Formative Assessment in the International Context

• In Event: Present and Future Formative Assessment Practices

Abstract

Although there is abundant literature on the approaches and benefits of formative assessment (Black and Wiliam, 1998; Kuln, 1994), much of this has focused on practices in the United States. The objectives of this component of the structured poster session are twofold: (1) to present current research on formative assessment in math best practices across countries viewed as having exemplar education systems, and (2) to provide research-based recommendations to improve the use of formative assessment in the U.S. and other countries.
Rankings from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA; OECD, 2010) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS; IEA, 2012) were used to identify exemplar countries. Additionally, we found evidence in the literature to corroborate these PISA and TIMSS rankings that provided more insight into what was distinctive about these nations’ approaches to formative assessment. Once target countries were identified, education experts, policy makers, and teachers in several archetype countries were recruited to participate in an online survey and follow-up Skype/phone interviews.
This study summarizes the results, describing and defining formative assessment in math as it is operationalized in these countries. For example, Finland, a country that is consistently at the top of both PISA and TIMSS rankings, sees the role of assessment within classrooms is to “guide and encourage studying and to depict how well the pupil has met the objectives established for growth and learning” (Finnish National Board of Education, 2004, p. 260). These formative assessment practices take the form of student-teacher interactions concerning the child’s behavior, work skills, and content knowledge (Hendrickson, 2012). Students also receive semi-annual reports about their progress. The combination are used to provide teachers with needed information as to the learning needs of their students. Further, they also enhance students’ abilities for self-evaluation. The majority of Finland’s assessments are formative. In fact, there is only one high-stakes, standardized summative assessment throughout a student’s academic career and it is at the end of their secondary school, since it determines whether students can go on to university, polytechnic, or vocational schools (Grubb, 2007; Ministry of Education and Culture, 2010).
Finally, the research presented herein will help researchers and educators understand the various approaches to successful formative assessment internationally. More importantly, we offer recommendations to policy makers and educators as to how best to translate these highlighted best practices for implementation in their own countries. For instance, schools should emphasize formative assessment, rather than one-shot, high-stakes summative assessments. Even as formative assessment is now widely used in some countries, it is often just periodic tests used as build-ups to the end-of-year summative assessment. Formative assessment should de-emphasize testing, and instead, provide opportunities for teachers to interact with students and their parents. It should also develop students’ abilities to evaluate their own learning progress. Additionally, summative assessments should be more broadly defined. Rather than just annual standardized tests, schools should use a diverse portfolio of material that is accumulated throughout the year or even throughout the past two years.

Author

• Thomas Anh Shirley, University of California - Davis