading improvement. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(1): 40–69.
69. Torrance, H., and Pryor, J., 1998. Investigating formative assessment: teaching, learning and assessment in the classroom, Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
70. Torrance, H., and Pryor, J., 2001. Developing formative assessment in the classroom: using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5): 615–631.
71. Treagust, D. F., Jacobowitz, R., Gallagher, J. L., and Parker, J., 2001. Using assessment as a guide in teaching for understanding: a case study of a middle school science class learning about sound. Science Education, 85(2): 137–157.
72. Tunstall, P., 2001. Assessment discourse and constructions of social reality in infant classrooms. Journal of Education Policy, 16(3): 215–231.
73. Tunstall, P., and Gipps, C., 1996. Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: a typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22(4): 389–404.
74. Uchiyama, M. K., 2004. “ Teachers’ use of formative assessment in middle school reform-based mathematics classrooms ”. In Digital Dissertations (UMI No.AAT 3123299)
75. Waddell, C. A., 2004. “ The effects of negotiated written feedback within formative assessment on fourth-grade students’ motivation and goal orientations ”. In Digital Dissertations (UMI No.AAT 3151330)
76. Waddle, J. L., and Conway, K. D., 2005. School reform through a school/university partnership. Current Issues in Education, 8(8) Available online at: http://cie.asu.edu/volume8/number8/(accessed 28 July 2005)
77. Yung, B. H. W., 2001. Three views of fairness in a school-based assessment scheme of practical work in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 23(10): 985–1005.