EFFECTS OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS

SYNOPSIS FOR RESEARCH PROJECT

B.Ed. (1.5 Year Program)

Aamir Shabbir

Roll Number : B J 6 5 8 8 0 8

Registration Number : 16 — PMB --- 01830

SUPERVISOR

Mohammed Tanweer

Tutor , AIOU Regional campus

M.B.DIN
INTRODUCTION

This thesis is about the possible challenges of implementing theoretically sound formative
assessment practices in assessment of writing in the English subject, and how students1 perceive
these practices. Writing is complex. It is about the processes that happen during the production of a
text, but it is also about the finished product. Assessing writing means that the teacher needs to
have in-depth knowledge of writing as process and product, as well as the distinctive characteristics
of the subject the student is writing within. To help students develop their writing skills, it is
necessary that teachers know what it means to be a competent writer, and that they can reflect on
and use relevant theory to make informed teaching and assessment choices (Sandvik, 2011, p. 1).
Central to assessment competence is knowing how views of learning impact the teaching and
assessment choices one makes (p. 7), and how these choices affect fundamental principles of all
assessment, namely transparency, reliability and validity. The problematic nature of these principles
in formative assessment is a key issue that will be discussed in chapter 2. Assuming that feedback is
instrumental to the process of becoming more adept at communicating in writing, providing quality
feedback is one of the most important tasks of the teacher. However, what constitutes quality
feedback is difficult to define, and is largely a matter of preference, though there is an abundance of
response literature with ‘best practice’ recommendations on how to provide feedback (Straub, 1997;
Hyland & Hyland, 2001; Lee, 2008; Ferris, 2014). This makes it all the more important to look at how
teachers frame their responses, what they focus on, and how students perceive the response, in
order to discuss the challenges of formative assessment.

Are pupils learning enough, and learning it well in secondary school classrooms – and how can you
tell? Can schools and teachers not only measure the progress made by pupils, but also identify their
learning needs and respond to them? Effective assessment is needed to provide effective answers to
all these critical questions. Tests and examinations are a classic way of measuring student progress
and are integral to accountability of schools and the education system. These highly visible forms of
tracking progress, known as “summative assessment” are also used by parents and employers. But
this is only part of the story. To be truly effective, assessment should also be “formative” – in other
words, identifying and responding to the students’ learning needs. In classrooms featuring formative
assessment, teachers make frequent, interactive assessments of student understanding. This
enables them to adjust their teaching to meet individual student needs, and to better help all
students to reach high standards. Teachers also actively involve students in the process, helping
them to develop skills that enable them to learn better. Many teachers incorporate aspects of
formative assessment into their teaching, but it is less common to find it practised systematically. If
formative assessment is used as a framework for teaching, teachers change the way they interact
with students, how they set up learning situations and guide students toward learning goals, even
how they define student success. Several countries promote formative assessment as a fundamental
approach to education reform. The OECD has studied the use of formative assessment in eight
educational systems: Australia (Queensland), Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, Italy, New Zealand
and Scotland. The study has also brought together reviews covering English, French and German
language research literature. This Policy Brief looks at the results of that study, including policy
principles to address barriers to formative assessment and encourage its wider use

In 2007, I was in my fifth year of teaching high school. As a secondary English/language arts (ELA)
teacher, I worked daily with over 100 students in grades 10-12 to develop their literacy skills through
reading, discussing, and writing about literature. My students ranged from those with Individualized
Education Programs (IEPs) and general-level learners in inclusive sections through pupils at the
honors levels, including those taking Advanced Placement English Literature and Composition with
me. Each year, I was able to see my students’ growth and development as they read and discussed
authors from Chinua Achebe to William Shakespeare. Their writing portfolios, filed away in a cabinet
in my classroom, told a tale of their development and the individualized progress that had occurred.
I would have been able to tell others, including other teachers, administrators, and a student’s
parents, about where each of my pupils currently stood in terms of their literacy, where they had
been at the beginning of the year, strategies that had helped them improve, and where I hoped they
would be by June. However, this knowledge did not seem to be what was important to the school
district in which I taught

The passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB, 2001) legislation in the United States made summative
assessments mandatory for public school students in an attempt to shrink national achievement
gaps and increase student academic success. However, a report issued by the OECD in 2009
indicated that the United States has fallen to 21st of the top 26 OECD countries in terms of
graduation rates (OECD, 2009). In addition, American students have shown little growth over the last
decade in primary subjects such as mathematics and reading (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).
These outcomes have left educators, administrators, and policymakers searching for more effective
methods of improving student achievement. Race to the Top (RTTT), authorized under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, came with the same goals of closing national
achievement gaps and increasing graduation rates (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). RTTT
encouraged states to innovate their measures of student learning and achievement (Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation, 2010). Since the arrival of RTTT, the topic of formative assessment has garnered a
great deal of interest among the national and international education community. Although past
research has shown formative assessment to have a positive effect on student achievement (Burns
et al, 2010; Bergan et al., 1991; Black & Wiliam, 1998; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1986; Martinez & Martinez,
1992; Sadler, 1989; White & Frederiksen, 1998), it can be a 2 time-intensive endeavor. However, the
recent interest in formative assessment has spurred the development of many online formative
assessment programs (OFAP) designed to take some of the burden off the shoulders of instructors,
allowing students to benefit from formative assessment without adding another time-intensive task
to the instructor’s already busy schedule. Whereas it is exciting to see these types of educational
innovations, it is also important to monitor how these tools function in terms of student outcomes.
Research at the Gates’ Foundation has suggested that an ideal scenario is one in which, “formative
assessments are embedded in the curriculum and actually guide the design of the summative
assessments; the two forms of assessment should be intertwined” (2010, p. 6). A logical next step
then would be to ask the question: Does the practice of formative assessment in the classroom
affect student performance on summative assessments? This thesis attempts to answer that
question. Working with a dataset of student information from an OFAP and student achievement
data from state-mandated mathematics and reading summative assessments for 6th, 7th, and 8th
grade students, this study investigated whether there are differences in student growth scores that
may be attributable to formative assessment based on student use statistics from an OFAP.

(Black & Wiliam, 1998) define assessment broadly to include all activities that teachers and students
undertake to get information that can be used diagnostically to alter teaching and learning. Under
this definition, assessment encompasses teacher observation, classroom discussion, and analysis of
student work, including homework and tests.Assessments become formative when the information
is used to adapt teaching and learning to meet student needs. When teachers know how students
are progressing and where they are having trouble, they can use this information to make necessary
instructional adjustments, such as reteaching, trying alternative instructional approaches, or offering
more opportunities for practice. These activities can lead to improved student success.(Sawyer,
Graham, & Harris, 1992) © Centre for Promoting Ideas, USA www.ijbssnet.com 102 Feedback given
as part of formative assessment helps learners become aware of any gaps that exist between their
desired goal and their current knowledge, understanding, or skill and guides them through actions
necessary to obtain the goal(Sadler, 2005). The most helpful type of feedback on tests and
homework provides specific comments about errors and specific suggestions for improvement and
encourages students to focus their attention thoughtfully on the task rather than on simply getting
the right answer(Arbaugh et al., 2008). This type of feedback may be particularly helpful to lower
achieving students because it emphasizes that students can improve as a result of effort rather than
be doomed to low achievement due to some presumed lack of innate ability. Formative assessment
helps support the expectation that all children can learn to high levels and counteracts the cycle in
which students attribute poor performance to lack of ability and therefore become discouraged and
unwilling to invest in further learning(Vispoel & Austin, 1995). While feedback generally originates
from a teacher, learners can also play an important role in formative assessment through self-
evaluation. Two experimental research studies have shown that students who understand the
learning objectives and assessment criteria and have opportunities to reflect on their work show
greater improvement than those who do not(Fontana & Fernandes, 1994). Students with learning
disabilities who are taught to use self-monitoring strategies related to their understanding of reading
and writing tasks also show performance gains(McCurdy & Shapiro, 1992). This study was designed
to find out the impact of formative assessment on academic achievements of secondary school
students.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Frequent failure of Nigerian students in Mathematics subject has been the concerned of all
stakeholders in Education industry. One of the major problems identified is poor assessment method
adopted by many Mathematics teachers in senior secondary schools. This study investigated the
effect of formative assessment on the students’ academic achievement in Mathematics in senior
secondary school in Iseyin local Government of Oyo state, Nigeria
The problem under investigation was to find out the impact of formative assessment on academic
achievements of secondary school students.

