Formative assessment: Making it happen in the classroom

Formative Assessment: Making it Happen in the Classroom

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1-144

  Heritage, Margaret ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84949770655     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781452219493     Document Type: Book

References (94)

1. Allal, L. L., & Lopez, M. (2005). Formative assessment of learning: A review of publications in French. In Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms (pp. 242-264). Paris: OECD Publishing.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261
4. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260
5. Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Testing, motivation, and learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Faculty of Education.
6. Bailey, A., & Heritage, M. (2008). Formative assessment for literacy, grades K-6: Building reading and academic language skills across the curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
7. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
8. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238.
9. Baron, R. A. (1993). Criticism (informal negative feedback) as a source of perceived unfairness in organizations: Effects, mechanisms, and countermeasures. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 155-170). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
10. Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536-553. doi: 10.1002/sce.1022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.1022
11. Black, P. (2003, April). Formative and summative assessment: Can they serve learning together? Paper presented at AERA, SIG Classroom Assessment Meeting, Chicago.
12. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
13. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 5, 7-73. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
14. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b, October). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
15. Bloom, B. S. (1969). Some theoretical issues relating to educational evaluation. In R. W. Tyler (Ed.), Educational evaluation: New roles, new means: The 63rd yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part II, pp. 26-50). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17. Butler, D., & Winne, P. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245-281.
18. Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 474-482. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.474 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.474
19. Chaiklin, S. (2005). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. Retrieved December 10, 2006, from http://www.education.miami.edu/blantonw/mainsite/componentsfromclmer/Component5/ChaiklinTheZoneofProximalDevelopmentInVygotsky.html
20. Clariana, R. B. (1990). A comparison of answer until correct feedback and knowledge of correct response feedback under two conditions of contextualization. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17 (4), 125-129.
21. Clariana, R. B., Wagner, D., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. C. (2000). A connectionist description of feedback timing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 5-11. doi: 10.1007/BF02319855 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02319855
22. Clarke, S. (2005). Formative assessment in the secondary classroom. London: Hodder Murray.
23. Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). Feedback timing and student control in the LISP intelligent tutoring system. In D. Bierman, J. Brueker, & J. Sandberg (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education (pp. 64-72). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
24. Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Locus of feedback control in computer-based tutoring: Impact on learning rate, achievement and attitudes. In Proceedings of ACMCHI 2001 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 245-252). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press. doi: 10.1145/365024.365111 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/365024.365111
25. Corno, L., & Snow, R. E. (1986). Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 605-629). New York: Macmillan.
26. Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009, February). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council.
27. Davis, N. T., Kumtepe, E. G., & Aydeniz, M. (2007). Fostering continuous improvement and learning through peer assessment: Part of an integral model of assessment. Educational Assessment, 12, 113-135. doi: 10.1080/10627190701232720 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627190701232720
28. Dihoff, R. E., Brosvic, G. M., & Epstein, M. L. (2003). The role of feedback during academic testing: The delay retention revisited. The Psychological Record, 53, 533-548.
29. DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (Eds.). (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.
30. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
31. Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
32. Educational Testing Service. (2009). TLC Leader Handbook. Portland, OR: Author.
33. Gaynor, P. (1981). The effect of feedback delay on retention on computer-based-mathematical material. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 8 (2), 28-34.
34. Green, J. M. (1998, February). Constructing the way forward for all students. A speech delivered at "Innovations for Effective Schools," OECD/New Zealand joint follow-up conference, Christchurch, New Zealand.
35. Harlen, W. (2006). The role of assessment in developing motivation for learning. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 61-80). London: Sage.
36. Harlen, W. (2007). Criteria for evaluating systems for student assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 33 (1), 15-28. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.01.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.01.003
37. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487 http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
38. Heritage, M. (2007). Formative assessment: What do teachers need to know and do? Phi Delta Kappan, 89, 140-145.
39. Herman, J. L. (2006). Challenges in integrating standards and assessment with student learning. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 4, 119-124.
40. Herman, J., & Heritage, M. (2007, June). Moving from piecemeal to effective formative assessment practice: Moving pictures on the road to student learning. Paper presented at the Chief Council of State School Officers Assessment Conference, Nashville, TN.
41. Hoska, D. M. (1993). Motivating learners through CBI feedback: Developing a positive learner perspective. In V. Dempsey & G. C. Sales (Eds.), Interactive instruction and feedback (pp. 105-132). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
42. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
43. Kulhavy, R. W., White, M. T., Topp, B. W., Chan, A. L., & Adams, J. (1985). Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency. Contemporary Education and Psychology, 10, 285-291. doi: 10.1016/0361-476X(85)90025-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X%2885%2990025-6
44. Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute-by-minute and day-by-day. Educational Leadership, 63 (3), 18-24.
45. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
46. Lyon, C. J., Cleland, D., & Ganon, M. (2008). Letting go of the reins: Learning about scalability in the context of one district-wide implementation. In E. C. Wylie (Ed.), Tight but loose: Scaling up teacher professional development in diverse contexts. (ETS Research Rep. № RR-08-29). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
47. Martinez-Miller, P., & Cervone, L. (2007). Breaking through to effective teaching: A walk-through protocol linking student learning and professional practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
