Issues in field experience assessment in teacher education in a standards-based context

Journal of Education for Teaching

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 17-32

  Tang, Sylvia Yee Fan ^a  

^a THE EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 39449132546     PISSN: 02607476     EISSN: 13600540     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02607470701773416     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Advisory Committee on Teacher Education and Qualifications. 2003. Towards a learning profession: The teacher competencies framework and the continuing professional development of teachers. Hong Kong: Advisory Committee on Teacher Education and Qualifications.
2. Bates, R. 2004. Regulation and autonomy in teacher education: Government, community or democracy? Journal of Education for Teaching 30, no. 2: 117-30.
3. Brooker, R., R. Muller, A. Mylonas, and B. Hansford. 1998. Improving the assessment of practice teaching: A criteria and standards framework. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 23, no. 1: 5-24.
4. Bullough, R.V.J., D.C. Clark, and R.S. Patterson. 2003. Getting in step: Accountability, accreditation and the standardization of teacher education in the United States. Journal of Education for Teaching 29, no. 1: 35-51.
5. Carless, D. 2006. Different perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education 31, no. 2: 219-33.
6. Cooper, J.M. 1994. Supervision in teacher education. In The international encyclopedia of education, ed, T. Husen and T.N. Postlethwaite. 2nd ed., 6000-4. New York: Pergamon.
7. Cope, P., A. Bruce, J. McNally, and G. Wilson. 2003. Grading the practice of teaching: an unholy union of incompatibles. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 28, no. 6: 673-84.
8. Danielson, C., and T.L. McGreal. 2000. Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
9. Darling-Hammond, L., and J. Snyder. 2000. Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education 16, no. 5-6: 523-45.
10. Flowers, C.P., and D.R. Hancock. 2003. An interview protocol and scoring rubric for evaluating teacher performance. Assessment in Education 10, no. 2: 161-8.
11. Hager, P., and J. Butler. 1996. Two models of educational assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 21, no. 4: 367-78.
12. Hager, P., A. Gonczi, and J. Athanasou. 1994. General issues about assessment of competence. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 19, no. 1: 3-16.
13. Harlen, W. 2006. On the relationship between assessment for formative and summative purposes. In Assessment and learning, ed. J. Gardner, 103-18. London: Sage Publications.
14. Hartsough, C.S., K.D. Perez, and C.L. Swain. 1998. Development and scaling of a preservice teacher rating instrument. Journal of Teacher Education 49, no. 2: 132-9.
15. Kleinhenz, E., and L. Ingvarson. 2004. Teacher accountability in Australia: Current policies and practices and their relation to the improvement of teaching and learning. Research Papers in Education 19, no. 1: 31-49.
16. Knight, P. 2002. Summative assessment in higher education: Practices in disarray. Studies in Higher Education 27, no. 3: 275-86.
17. _. 2006. The local practices of assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 31, no. 4: 435-52.
18. Martin, S. 1997. Two models of educational assessment: A response from initial teacher education: If the cap fits. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 22, no. 3: 337-43.
19. Mayer, D., J. Mitchell, D. Macdonald, and R. Bell. 2005. Professional standards for teachers: A case study of professional learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 33, no. 2: 159-79.
20. Nicol, D.J., and D. Macfarlane-Dick, 2006. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education 31, no. 2: 199-218.
21. Pyke, C.L., and S. Lynch. 2005. Mathematics and science teachers' preparation for National Board of Professional Teaching Standards Certification. School Science and Mathematics 105, no. 1: 25-35.
22. Raths, J., and F. Lyman. 2003. Summative evaluation of student teachers. Journal of Teacher Education 54, no. 3: 206-16.
23. Rust, C., B. O'Donovan, and M. Price. 2005. A social constructivist assessment process model: How the research literature shows this could be best practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 30, no. 3: 231-40.
24. Rust, C., M. Price, and B. O'Donovan. 2003. Improving students' learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 28, no. 2: 147-64.
25. Sachs, J. 2003. The activist teaching profession. Buckingham: Open University Press.
26. Sadler, R. 1987. Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education 13, no. 2: 191-209.
27. _. 1998. Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education 5, no. 1: 77-85.
28. Tang, S.Y.F., and A.W.K. Chow. 2007. Communicating feedback in teaching practice supervision in a learning-oriented field experience assessment framework, Teaching and Teacher Education 23, no. 7: 1066-85.
29. Tang, S.Y.F., M.M.H. Cheng, and W.W.M. So. 2006. Supporting student teachers' professional learning with standards-referenced assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 34, no. 2: 223-44.
30. Toohey, S. 2002. Assessment of students' personal development as part of preparation for professional work - is it desirable and is it feasible? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 27, no. 6: 529-38.
31. Toohey, S., G. Tyan, and G. Hughes. 1996. Assessing the practicum. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 21, no. 3: 215-27.
32. Wong, A.F.L., and K.C. Goh. 2002. The practicum in teacher training: A preliminary and qualitative assessment of the improved National Institute of Education-School Partnership model in Singapore. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 30, no. 2: 198-206.