Classroom assessment in the context of learning theory and research

SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 17-34

  Andrade, Heidi L ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84899065994     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781452218649.n2     Document Type: Chapter

References (89)

1. Allal, L. (2010). Assessment and the regulation of learning. In E. B. P.Peterson (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Education (Vol. 3, pp. 348-352). Oxford: Elsevier.
2. Allal, L., & Lopez, L. M. (2005). Formative assessment of learning: A review of publications in French. In J.Looney (ed.), Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms (pp. 241-264). Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
3. Allen, K., & Hancock, T. (2008). Reading comprehension improvement with individualized cognitive profiles and metacognition. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47, 124-139.
4. Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete edition). New York: Longman.
5. Andrade, H. G. (2001). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in Education, 4(4). Retrieved from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume4/number4
6. Andrade, H. L. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In H. L.Andrade & G. J.Cizek, Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 90-105). New York: Routledge.
7. Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and middle school students' writing. Assessment in Education, 17(2), 199-214.
8. Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2009). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students' writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 27(2), 3-13.
9. Azevedo, R. (2005). Computer environments as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 193-197.
10. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7-74.
11. Bloom, B. (ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David Mckay.
12. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
13. Briggs, D. C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple choice items. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 33-63.
14. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1967). Response to pressure from peers versus adults among Soviet and American school children. International Journal of Psychology, 2(3), 199-207.
15. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1970). Reactions to social pressure from adults versus peers among Soviet day school and boarding school pupils in the perspective of an American sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 179-189.
16. Brookhart, S. (2004). Classroom assessment: Tensions and intersections in theory and practice. Teachers College Record, 106(3), 429-458.
17. Brookhart, S. (2007). Expanding views about formative classroom assessment: A review of the literature. In J. H.McMillan (ed.), Formative classroom assessment: Theory into practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Brown, N., & Wilson, M. (2011). A model of cognition: The missing cornerstone of assessment. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 221-234.
19. Butler, D., & Winne, P. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245-281.
20. Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 474-482.
21. Butler, R., & Nisan, M. (1986). Effects of no feedback, task-related comments, and grades on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 210-216.
22. Church, M., Elliot, A., & Gable, S. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 43-54.
23. Ciofalo, J. F., & Wylie, E. C. (2006). Using diagnostic classroom assessment: One question at a time. Teachers College Record.
24. Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review.
25. Cook, T. D. (2006). Describing what is special about the role of experiments in contemporary educational research: Putting the "gold standard" rhetoric into perspective. Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 3(6), 1-7.
26. Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform (CPRE Research Report # RR-63). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
27. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. In L.Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press.
28. Desoete, A. (2008). Metacognitive prediction and evaluation skills and mathematical learning in third-grade students. Educational Research & Evaluation, 15(5), 435-446.
29. Draper, S. (2009). What are learners actually regulating when given feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 306-315.
30. Dweck, C., & Bush, E. (1976). Sex differences in learned helplessness: I. Differential debilitation with peer and adult evaluators. Developmental Psychology, 12(2), 147-156.
31. Dweck, C., Davidson, W., Nelson, S., & Enna, B. (1978). Sex differences in learned helplessness: II. Contingencies of evaluative feedback in the classroom and III. An experimental analysis. Developmental Psychology, 14(3), 268-276.
32. Fitzpatrick, B., & Schulz, H. (2010). Assessing higher order thinking: What teachers think and do. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
33. Franzke, M., Kintsch, E., Caccamise, D., Johnson, N., & Dooley, S. (2005). Summary Street: Computer support for comprehension and writing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33, 53-80.
34. Green, S., & Johnson, R. (2010). Assessment is essential. New York: McGraw-Hill.
35. Hacker, D., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. (1998). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36. Hadwin, A., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2011). Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In B.Zimmerman & D.Schunk (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 65-86). New York: Routledge.
37. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.
38. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
39. Heritage, M. (2009). The case for learning progressions. San Francisco: Stupski Foundation.
40. Heritage, M. (2011). Developing learning progressions. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
41. Heritage, M., & Heritage, J. (2011). Teacher questioning: The epicenter of instruction and assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
42. Heritage, M., Kim, J., Vendlinski, T., & Herman, J. (2009). From evidence to action: A seamless process in formative assessment? Educational Measurement Issues and Practice, 28(3), 24-31.
43. Hill, P. W., & Rowe, K. J. (1998). Modeling student progress in studies of educational effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9 (3), 310-333.
44. Hinton, C., Fischer, K., & Glennon, C. (2012). Student centered learning: A mind, brain and education perspective: The Students at the Center series. Boston: Jobs for the Future. Retrieved from http://www.studentsatthecenter.org/papers/assessing-learning
45. Hollander, E., & Marcia, J. (1970). Parental determinants of peer orientation and self-orientation among preadolescents. Developmental Psychology, 2(2), 292-302.
