Can teachers' summative assessments produce dependable results and also enhance classroom learning?

Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 451-469

  Black, Paul ^a   Harrison, Christine ^a   Hodgen, Jeremy ^a   Marshall, Bethan ^a   Serret, Natasha ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

pedagogy; portfolios; summative; teachers' assessments; validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859652236     PISSN: 0969594X     EISSN: 1465329X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2011.557020     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. AQA (Assessment and Qualifications Alliance). 2010. Assessment and Qualifications Alliance: Controlled assessment. http://web.aqa.org.uk/support/assessment.php?id=03&prev=03 (accessed February 3, 2010).
2. ARG (Assessment Reform Group). 2002. Testing motivation and learning. Assessment Reform Group. Cambridge: Cambridge University Faculty of Education. http://www.assessment-reform-group.org (accessed February 3, 2010).
3. ARG (Assessment Reform Group). 2006. The role of teachers in the assessment of learning. Assessment Reform Group. http://www.assessment-reform-group.org (accessed February 3, 2010).
4. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. 2003. Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice, Buckingham: Open University Press.
5. Black, P., Harrison, C., Hodgen, J., Marshall, B. and Serret, N. 2010. Validity in teachers' summative assessments. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(2): 217-234.
6. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. 2007. Large-scale assessment systems: Design principles drawn from international comparisons. Measurement, 5(1): 1-53.
7. Crooks, T.J., Kane, M.T. and Cohen, A.S. 1996. Threats to the valid use of assessments. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 3(3): 265-285.
8. Daugherty, R. 2010. "Summative assessment: The role of teachers". In International encyclopedia of education, Edited by: Peterson, P., Baker, E. and McGaw, B. Vol. 3, 384-391. Oxford: Elsevier.
9. DCSF (Department for Children, Schools and Families). 2008. National strategies: Assessment for learning. http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/primary/assessment/assessingpupilsprogressapp(accessed January 12, 2011).
10. Gardner, J. 2007. Is teaching a 'partial' profession?. Making the Grade, Summer: 18-21.
11. Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, Chicago, IL: Aldine.
12. Good, F.J. 1988. Differences in marks awarded as a result of moderation: Some findings from a teacher assessed oral examination in French. Educational Review, 40(3): 319-331.
13. Harlen, W. 2004. A systematic review of the evidence of reliability and validity of assessment by teachers used for summative purposes. Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education. http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=61 (accessed March 20, 2010).
14. Harlen, W., and R. Deakin Crick. 2002. A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students' motivation for learning (EPPI-Centre Review). Research Evidence in Education Library. Issue 1. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education. http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=61 (accessed March 20, 2010).
15. Hayward, H., W. Dow, and B. Boyd. 2008. Sharing the standard. Edinburgh: Education Scotland. http://wayback.archive-it.org/1961/20100730134209; http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/resources/s/genericresource_tcm4579679.asp?strReferringChannel=assess (accessed July 2011)
16. H of C. 2008. House of Commons, Children, Schools and Families Committee, Testing and Assessment. Third Report of Session 2007-2008 Norwich: The Stationery Office. Volume I
17. Koretz, D. 1998. Large-scale portfolio assessments in the US: Evidence pertaining to the quality of measurement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(3): 309-334.
18. Mansell, W., James, M. and The Assessment Reform Group. 2009. Assessment in schools: Fit for purpose? A commentary on the Teaching and Learning Research Programme, London: Economic and Social Research Council.
19. Poehner, M.E. and Lantolf, J.P. 2005. Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(3): 1-33.
20. QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). 2005. New coursework arrangements for GCSE, London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
21. QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). 2006. National curriculum assessments for England. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110223175304; http://www.qcda.gov.uk/qualifications/gcses/570.aspx (accessed July 2011).
22. QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). 2009. Improving skills for assessing pupil progess. http://www.qcda.gov.uk/assessment/82.aspx (accessed January 12, 2011).
23. QCDA (Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency). 2010. Developing the curriculum, delivering assessments, reforming qualifications. http://www.qcda.gov.uk/qualifications/exams/3510.aspx(accessed January 12, 2011).
24. Shapley, K.S. and Bush, M.J. 1999. Developing a valid and reliable portfolio assessment in the primary grades: Building on practical experience. Applied Measurement in Education, 12(2): 111-132.
25. Stanley, G., MacCann, R., Gardner, J., Reynolds, L., Wild, I., 2009. Review of teacher assessment: Evidence of what works best and issues for development. Oxford: Oxford University Centre for Educational Development; report commissioned by the QCA. http://www.education.ox.ac.uk/assessment/publications.php (accessed January 12, 2011).
26. Stobart, G. 2009. Determining validity in national curriculum assessments. Educational Research, 51(2): 181-212.
27. Taylor, M. 2005. Teacher moderation systems, London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
28. Whetton, C. 2009. National curriculum assessment in England: How well has it worked? Perspectives from the UK, Europe and beyond. Educational Research, 51(2): 131-135.