Variation in teachers' conceptions of alternative assessment in Singapore primary schools

Educational Research for Policy and Practice

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 21-41

  Tan, Kelvin H K ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Alternative assessment; Conceptions; Phenomenography; Power; Sustainable assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877002284     PISSN: 15702081     EISSN: 15731723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10671-012-9130-4     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Akerlind, G. (2002). Principles and practice in phenomenographic research. Paper presented at the Current Issues in Phenomenography Symposium, Australian National University, Canberra.
2. Akerlind G. (2005) Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research and Development 24(4): 321-334.
3. Ashworth P., Lucas U. (2000) Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Studies in Higher Education 25(3): 295-308.
4. Assessment Reform Group (2002). Assessment for learning: Research-based principles to guide classroom practice. http://www. assessment-reform-group. org/CIE3. PDF.
5. Baker E., O'Neil H., Linn R. (1993) Policy and validity prospects for performance-based assessment. American Psychologist 48: 1210-1218.
6. Belanoff, P., Dickson, M. (eds) (1991) Portfolios: Process and product. Heinemann, Portsmouth.
7. Berry R. (2010) Teachers' orientations towards selecting assessment strategies. New Horizons in Education 58(1): 96-107.
8. Berry R. (2011) Assessment trends in Hong Kong: Seeking to establish formative assessment in an examination culture. Assessment in Education 18(2): 199-221.
9. Biggs J. (1999) Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University Press, London.
10. Black K., Wiliam D. (1998) Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 83(10): 758-765.
11. Booth S. (1992) Learning to program: A phenomenographic perspective. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, Goteburg.
12. Booth S. (1997) On phenomenography, learning and teaching. Higher Education Research and Development 16(2): 135-158.
13. Boud D. (1995) Assessment and learning: Contradictory or complementary?. In: Knight P. (ed) Assessment for learning in higher education. Kogan Page Limited, London.
14. Boud D. (2000) Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Higher Education 22(2): 151.
15. Bowden J. (2000) Experience of phenomenographic research: A personal account. In: Bowden J., Walsh E. (eds) Phenomenography. RMIT Publishing, Melbourne, pp 47-61.
16. Bowden J. (2000) The nature of phenomenographic research. In: Bowden J., Walsh E. (eds) Phenomenography. RMIT Publishing, Melbourne, pp 1-18.
17. Buckles S., Schug M., Watts M. (2001) A national survey of state assessment practices in the social studies. Social Studies 92(4): 141-146.
18. Buhagiar M. (2007) Classroom assessment within the alternative assessment paradigm: Revisiting the territory. Curriculum Journal 18(1): 39-56.
19. Corson D. (1988) Making the language of education policies more user-friendly. Journal of Education Policy 3(3): 249-260.
20. Darling-Hammond L. (1994) Setting standards for students: The case for authentic assessment. The Educational Forum 59(1): 14-21.
21. Edwards R., Nicoll K. (2001) Researching the rhetoric of lifelong learning. Journal of Education Policy 16(2): 103-112.
22. Gopinathan S. (1999) Preparing for the next rung: Economic restructuring and educational reform in Singapore. Journal of Education and Work 12(3): 295-308.
23. Gopinathan S. (2001) Globalisation, the state and education policy in Singapore. In: Tan J., Gopinathan S., Ho W. K. (eds) Challenges facing the Singapore education system today. Pearson Prentice Hall, Singapore.
24. Gregory K., Clarke M. (2003) High-stakes assessment in England and Singapore. Theory into Practice 42(1): 66-74.
25. Hargreaves E. (2012) Teachers' classroom feedback: Still trying to get it right. Pedagogies: An International Journal 7(1): 1-15.
26. Hawe E. (2002) Assessment in a pre-service teacher education programme: The rhetoric and the practice of standards-based assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 30(1): 93-106.
27. Hogan D., Towndrow P., Koh K. (2009) The logic of confidence and the social economy of assessment reform in Singapore: A new institutionalist perspective. In: Grigorenko E. (ed) Assessment of abilities and competencies in the era of globalization. Springer, New York.