46. Hoover, N., & Abrams, L. (in press). Teachers' instructional use of student assessment data. Applied Measurement in Education.
47. Jones, D. (2007). Speaking, listening, planning and assessing: The teacher's role in developing metacognitive awareness. Early Child Development and Care, 6/7, 569-579.
48. Kegel, C., Bus, A. G., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (2011). Differential susceptibility in early literacy instruction through computer games: The role of the dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4). Mind, Brain and Education, 5(2), 71-78.
49. Kramarski, B., & Dudai, V. (2009). Group-metacognitive support for online inquiry in mathematics with differential self-questioning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(4), 377-404.
50. Landauer, T., Lochbaum, K., & Dooley, S. (2009). A new formative assesment technology for reading and writing. Theory Into Practice, 48(1).
51. Lipnevich, A., & Smith, J. (2008). Response to assessment feedback: The effects of grades, praise, and source of information (Research report RR-08-30). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
52. Mathan, S., & Koedinger, K. (2005). Fostering the intelligent novice: Learning from errors with metacognitive tutoring. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 257-265.
53. McMillan, J. (2011). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction. New York: Pearson.
54. Moreland, J., & Jones, A. (2000). Emerging assessment practices in an emergent curriculum: Implications for technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 283-305.
55. Moss, C., Brookhart, S., & Long, B. (2011). School administrators' formative assessment leadership practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
56. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
57. Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
58. Nitko, A., & Brookhart, S. (2011). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). New York: Pearson.
59. Paulhus, D. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. In J.Robinson, P.Shaver, & L.Wrightsman (eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes, Measures of social psychological attitudes (Vol. 1, pp. 17-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
60. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (eds.). (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
61. Pintrich, P. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219-225.
62. Popham, J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 4-11.
63. Popham, J. (2011). How to build learning progressions: Formative assessment's basic blueprints. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
64. Pruzek, R., & Helmreich, J. (2009). Enhancing dependent sample analyses with graphics. Journal of Statistical Education, 17(1), 1-21.
65. Raider-Roth, M. (2005). Trusting what you know: The high stakes of classroom relationships. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
66. Roberts, T., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1989). Sex differences in reactions to evaluative feedback. Sex Roles, 21 (11/12), 725-746.
67. Ross, J. A., & Starling, M. (2008). Self-assessment in a technology supported environment: The case of grade 9 geography. Assessment in Education, 15(2), 183-199.
68. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2011). Looking into teachers' feedback practices: How teachers interpret students' work. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
69. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Furtak, E., Yin, Y., Ayala, C. J., & Shavelson, R. (2010). On the impact of formative assessment on student science learning and motivation. In H. L.Andrade & G. J.Cizek (eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 139-158). New York: Routledge.
70. Russell, M. (2010). Technology-aided formative assessment of learning. In H. L.Andrade & G. J.Cizek (eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 125-138). New York: Routledge.
71. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
72. Schneider, C., & Andrade, H. (2012). Teachers' use of evidence of student learning to take action: Conclusions drawn from a special issue on formative assessment. Manuscript submitted for publication.
73. Schneider, C., & Gowan, P. (2011). Deconstructing student work: Investigating teacher's abilities to use evidence of student learning to inform instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
74. Schunk, D. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal-setting, and self-evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 159-172.
75. Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R.Tyler, R.Gagne, & M.Scriven (eds.), Perspectives on curriculum evaluation (pp. 39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally.
76. Seidel, T., Rimmele, R., & Prenzel, M. (2005). Clarity and coherence of lesson goals as a scaffold for student learning. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 539-556.
77. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454-499.
78. Shepard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.
79. Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.
80. Shute, V., Hansen, E., & Almond, R. (2008). You can't fatten a hog by weighing it-or can you? Evaluating an assessment for learning system called ACED. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18, 289-316.
81. Songer, N., Kelcey, B., & Gotwals, A. (2009). How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progression focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 610-631.
82. Steedle, J., & Shavelson, R. (2009). Supporting valid interpretations of learning progression level diagnoses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 699-715.
83. Stiggins, R. (2008). An introduction to student-involved assessment FOR learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
84. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
85. Wade-Stein, D., & Kintsch, E. (2004). Summary Street: Interactive computer support for writing. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 333-362.
86. White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (2005). A theoretical framework and approach for fostering metacognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 211-223.
87. Wiliam, D. (2010). An integrative summary of the research literature and implications for a new theory of formative assessment. In H. L.Andrade & G. J.Cizek (eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 18-40). New York: Routledge.
88. Winne, P. (2011). A cognitive and metacognitive analysis of self-regulated learning. In B.Zimmerman & D.Schunk (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 15-32). New York: Routledge.
89. Wylie, C., Ciofalo, J., & Mavronikolas, E. (2010). Documenting, diagnosing and treating misconceptions: Impact on student learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.