The dissertation is a study on the formative assessment practices in Bhutanese Middle Secondary
and Higher Secondary Schools (Classes IX – XII) and its impact on quality of education. The principal
question for this study is: To discover how practices of formative assessment relate to the nature of
students’ learning. More specifically, the research study attempts: To determine the features of
formative assessment that presumably are most important for learning in the context of Bhutanese
secondary schools. The word “presumably” is included because the dissertation is not about
comparing any precise importance for learning of strictly defined features of formative assessment.
In contrast, the endeavor is to sharpen through theoretical and empirical clarification the conceptual
understanding of formative assessment and its importance for learning.

Is formative assessment observable in practice? If we are to ascertain whether and to what degree
formative assessment is occurring in classroom instruction, we must have a method to observe its
use. If we are to ascertain whether formative assessment truly makes a significant difference in
student learning, we must have a method to observe its use. Developing such a method could be
important for enhancing formative assessment use because it has been noted that reliable
observational tools are essential for providing teachers with meaningful feedback on their classroom
practice and for understanding patterns of implementation that can direct professional development
(Baker, Gersten, Haager, & Dingle, 2006).
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this dissertation study was to examine the formative assessment practices used by
secondary ELA teachers in their classrooms in terms of (a) what assessment practices they use, (b)
how they choose which practices to use, (c) how effective they believe the practices they use to be,
and (d) how they determine the effectiveness of these practices. The following literature review
supports this exploratory research through an examination of assessment practices in teaching—
those labeled “formative assessment” in particular—and how research on these practices in other
content areas and contexts have informed this study.

The first major theme, purpose of assessment, emerged as the interviewed teachers reported having
various purposes for using particular assessment practices. For example, Mia talked about the
amount of written feedback she provided to her students, saying, “It just depends on the time [that
the student and I have to be able to conference with each other], and what we’re doing at that
point” (interview dated July 17, 2015). Several teachers commented on the need to give feedback
quickly to students about their writing, such as through comments on think papers or drafts, so that
they could incorporate those ideas into more refined versions of their work in a timely fashion.
Helen, Krystal, and Charlotte spoke of writing questions and comments on their students’ papers as
a form of interaction with them that would be likely to prompt further discussion in a one-on-one
meeting.

The following were the objectives of the study: 1. To find out the extent of the relationship of
formative assessment with academic achievements of secondary school students. 2. To find out the
impact of formative assessment on academic achievements of secondary school students.

the term “formative assessment,” Mia’s definition seemed to capture elements that were raised by
the others. Similar findings that emerged are presented below, and are organized by the following
minor emergent themes: (a) meeting learners’ needs, (b) meeting teaching goals, and (c) fair
evaluation of students’ work.

