Feedback: At the Heart of - But Definitely Not All of - Formative Assessment

The Cambridge Handbook of Instructional Feedback

Volumn , Issue , 2018, Pages 3-28

  Wiliam, Dylan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85138894120     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.003     Document Type: Chapter

References (66)

1. Anderson, R. C., Kulhavy, R. W., and Andre, T. (1971). Feedback procedures in programmed instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 148-156.
2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., and Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238.
3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., and Kulik, C.-L. C. (1987, April). The impact of peekability on feedback effects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
4. Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 18, 5-25.
5. Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe and A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 188-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Bjork, R. A., and Bjork, E. L. (1992). A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation. In A. F. Healy, S. M. Kosslyn, and R. M. Shiffrin (Eds.), From learning processes to cognitive processes: Essays in honor of William K. Estes (vol. 2, pp. 35-67). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Black, H. (1986). Assessment for learning. In D. L. Nuttall (Ed.), Assessing educational achievement (pp. 7-18). London: Falmer Press.
8. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., and Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
9. Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 7-74.
10. Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (2005). Developing a theory of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 81-100). London: Sage.
11. Black, P. J., and Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5-31.
12. Blodgett, H. C. (1929). The effect of the introduction of reward upon the maze performance of rats. University of California Publications in Psychology, 4(8), 113-134.
13. Bloom, H. S., Hill, C. J., Black, A. R., and Lipsey, M. W. (2008). Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1, 289-328.
14. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., and Rothstein, H. R. (2011). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: Wiley.
15. Braun, K. F. (1909). Electrical oscillations and wireless telegraphy. In Alfred Nobel Memorial Foundation (Ed.), Nobel prize lectures (pp. 226-245). Stockholm: Alfred Nobel Memorial Foundation.
16. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481.
18. Dempster, F. N. (1991). Synthesis of research on reviews and tests. Educational Leadership, 48, 71-76.
19. Dempster, F. N. (1992). Using tests to promote learning: A neglected classroom resource. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 25, 213-217.
20. Earl, L. M., and Katz, S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth.
21. Education Endowment Foundation. (2015). Teaching and learning toolkit. Retrieved from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/toolkit/toolkit-a-z/.
22. Elshout-Mohr, M. (1994). Feedback in self-instruction. European Education, 26(2), 58-73.
23. Gagné, R. M. (1954). Training devices and simulators: Some research issues. American Psychologist, 9(3), 95-107.
24. Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
25. James, M. (1992, April). Assessment for learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
26. Jay, J. M. (1865, May 16). Improvement in machines for making the spindles of wagonaxles. US Patent No. US47769 A. US Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC.
27. Jenkins, D. H. (1948). Feedback and group self-evaluation. Journal of Social Issues, 4(2), 50-60.
28. Jenkins, W. O., and Stanley, Julian C. Jr. (1950). Partial reinforcement: A review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 47, 193-234.
29. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, problembased, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
30. Kluger, A. N., and 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.
31. Kulhavy, R. W. (1977). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47, 211-232.
32. Kulik, J. A., and Kulik, C.-L. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79-97.
33. Levins, R. (1966). The strategy of model building in population biology. American Scientist, 54, 421-431.
34. McCabe, J. (2011). Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory and Cognition, 39, 462-476.
35. Mittler, P. (1973). Purposes and principles of assessment. In P. Mittler (Ed.), Assessment for learning in the mentally handicapped (pp. 1-16). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.
36. Natriello, G. (1987). The impact of evaluation processes on students. Educational Psychologist, 22, 155-175.
37. Nyquist, J. B. (2003). The benefits of reconstruing feedback as a larger system of formative assessment: A meta-analysis. Master’s thesis, Vanderbilt University.
38. Perrenoud, P. (1998). From formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning. Towards a wider conceptual field. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 85-102.
39. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4-13.
40. Roseborough, M. E. (1953). Experimental studies of small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 50, 275-303.
41. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., and Li, M. (2013). Examining formative feedback in the classroom context: New research perspectives. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment (2nd edn., pp. 215-232). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Hamilton, L., and Klein, S. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 369-393.
43. Schimmel, B. J. (1983, April). A meta-analysis of feedback to learners in computerized and programmed instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Association, Montreal, Canada.
44. Sedlmeier, P., and Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309-316.
45. Shepard, L. A. (2008). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 279-303). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153-189.
47. Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review, 57, 193-216.
48. Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
49. Slavin, R. E. (1986). Best-evidence synthesis: An alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational Researcher, 15(9), 5-11.
50. Soderstrom, N. C., and Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 176-199.
51. Stenhouse, L. (1980). Product or process? A reply to Brian Crittenden. New Education, 2, 137-140.
52. Sutton, R. (1995). Assessment for learning. Salford, UK: RS Publications.
53. Thorndike, E. L. (1913). The psychology of learning. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
54. Washburne, J. N. (1935). An electro-chemical theory of learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 26, 99-122.
55. Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics, or control and communication in the animal and the machine. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
56. Wiliam, D. (1992). Special needs and the distribution of attainment in the national curriculum. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 397-403.
57. Wiliam, D. (2011a). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
58. Wiliam, D. (2011b). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 2-14.
59. Wiliam, D. (2013). Feedback and instructional correctives. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment (2nd edn., pp. 197-214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
60. Wiliam, D. (2016a). La evaluación formative del desempeño de la enseñanza. In G. G. Niebla, M. T.M. Irigoyen, F. E. R. Castaño, H. S. Pérez, and F. T. Segura (Eds.), La evaluación docente en el mundo (pp. 166-199). Mexico City: Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación.
61. Wiliam, D. (2016b). Leadership for teacher learning: Creating a culture where all teachers improve so that all learners succeed. West Palm Beach, FL: Learning Sciences International.
62. Wiliam, D., and Leahy, S. (2015). Embedding formative assessment: Practical techniques for K-12 classrooms. West Palm Beach, FL: Learning Sciences International.
63. Wiliam, D., and Thompson, M. (2008). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53-82). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
64. Wilson, R. C., High, W. S., and Beem, H. P. (1954). A factor-analytic study of supervisory and group behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 89-92.
65. Yan, V. (2016). Retrieval strength vs. storage strength. Learning Scientists. Retrieved from www.learningscientists.org/blog/2016/5/10-1.
66. Yeager, D. S., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Hooper, S. Y., and Cohen, G. L. (2017). Loss of institutional trust among racial and ethnic minority adolescents: A consequence of procedural injustice and a cause of life-span outcomes. Child Development, 88, 658-676.