28. Janisch C., Liu X., Akrofi A. (2007) Implementing alternative assessment: Opportunities and obstacles. The Educational Forum 71(3): 221-230.
29. Kennedy K. J., Chan J. K. S., Fok P. K., Yu W. M. (2008) Forms of assessment and their potential for enhancing learning: Conceptual and cultural issues. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 7(3): 197-207.
30. Klenowski V. (2009) Assessment for Learning revisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 15(3): 263-268.
31. Koh K., Luke A. (2009) Authentic and conventional assessment in Singapore schools: An empirical study of teacher assignments and student work. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 16(3): 291-318.
32. Koh K., Velayutham R. L. (2009) Improving teachers' assessment literacy in Singapore schools: An analysis of teachers' assessment tasks and student work. Research Brief 9(2): 1-4.
33. Maclellan E. (2004) How convincing is alternative assessment for use in higher education?. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29(3): 311-321.
34. Marton F. (1986) Phenomenography-A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought 21: 28-49.
35. Marton F., Booth S. (1997) Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah.
36. Marton F., Tsui A. (2004) Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
37. Marton F., Dall'alba G., Beaty E. (1993) Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research 19: 277-300.
38. Ministry of Education, Singapore: (1979) Report on the Ministry of Education 1978. Ministry of Education, Singapore.
39. Prosser M., Trigwell K. (1999) Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Open University Press, Milton Keynes.
40. Ramsden P. (1992) Learning to teach in higher education. Routledge, London.
41. Runesson U. (2006) What is it possible to learn on variation as a necessary condition for learning?. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 50(4): 397-410.
42. Sadler D. R. (2007) Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment criteria. Assessment in Education 14(3): 387-392.
43. Snyder B. R. (1971) The hidden curriculum. Alfred A Knopf, New York.
44. Stralberg S. (2010) Students, teachers and alternative assessment in secondary school: Relational models theory (RMT) in the field of education. Australian Educational Researcher 37(1): 83-106.
45. Tan C. (2006) Creating thinking schools through "Knowledge and Inquiry": The curriculum challenges for Singapore. The Curriculum Journal 17(1): 89-105.
46. Tan K. H. K. (2009) Variation theory and the different ways of experiencing educational policy. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 8(2): 95.
47. Tan K. H. K. (2011) Assessment for learning in Singapore-Unpacking its meanings and identifying some areas for improvement. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 10(2): 91-103.
48. Tan K. H. K. (2011) Assessment reform in Singapore-Enduring, sustainable or threshold?. In: Berry R., Adamson B. (eds) Assessment reform in education: Policy and practice. Springer, London, pp 75-88.
49. Tan K. H. K., Prosser M. (2004) Qualitatively different ways of differentiating student achievement: A phenomenographic study of grade descriptors. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29(3): 267-282.
50. Tan K. H. K., Teo C. T., Ng C. S. (2011) Variation in students' conceptions of self-assessment and standards. Education Research International 2011: 1-9.
51. Torrance H. (1995) Authentic assessment. Open University Press, Birmingham.
52. Trigwell, K. (2000). Phenomenography: Discernment and variation. Paper presented at the Improving Student Learning, 7th International Symposium, Oxford.
53. Trigwell K., Prosser M., Taylor P. (1994) Qualitative differences in approaches to teaching first year university science. Higher Education 27: 75-84.
54. Tsui A. (2004) The shared space of learning. In: Marton F., Tsui A. (eds) Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, pp 165-186.
55. Webb M., Jones J. (2009) Exploring tensions in developing assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 16(2): 165-184.
56. Wiggins G. (1989) Teaching to the (authentic) test. Educational Leadership 46(7): 41-47.
57. Wiggins G. (1989) A true test: Toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 70: 703-713.
58. Wilson M., Sloane K. (2000) From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system. Applied Measurement in Education 13(2): 181-208.
59. Worthen B. (1993) Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 74(6): 444-454.