Formative assessment is meant to enhance pupils’ achievements and develop their proficiency level.
Accordingly, the present work had been carried out to see the extent to which this claim can be
applicable to the Algerian third year secondary school pupils mainly in terms of text comprehension.
The aim is therefore to examine the impact of formative assessment on pupils’ text comprehension.
Another aim behind choosing these texts in the intervention as formative assessments is to make
the pupils familiar with task types that they are likely to encounter in
This thesis in English as a foreign language (EFL) didactics aims to investigate learners´ perspectives
in regards to their assessment practice in EFL writing. More precisely, the focus of the investigation
is formative assessment in the English subject at the lower secondary level. The data constitutes of
interviews with pupils. Consequently, it is the learners who are the most important source of
information in this project. In the current assessment practice, written feedback is communicated
through the formative feedback practice “two stars and a wish”, and how pupils choose to utilize the
information of one´s strengths and weaknesses as EFL writers (in terms of choice of language
learning strategies). The learners´ experiences in language learning are interesting for several
reasons. First, both the Common European Framework of References for Languages (Council of
Europe, 2007) and the Knowledge Promotion Curriculum (LK06/13) stress the language learner’s
awareness of the processes in own language learning. Hence, I am particularly interested in
increased knowledge of whether and how the assessment practice contributes to language learners´
awareness. Within this focus, terms such as language learning strategies and metacognition are
central in this study, and terms will be discussed in the theory chapter. There has been and still is a
focus on improved practice of formative assessment in the Norwegian school, commonly referred to
as Assessment for learning (see 1.2 for definitions and elaboration). This focus on formative
assessment has also been central in my own teaching practice since 2010. Through participation in
Forsterket lærerutdanning1 in 2010, my awareness of formative assessment was raised and its
importance was confirmed. The actual implementation of formative assessment in the everyday
classroom is challenging, and thus plays an important part in my motivation for this study. What is
more, the present study ought to be attractive to teachers since feedback to written work is always
relevant. In short, this study seeks to investigate pupils´ experiences of one particular practice of
formative assessment in EFL writing, which entails detailed descriptions of the assessment practice
(see section 1.5), and the aim is to investigate possible negative aspects as well as 1 An extensive (50
hours) course in didactics provided to all newly employed teachers in ”Osloskolen”. Assessment for
Learning was one of the main focus areas of the course. 12 positive aspects revealed through pupils´
experiences. It is also my goal that the study will be an in-depth contribution for teachers to reflect
on and improve formative assessment in their own practices.

Most assessment research has focused on either teacher assessment practice, or what characterizes
effective feedback in general. Consequently, there is a need for domain-specific research on
formative assessment (Bennett, 2011, p. 15). Each subject has its own ‘culture of knowledge’, an
understanding of what is important to know, how this is expressed through criteria, and what quality
writing entails in different subjects (Evensen, 2009, p. 20). Recent studies on assessment practices in
Norway have found that the degree to which feedback practices are formative in the English subject
varies quite a lot (Burner, 2015a; Horverak, 2015, 2016; Saliu-Abdulahi; 2017; 1 I follow American
writing conventions, and therefore use students, rather than pupils. 11 Saliu-Abdulahi, Hellekjær &
Hertzberg, 2017). These studies indicate a need for more research on how formative assessment is
practiced in the English subject, and the challenges teachers face in trying to balance the needs of
students with theoretical principles of formative assessment. This thesis will explore the possible
challenges of formative assessment at the intersection of assessment theory, teacher practice, and
student perceptions by examining how texts by Norwegian L2 learners of English are assessed, and
what types of feedback students find useful. The following research questions will serve to limit the
scope of this thesis: -What does formative assessment theory say about ‘best practice’? -What types
of written feedback do teachers give students, and how do teachers explain their feedback
practices? -What are students’ perceptions of written feedback practices?

SIGNIFICANCE

Decline of quality of education is an issue coming up frequently in Bhutan. The issue became more
prominent after the detrimental Call Centre interview where only 27.6% of the 163 high school
students as well as university graduates who applied were found competent enough for the job
(Wangdi, 2006). In the same year, it was further deliberated in the 86th National Assembly, where it
was noted that the standard of education in Bhutan is deteriorating. Now, the question is: what is
really happening in our education system? In particular, we may ask how well teaching and learning
in the schools are supported through assessment practices. In the Bhutanese schools, the most
visible assessment practice is summative assessment in the form of mid-term examination, annual
examination, unit test, class test etc., though 19 formative assessment does take place. It seems as if
too much emphasis is placed on summative assessment and that rote learning is prevalent. There
exists a practice of continuous assessment, but whether it serves formative purposes or summative
purposes is more obscure. The present dissertation contributes to remedy this situation by
indicating how formative assessment should be conceived in relation to the quality of education, or
more precisely: the quality of teaching and learning. Based on the research findings, informed
decisions can be made on formative assessment practices, curriculum changes, improvements in
teaching methods and resources. Some appropriate intervention strategies may be proposed to
improve the teaching-learning environment. This study may be useful for the overall improvement
of formative assessment practices in the country with far reaching consequences in producing skilled
and literate workforce.

