A framework for classroom assessment, learning, and self-regulation

Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2020, Pages 373-393

  Chen, Peggy P ^a   Bonner, Sarah M ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

assessment for learning; Classroom assessment; self regulated learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 85067648662     PISSN: 0969594X     EISSN: 1465329X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2019.1619515     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2. Bandura, A., (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3. Bennett, R. E., (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18 (1), 5–25.
4. Black, P., & Wiliam, D., (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5 (1), 7–74.
5. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003, April). Formative and summative assessment: Can they serve learning together? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association., Chicago, IL.X
6. Bonner, S. M., (2016). Teachers’ perceptions about assessment: Competing narratives. In G. T. L. Brown (Ed.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 37–55). New York, NY: Routledge.
7. Bonner, S. M., (2017, April). Using learning theory and validity theory to improve classroom assessment research, design, and implementation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Antonio, TX.
8. Bonner, S. M., & Chen, P. P., (2019). Systematic classroom assessment: An approach for learning and self-regulation (1st ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Press.
9. Briggs, D. C., Ruiz-Primo, M., Furtak, E., Shepard, L., & Yin, Y., (2012). Meta-analytic methodology and inferences about the efficacy of formative assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 31 (4), 13–17.
10. Camilli, G., (2013). Ongoing issues in test fairness. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19 (2–3), 104–120.
11. Chen, P. P., & Zimmerman, B. J., (2007). A cross-national comparison study on the accuracy and predictability of the self-efficacy beliefs of middle-school mathematics students. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 221–244.
12. Clark, I., (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24 (2), 205–249.
13. Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J., (2001). Self-regulation differences during athletic practice by experts, non-experts, and novices. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13 (2), 185–206.
14. DiBenedetto, M. L., & Zimmerman, B. J., (2013). Construct and predictive validity of microanalytic measures of students’ self-regulation of science learning. Learning and Individual Difference, 26, 30–41.
15. DiGiacomo, G., & Chen, P. P., (2014). Enhancing self-regulatory skills through an intervention embedded in a middle school. Psychology in the Schools, 53 (6), 601–616.
16. Dweck, C. S., (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.
17. Efklides, A., (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated learning: The MASRL model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 6–25.
18. Fyfe, E. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B., (2016). Feedback both helps and hinders learning: The causal role of prior knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108 (1), 82.
19. Gipps, C., (1999). Chapter 10: Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24 (1), 355–392.
20. Gipps, C., & Stobart, G., (2009). Fairness in assessment. In C., Wyatt-Smith & J. J., Cumming (Eds.), Educational assessment in the 21st century: Connecting theory and practice (pp. 105–118). New York, NY: Springer.
21. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Keener, M. C., (2008). Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. In J., Dunlosky & R. A., Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 429–455). New York: Psychology Press.
22. Hadwin, A., Jarvela, S., & Miller, M., (2018). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and shared regulation in collaborative learning environment. In D. H., Schunk & J. A., Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed. pp. 83–106). New York, NY: Routledge.
23. Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M., (2011). Twelve steps for effective test development. In S. M. Downing & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 17–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H., (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
25. 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.
26. Kane, M. T., (2006). Validation. In R. L., Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17–64). Westport, CT: Praeger.
27. Kapan, A., & Maehr, M. L., (2007). The contributions and prospects of goal orientation theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 141–184.
28. Kingston, N., & Nash, B., (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30 (4), 28–37.
29. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. J., (2002). Comparing self-regulatory processes among novice, non-expert, and expert volleyball players: A microanalytic study. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14 (2), 91–105.
30. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2006). Enhancing self-regulation of practice: The Influence of graphing and self-evaluative standards.Metacognition and Learning, 3, 201–212.
31. Könings, K. D., van Zundert, M., & van Merriënboer, J. J., (2019). Scaffolding peer-assessment skills: Risk of interference with learning domain-specific skills? Learning and Instruction, 60, 85–94.
32. Lawson, M. J., Vosniadou, S., Van Deur, P., Wyra, M., & Jeffries, D., (2018). Teachers’ and students’ belief systems about the self-regulation of learning. Educational Psychology Review, 1–29. doi: 10.1007/s10648-0189453-7
33. Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D., (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, and day by day. Educational Leadership, 63 (3), 18–24.
34. McDonnell, L. M., (1995). Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17 (3), 305–322.
35. McGuire, J. T., & Kable, J. W., (2016). Deciding to curtail persistence. In K. D., Vohs & R. F., Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (3rd ed., pp. 533–546). New York: Guilford Press.
36. McMillan, J. H., Venable, J. C., & Varier, D., (2013). Studies of the effect of formative assessment on student achievement: So much more is needed. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18 (2). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=18&n=2
37. McPherson, G. E., & McCormick, J., (2006). Self-efficacy and music performance. Psychology of Music, 34 (3), 325–340.
38. Messick, S., (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23 (2), 13–23.
39. Michalsky, T., Mevarech, Z. R., & Haibi, L., (2009). Elementary school children reading scientific texts: Effects of metacognitive instruction. The Journal of Educational Research, 102 (5), 363–376.
40. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L., (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H., Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 125–173). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5
41. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L., (1994). Why investigate metacogntiion? In J., Metcalfe & A. P., Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Panadero, E., Andrade, H., & Brookhart, S. M., (2018). Fusing self-regulated learning and formative assessment: A roadmap of where we are, how we got here, and where we are going. Australian Educational Researcher, 45 (1), 13–31.
43. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
44. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V., (1990). Motivational and slef-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1), 33–40.
45. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H., (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and application (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
46. Polikoff, M. S., (2010). Instructional sensitivity as a psychometric property of assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29 (4), 3–14.
47. Pope, N., Green, S. K., Johnson, R. L., & Mitchell, M., (2009). Examining teacher ethical dilemmas in classroom assessment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 (5), 778–782.
48. Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D., (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1 (3), 181–210.
49. Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 159–172.
50. Scriven, M., (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. E., Stake (Ed.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (Vol. 1, pp. 39–55). Chicago: Rand McNally.
51. Shepard, L. A., (2006). Classroom assessment. In R. L., Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 623–646). Westport, CT: American Council on Education/Praeger.
52. Shepard, L. A., Penuel, W. R., & Pellegrino, J. W., (2018). Using learning and motivation theories to coherently link formative assessment, grading practices, and large‐scale assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 37 (1), 21–34.
53. Shute, V. J., (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189.
54. Weiner, B., (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45 (1), 28–36.
55. Wiliam, D., (2007). Keeping learning on track: Classroom assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K., Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 3, pp. 1053–1098). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
56. Winne, P. H., (2018). Theorizing and researching levels of processing in self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 9–20.
57. Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 189–205.
58. Zimmerman, B. J., (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 82–91.
59. Zimmerman, B. J., (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 42 (2), 64–70.
60. Zimmerman, B. J., (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical back-ground, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166–183.
61. Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R., (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In D. J., Hacker, J., Dunlosky, & A. C., Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 299–315). New York: Routledge.
62. Zimmerman, B. J., Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K., (2015). A personal agency view of self-regulated learning: The role of goal setting. In F., Guay, H., Marsh, D., McInerney, & R. G., Craven (Eds.), Self-concept, motivation, and identity: Underpinning success with research and practices (pp. 83–114). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
63. Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S., Evans, D., & Mellins, R. B., (1999). Self-regulating childhood asthma: A developmental model of family change. Health Education & Behavior, 26, 55–71.
64. Zimmerman, B. J., Moylan, A., Hudesman, J., White, N., & Flugman, B., (2011). Enhancing self-reflection and mathematics achievement of at-risk urban technical college students. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 53, 108–127.