1. Timing of Feedback

• Research focuses on immediate vs. delayed feedback.

• Immediate feedback beneficial for error correction during task acquisition (FT).

• Delayed feedback better for fluency building (FP).

2. Effects of Positive and Negative Feedback

• Negative feedback more impactful at self level (FS).

• Feedback effectiveness relates to commitment, mastery/performance orientation, and self-efficacy at regulation level (FR).

• At self-regulation level, commitment influences response to feedback:

  • Positive feedback increases motivation for tasks people want to do.

  • Negative feedback increases motivation for tasks people have to do.

  
  

Three goals:

• Identifies personal factors, behavioural factors and environmental factors in relation to the concepts of student agency and reciprocity between teachers and students’ in-classroom assessment as a learning process.

  • Agency: The notion of agency being shaped by the dynamic interplay among

    multiple factors is shared by others.

• The transformation of assessment practice over three generations of pedagogical theory.

  • The first generation of assessment practices is characterised by a

    mechanistic approach to teaching and learning, which dates back to

    Edward Thorndike’s “effects of connection”.

  • The second generation of assessment practice suggests a shift in the learner’s

    role, from a recipient of instruction to a constructor of understanding.

  • The third generation of assessment practice presents a shift away from

    viewing learning as an acquisition of knowledge and understanding––

    instead, learning is seen as a social practice of participation.

• Social cognitive theory offers a recalibrated understanding of assessment as a student-centred learning process

  • Regulation in this context refers to four main processes:

    1. goal setting

    2. monitoring progress towards goal

    3. interpretation of feedback derived from monitoring

    4. adjustment of goal-directed action and/or readjustment of the goal itself

  • students who are able to self-regulate their learning tend to enjoy greater academic success.

  • Classroom assessment as a three-phase process

    • a forethought

    • a performance

    • a self-reflection phase

-       The important and strategies for implementing formative assessment at broader level including formative assessment continuous process to improve students learning, requires end of term assessment that continuously support students’ progress.

-       Collaboration among educator is crucial for successful implementation

-       It involves engaging students in self-assessment, fostering a growth mindset, and building their capacity to understand their learning process.

Team Members name: Muykeang Sealim, Zichang, Sameera, Maitreyee

Purpose of Assessments: Used to support improvements in student learning, not just to measure it.

Five general strategies for promoting assessment for learning in classroom lessons:

• clarifying and understanding learning intentions and sharing criteria for suc- cess

• promoting and supporting effective classroom discussions and developing activities and tasks that elicit evidence of learning

• providing feedback that moves learners forward

• activating students as ped- agogic resources for one another

• activating students as the owners of their own learning

  
  

Challenges with Implementing Assessments:

• Difficulty for teachers to incorporate AfL practices

• Struggle to balance promoting student autonomy in learning with performance-oriented assessments

This paper examines six interrelated topics, denoted as follows: the definitional

issue, the effectiveness issue, the domain dependency issue, the measurement issue,

the professional development issue, and the system issue.

Definitional issue: the distinction between the summative and

formative roles was first proposed by Scriven (1967) in the context of programme

evaluation (Black and Wiliam 2003; Wiliam and Thompson 2008). For bloom, the porpose of formative evaluation was… to provide feedback and correctives at each stage in the teaching- learning process. Summative evaluation was employed to judge what the learner had achieved at the end of a course or programme

effectiveness issue: The most widely cited source for these strong claims is almost certainly the pair of

papers published by Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam, both then of Kings College, London.

‘Inside the Black Box’ is a brief position piece that appeared in Phi Delta Kappan (Black

and Wiliam 1998a) and also as a widely distributed pamphlet (Black and Wiliam

1998b). That article summarises a lengthy, meticulous review, ‘Assessment and class-

room learning’, published the same year in this journal, Assessment in Education (Black

and Wiliam 1998c).

the domain dependency issue: This issue concerns whether formative assessment can be maximally effective if theory and development are focused at a domain-independent level. To place the issue in context, we know from cognitive-scientific research that general and specialised knowledge function in close partnership (Perkins and Salomon 1989).

the measurement issue: A basic definition of educational measurement is that it involves four activities: design-ing opportunities to gather evidence, collecting evidence, interpreting it, and acting on interpretations.

the professional development issue

the system issue This last issue may be the most challenging of all. The ‘system issue’ refers to the fact that formative assessment exists within a larger educational context.