48. Mason, B. J., & Bruning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us. Center for Instructional Innovation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Retrieved June 1, 2006, from http://dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBrunning.html
49. McMillan, J. M. (2007). Assessment essentials for standards-based education (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
50. Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary (11th ed.). (2007). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
51. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: A multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 365-395.
52. Messick, S. (1995). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14 (4), 5-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1995.tb00881.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1995.tb00881.x
53. Nadler, D. (1979). The effects of feedback on task group behavior: A review of the experimental research. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 23, 309-338. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(79)90001-1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073%2879%2990001-1
54. Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. In H. M. Niegemann, D. Leutner, & R. Brunken (Eds.), Instructional design for multimedia learning (pp. 181-195). Munster, NY: Waxmann.
55. National Research Council. (1999). Improving student learning: A strategic plan for education research and its utilization. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
56. National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
57. National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Committee on the Foundations of Assessment.
58. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
59. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (OECD/CERI). (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: OECD Publishing.
60. Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 293-316. doi: 10.1016/0361-476X(83)90018-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X%2883%2990018-8
61. Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (2003). The role of self-regulated learning in contextual teaching: principles and practices for teacher preparation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
62. Perrenoud, P. (1991). Towards a pragmatic approach to formative evaluation. In P. Weston (Ed.), Assessment of pupils’ achievement: Motivation and school success (pp. 77-101). Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger.
63. Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
64. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4-13. doi: 10.1002/bs.3830280103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830280103
65. Russell, M., & O’Dwyer, L. M. (2009). Diagnosing students’ misconceptions in algebra: Results from an experimental pilot study. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 414-424. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.2.414 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.414
66. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-140. doi: 10.1007/BF00117714 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
67. Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy (pp. 97-110). New York: Guilford Press.
68. Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281-303). New York: Plenum Press.
69. Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagné, & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (pp. 39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally.
70. Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Pine, J. (1992). Performance assessments: Political rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, 4 (21), 22-27.
71. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29 (7), 4-14.
72. Shepard, L. A. (2000, April 26). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Presidential address presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
73. Shepard, L. A. (2005). Linking formative assessment to scaffolding. Educational Leadership, 63 (3), 66-71.
74. Shepard, L. A., Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Rust, F., Snowden, J. B., Gordon, E., et al. (2005). Assessment. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teacher should learn and be able to do (pp. 275-326). Indianapolis, IN: Jossey-Bass.
75. Shulman, L. (2005, February). The signature pedagogies of the professions of law, medicine, engineering, and the clergy: Potential lessons for the education of teachers. Speech delivered at the Math Science Partnerships (MSP) Workshop: "Teacher Education for Effective Teaching and Learning." Hosted by the National Research Council’s Center for Education, Irvine, CA.
76. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153-189. doi: 10.3102/0034654307313795 http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
77. Sizer, T. R., & Sizer, N. F. (1999). The students are watching: Schools and the moral contract. Boston: Beacon Press.
78. Smith, C., Wiser, M., Anderson, C., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Implications of research on children’s learning for standards and assessment: A proposed learning progression for matter and atomic-molecular theory. Measurement, 14, 1-98.
79. Song, S. H., & Keller, J. M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49 (2), 5-22. doi: 10.1007/BF02504925 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02504925
80. Stevens, S., Shin, N., Delgado, C., Krajcik, J., & Pellegrino, J. (2007, April). Using learning progressions to inform curriculum, instruction, and assessment design. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
81. Stiggins, R. J. (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
82. Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment FOR learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 758-765.
83. Stobart, G. (2006). The validity of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 133-146). London: Sage.
84. Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2008). Tight but loose: A conceptual framework for scaling up school reforms. In E. C. Wylie (Ed.), Tight but loose: Scaling up teacher professional development in diverse contexts. (ETS Research Rep. № RR-08-29). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
85. Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (1998). Investigating formative assessment. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
86. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
87. White, M. A. (1971). The view from the pupil’s desk. In M. Silberman (Ed.), The experience of schooling (pp. 337-345). New York: Rinehart and Winston.
88. Wiliam, D. (2000, May). Recent developments in educational assessment in England: The integration of formative and summative functions of assessment. Paper presented at SweMas, Umeå, Sweden.
89. Wiliam, D. (2006, July). Does assessment hinder learning? Paper presented at ETS Invitational Seminar, Institute of Civil Engineers, London.
90. Wiliam, D. (2007). Content then process: Teacher learning communities in the service of formative assessment. In D. B. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment to transform teaching and learning (pp. 183-207). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
91. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
92. Wylie, E. C., & Ciofalo, J. F. (2008, September 5). Supporting teachers’ use of individual diagnostic items. Teachers College Record. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 15363.
93. Wylie, E. C., & Lyon, C. (2009, August 3). What schools and districts need to know to support teachers’ use of formative assessment. Teachers College Record. Retrieved August 7, 2009, from http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 15734.
94. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attainment of self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.