In planning educational interventions, including teacher professional development, it is necessary to

know where teachers currently are in their practice and what strategies they value. This will allow
for a more effective approach to close any gaps in teachers’ pedagogical knowledge, which in turn
can close gaps in student knowledge. A better understanding of teachers’ actual practices
additionally allows for more precise tailoring of interventions to best suit both teachers’ and their
students’ needs

In planning educational interventions, including teacher professional development, it is necessary to

know where teachers currently are in their practice and what strategies they value. This will allow
for a more effective approach to close any gaps in teachers’ pedagogical knowledge, which in turn
can close gaps in student knowledge. A better understanding of teachers’ actual practices
additionally allows for more precise tailoring of interventions to best suit both teachers’ and their
students’ needs.

The chosen population for this study is in a range of geographic locations across several states, with
varying levels of urbanicity and demographic representation of students within each state,
depending on the school or school district where the teachers are employed. These contextual
variations have the potential for allowing understanding of teachers’ use of assessment practices in
varied contexts, even if all of the instructors are teaching the same course. If the data collection
methods for this study are feasible for appropriate research with this population (i.e., experienced,
university-approved teachers who often discuss and reflect on their practice), these tools could be
adapted for use in studying the assessment practices of other populations. It is anticipated that the
results of this study add additional insight into secondary ELA teachers’ practices for improving
student learning to the FA literature. Having an understanding of how SPRUCE ENG 135 Instructors
implement assessment practices that fall under the aegis of “formative assessment,” especially with
regard to questioning, discussion, and feedback, can better inform further empirical study in this
context.

The main functions of classroom assessment serve formative and summative purposes, and are
described using terms introduced by Scriven (1967) to the field of evaluation. Formative assessments
are meant to guide and improve student learning as well as teachers’ instructional practice, while
summative assessments are used for reporting purposes (Black, 2013; Bonner, 2013). Any
assessments that take place in a classroom are highly situated (and therefore challenging to
generalize to other settings), are generally low-stakes, frequently informal, and are often quite
complex and based on a variety of methods (Bonner, 2013). FA in particular focuses on the ongoing
gathering and use of evidence about how students’ learning is developing while instruction is taking
place (Black & Wiliam, 1998b; Heritage, 2013)

Teachers using formative assessment have changed the culture of their classrooms, putting the
emphasis on helping students feel safe to take risks and make mistakes and to develop self-
confidence in the classroom. Teachers working with students from backgrounds other than their
own also make efforts to understand cultural preconceptions. They interact frequently with
individual or small groups of students and involve students in the assessment process, providing
them with tools to judge the quality of their own work. Teachers also make the learning process
more transparent by establishing and communicating learning goals, tracking student progress and,
in some cases, adjusting goals to better meet student needs. Teachers are able to compare their
assessments with other teachers to ensure that they are treating students equitably. They often find
that comments are more effective than marks for improving student performance and helping all
students to reach high standards. It is not always easy to drop or decrease the frequency

To meet a range of student needs, teachers vary instruction methods. They ensure that lessons
include different approaches to explaining new concepts, provide options for independent
classroom work, and encourage students who have grasped a new concept to help their peers.
Teachers use a mix of approaches to assess student understanding of what has been taught. They
may use diagnostic assessment to determine a student’s level when he or she first enters a new
school or at specified times during the school term to help shape teaching strategies. During
classroom interactions, they most often use questioning techniques. Questions regarding causality,
or open-ended questions, for example, often reveal student misconceptions. For example, biology
teachers in one of the case study schools started asking students what would happen if chlorophyll
stopped working, and discovered a common misconception – that the entire world would be dark.
Teachers may provide verbal or written feedback on student’s work. Teachers and researchers have
found that the most effective feedback is timely, specific and tied to explicit criteria. Teachers also
adjust their strategies to meet needs identified in assessment.

