Evaluating Classroom Assessment Training in Teacher Education Programs

Stiggins, Richard J.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1999.tb00004.x

Cited by 171 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

116

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In following an outline proposed by Brindley (2001), InbarLourie (2008) emphasized aspects such as "the reasoning or rationale for assessment (the 'why'), the description of the trait to be assessed (the 'what'), and the assessment process (the 'how')" (p. 390) as the assessment knowledge dimensions language teachers require. Other authors (Popham, 2009;Schafer, 1993;Stiggins, 1999) have also attempted to define what constitutes the knowledge base of assessment for teachers across various areas including EFL education. Stiggins (1999) suggested a list of seven content requirements or competences aimed to provide a comprehensive foundation in assessment practices.…”

Section: Efl Teachers' Assessment Knowledge Basementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other authors (Popham, 2009;Schafer, 1993;Stiggins, 1999) have also attempted to define what constitutes the knowledge base of assessment for teachers across various areas including EFL education. Stiggins (1999) suggested a list of seven content requirements or competences aimed to provide a comprehensive foundation in assessment practices. These included (a) connecting assessments to clear purposes, (b) clarifying achievement expectations, (c) applying proper assessment methods, (d) developing quality assessment exercises and scoring criteria and sampling appropriately, (e) avoiding bias in assessment, (f) communicating effectively about student achievement, and (g) using assessment as an instructional intervention.…”

Section: Efl Teachers' Assessment Knowledge Basementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Call for Language Assessment Literacy in the Education and Development of English Language Teachers

Herrera

Macías

2015

Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Even though assessment constitutes an essential component of any educational process, pre-service and in-service teachers at large seem to ignore its multiple implications and manifestations. Assessment continues to be regarded mainly as the summative evaluation which informs teachers of students´ success or failure in their learning process based on a numeric scale. This narrowed approach may be due in part to the lack of preparation and training both in teacher education programs and professional development programs. It is the aim of this paper thus to raise awareness of the relevance of Assessment Literacy (henceforth AL) in the field of English language teaching by re-examining some definitions of assessment, reviewing various studies in the area, analysing some models and alternatives for the evaluation and development of AL in English language teaching, and finally, offering conclusions and recommendations for the development of AL among prospective and in-service teachers so that they can better serve the needs of their students and their institutions.</p>

show abstract

Section: Efl Teachers' Assessment Knowledge Basementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Efl Teachers' Assessment Knowledge Basementioning

confidence: 99%

A Call for Language Assessment Literacy in the Education and Development of English Language Teachers

Herrera

Macías

2015

Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet the need for a formal introduction to assessment theory and practice is supported by professional demands on teachers, by policy mandates and by research reviews. Stiggins (1999) pointed out that teachers spend an estimated 30-50% of their professional time engaged in assessment activities (DeLuca et al, 2010: 20). In South Africa, national policy mandates assessment knowledge and skill as a professional requirement of teachers (Department of Basic Education, 2012a, b).…”

Section: Presenting An Academically Rigorous Assessment Education Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The conceptual sections intend to distantiate students (Slonimsky & Shalem, 2006) from their taken for granted experience of having been assessed and also to offer them a lens through which to recognise the value (or not, depending on purpose) of the more technical skills of assessment they are about to learn. The practical sections intend to give students an insight into the complexity of considerations involved in generating assessment tasks and judgements, so they develop "positive professional dispositions" (Stiggins, 1999) towards assessment and have a sufficient foundation to learn from school conversations as new teachers.…”

Section: The Course Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The struggle for academic rigour in assessment education

Steinberg¹,

Waspe²

2016

PiE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionA 2010 study of the experiences of the University of the Witwatersrand's (Wits) first year B.Ed. students negotiating their academic learning arrived at the claim that only students who achieved marks above 70% were able to adapt to the "new semiotic domain" of the university, where, compared to school, there is "less external locus of control and where knowledge is regarded as more than performance" (Shalem et al., : 1093. The students who were in the mark range of 40-60% (i.e. just below or above failure) were caught in a struggle for "epistemological access" and remained unsure of "how to differentiate between the words they need to select to explain a specialised idea. Furthermore, they are unable to identify the web of concepts within which their thinking is nested and how to select the textual evidence needed to explain their views and the examples required to demonstrate their point of view" (ibid: 1093). The form and criteria of academic discourse were so foreign to them that it prevented students from accessing the content that is offered by university courses. For them, at the time, writing in ways that could be considered as academically rigorous was still out of reach.It so happened that when we taught and evaluated the 4 th year assessment course in 2014, we were working with the same group of students. Looking at the final course marks, only 52 out of 371 (14%) students achieved a mark of 70% and above, while 264 (71%) were in the 50-69% range. That made our pass marks look acceptable enough but was it any indicator of the course having been, and enabled the students to become more, academically rigorous?This article tells the story of an assessment education (AE) course in which the staff intended to offer epistemological access to a course that was academically rigorous, which, at the time, we understood to mean high quality teaching and learning. We saw it as our responsibility to offer clear, explanatory lectures on key assessment concepts and debates, appropriate readings, challenging and relevant tasks, useful feedback, and explicit guidance for student self-regulation of their work, so that students could acquire key assessment concepts and the accompanying professional skills. From our perspective, the students' responsibility was to engage with the lectures and ask questions, read the provided texts with understanding, put effort into writing the set tasks and generally enjoy the learning. This intention requires effort all round, which we conscientiously put in. Yet, to our dismay, we found that many students did minimum work and some evaluated the course as being 'boring', 'irrelevant' and 'useless'. Rather than losing faith in ourselves and our students, we decided to embark on the road of academic rigour by engaging in "collegial conversations that encourage deep and critical reflection for teacher educators" (Selkrig & Keamy, 2015: 1) The question that drove this conversation was: What are students' perspectives about what and how they learned from the assessmen...

show abstract

“…Teachers spend up to one third or even half of their career life in dealing with assessment (Stiggins, 1991a;1999). It is no doubt that teachers play a pivotal part in classroom assessment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of Chinese Middle School in-Service English Teachers� Assessment Literacy

Lin

2017

IEFLJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports an investigation into the status quo of assessment literacy of Chinese middle school in-service English teachers. Using tasks designed by Coombe et al. (2007), the study finds out that Chinese secondary English teachers have low levels of assessment literacy. They are not aware of such principles as authenticity, sensitivity issues about test content and self-assessment. Especially, they are extremely incompetent in understanding statistics about item analysis and distractor efficiency analysis. No significant difference was detected about teachers' assessment literacy in terms of teaching experience and whether they have taken assessment training courses in any forms. The authors call for a study into language assessment courses offered for secondary English teachers and enough attention paid to the relevance of language assessment training courses to classroom assessment.

show abstract

Evaluating Classroom Assessment Training in Teacher Education Programs

Abstract: What should training for teachers look like? Do our assessment practices align well with what we would like our students to do? How can you self‐assess assessment training at your institution?

Cited by 171 publications

References 5 publications

A Call for Language Assessment Literacy in the Education and Development of English Language Teachers

A Call for Language Assessment Literacy in the Education and Development of English Language Teachers

The struggle for academic rigour in assessment education

An Investigation of Chinese Middle School in-Service English Teachers� Assessment Literacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About