Feedback has been an important moderator and component of formative assessment to make it
effective in enhancing learning (Bell & Cowie, 1999; Black & Wiliam, 1998b; Torrance & Pryor, 1998;
Sadler, 1989, 1998, 2009b, 2010). Effective feedback can support learners, and lead to future
learning gains. Concerns over students’ development and achievements in writing practice have
been widely reported both internationally and nationally (Cutler & Graham, 2008; Dalke &
Grobstein, 2010; Dyson & Freedman, 2003; Hawe et al., 2008; Locke et al., 2011). Yet few have
investigated the meaning of formative feedback in relation to teacher beliefs, or implementation of
formative feedback in writing lessons in particular (Kaplan, 2008). New Zealand teachers have
experienced repeated theoretical and pedagogical shifts (Dix, 2012), and have been required to
adopt these changes into their classroom practice. It is therefore extremely relevant to attempt to
comprehend teachers’ beliefs about formative feedback, and to investigate the extent to which
these formative feedback practices interplay with their practices in the teaching of writing. It is
hoped that this study will provide valuable insights into what teachers beliefs about formative 6
feedback are, and how these beliefs are conceptualised and implemented into their classroom
practice. Another contributing factor in student writing difficulties is, as research indicates, the
paucity of teacher knowledge (Glasswell, Parr & McNaughton, 2003; Torrance, 2007). Teachers’
engagement in PD has the potential to increase their knowledge and confidence about teaching
writing through questioning of their beliefs and practices. For example, Parr and Timperley (2010)
have suggested that teachers themselves need more knowledge about teaching writing. Other
studies have reported that teachers’ experience with assessment tools and their understanding of
writing hinders the ability to communicate knowledge to students (Limbrick, Buchanan, Good &
Shwarcz, 2010). Findings also indicate that teachers lack confidence in using data from the
assessment of writing to inform and influence their teaching, thus admitting gaps in their knowledge
about writing instructions and strategies (Limbrick et al., 2010). It is apparent that teachers are still
in the learning stages of implementing New Zealand’s newest education reforms. There may be gaps
in their understanding and application of various different pedagogies relating to formative
assessment and feedback, and new designs for writing instructions that are being implemented in
New Zealand. Thus the importance of investigating and sharing information based on teachers’
professional judgment of those standards is obvious; such an investigation may inform PD design in
support of other new initiatives.

DELIMITATIONS
There were several limitations and strengths of this research due to factors such as the nature of the
study design, the researcher’s familiarity with the content area and context, and the use of the
ELATE checklists and interviewsThe primary limitations of this study were the small sample size; the
use of self-reported data from teachers; the use of student performance level labels; the timing of
the study; the need for more appropriate anticipation of response patterns to the ELATE checklists;
and the reliability and validity of the ELATE checklist instrument

Sadler’s (1989) proposed theorisation of formative assessment and feedback is an attempt to offer a
broader perspective on effective formative assessment and feedback practice that involves students
as insiders in the process of teaching and learning. He argues that traditional feedback practice
emphasized teachers as having the main role in the implementation of good feedback practice.
According to him, research on formative assessment has often put teachers into the spotlight,
however the focus on teachers’ judgement should be concerned with more than just the presence or
absence of criteria and attention paid to students. He argues that formative assessment and
feedback works in any context, provided there is a teacher/student partnership and interaction in
the learning process. Although Sadler’s (1989) theory was consistent with effective formative
feedback, the ‘closing the gaps’ concepts has been inferred as too limited to account for the
effectiveness of feedback (Gibbs & Simpson, 2004). These findings address the need to reposition
formative assessment and feedback within a wider framework that consists of self-regulation
theories, as well as behavioural and cognitive theories of learning. Formative feedback, for example,
involves students becoming ‘insiders’ to their learning, actively taking control of their learning
(behaviour) and learning to monitor their own learning through self-regulations, eventually
becoming autonomous (self-regulation). Sadler’s (1989) formative assessment and feedback
encompassed all strategies undertaken by teachers and students to modify both teaching and
learning in closing the gap, through peer and self-assessment, learning goals/intentions, and 208
attainment. It is therefore difficult to ascertain the specific strategy by which to conduct formative
assessment and feedback in a manner that attributed learning and attainment to students, as
according to all three teachers’ students had successfully completed their task. As a small-scale
qualitative inquiry, rather than focussing on reliability of the findings, Lincoln and Guba (1985)
suggest discerning the dependability and consistency of the findings. This involves the audit trail as
discussed earlier to augment the trustworthiness of my study (Rosman and Rallis, 2012). As
discussed in the previous sections, the aim of my research was not to generalise the findings and
provide conclusions, but on exploring the complexity of formative assessment and feedback within
one the writing lesson. So while my study identifies some significant insights into the primary
classroom during the teaching of writing, particularly with regard to how teachers’ beliefs influence
the uptake and enactment of formative assessment and feedback practices, it has a number of
limitations. For example, the utilisation of Sadler’s (1989) theoretical framework was constrained by
my inability to explore the link between socio-cultural aspects, professional learning and
development of teachers, and their planning, or their conferencing with students for the
identification of students’ current level of proficiency according to teachers’ perceptions of
standards. To enable such connections and links to be explored, more research and further
commitment from teachers would be required. In the next section, I propose further research and
exploration within this area, which could form a significant to the contribution to field of research on
formative assessment and feedback. Another limitation is this research arose from the inability to
report in–depth on the influence of teachers’ selected formative assessment and feedback strategies
on students’ efficacy beliefs, motivation and achievement. It is very likely that these aspects are
significant to students’ achievement, and to their involvement in the assessment and feedback
process (Ashwell, 2000; Askew & Lodge, 2000), that teachers’ beliefs and practices were the focus of
my study eliminated the prospects of collecting data from students. Therefore further research
focussing on how students’ efficacy beliefs, motivation and achievement influence them in uptake of
formative feedback from teachers would be a valuable contribution for future research.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Is formative assessment observable in practice? The question is important because, while formative
assessment practices can frequently be found embedded in both teacher training and evaluation,
there remains an absence of an instrument/method specifically designed to evaluate its use by
observing it in practice. In light of the potential impact of formative assessment on student learning,
it is important that such an instrument be constructed and tested. Consequently, I undertook to
develop and appraise an instrument designed to observe formative assessment in practice, thereby
answering the question of whether formative assessment is observable in practice.

Research is according to Creswell (2014, p. 17) “ a process of steps used to collect and analyze
information to increase our understanding of a topic or issue”. In this process, the researcher must
choose a main track of either the qualitative or the quantitative method. That however, does not
mean that the researcher have to choose only one of the methods. A research study might be
qualitative and quantitative to various degrees, and it is also possible to combine both methods in
the same research (mixed methods). One of the main differences between the qualitative and the
quantitative method is the degree of flexibility, with the quantitative method being less flexible than
the qualitative method (Bernard 2004 in Christoffersen & Johannessen 2012, p.17). Based on the
nature of the research problem, the researcher must choose the method most suitable to be able to
answer the research questions (Creswell, 2014, p.25). First, I will discuss the reasoning for choosing
qualitative methods for 44 this particular study, and then I will continue to elaborate on some of the
characteristics of qualitative methods. I will also briefly discuss the choices of qualitative data
collection.

Drawing from the objectives stated earlier, the researcher opts for an experimental research design
which is based on the causal links as stated by Denscombe (2007, p. 49): “experiments are generally
concerned with determining the cause of any changes that occur to the thing being studied”; within
experimental design the cause and effect relationship exists between two variables: the
independent variable and the dependent variable. In the present work the independent variable is
formative assessment while the dependent variable is text comprehension. The researcher opted
mainly for one group pretest-posttest experimental design. Additionally, the researcher employed
also a questionnaire as a support to crosscheck data. In the present research work, the researcher
opts for a one group pretest- posttest experimental research design (pre-experiment) where there is
only one group who receives the treatment, thus she employs a quasi-experimental design
REFERENCES