Formative assessment is an essential component of classroom work and can raise student achievement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeatonAlbert E., et al. Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years. Boston: Boston College, 1996.
2.
BlackPaul J., and Myron AtkiJ.. Changing the Subject: Innovations in Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education. London: Routledge for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1996.
3.
BlackPaul, and WiliamDylan. “Assessment and Classroom Learning.”Assessment in Education (March 1998): 7–74.
4.
ClementDassaVazquez-AbadJesús, and AjarDjavid. “Formative Assessment in a Classroom Setting: From Practice to Computer Innovations.”Alberta Journal of Educational Research39, no. 1 (1993): 116.
5.
DaughertyRichard. National Curriculum Assessment: A Review of Policy, 1987-1994. London: Falmer Press, 1995.
6.
DawsNicholas, and SinghBirendra. “Formative Assessment: To What Extent Is Its Potential to Enhance Pupils' Science Being Realized?”School Science Review77 (1996): 99.
7.
FuchsLynn S., and FuchsDouglas. “Effects of Systematic Formative Evaluation: A Meta-Analysis.”Exceptional Children53, no. 3 (November 1986): 199–208.
8.
FuchsLynn S., et al. “Effects of Task-Focused Goals on Low-Achieving Students with and Without Learning Disabilities.”American Educational Research Journal34, no. 3 (Fall 1997): 513–543.
9.
FullanMichael G., with StiegelbauerSuzanne. The New Meaning of Educational Change. London: Cassell, 1991.
10.
JohnstonPeter. “Assessment of Teaching and Learning in Literature-Based Classrooms.”Teaching and Teacher Education11, no. 4 (July 1995): 359.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED).Subjects and Standards: Issues for School Development Arising from OFSTED Inspection Findings 1994-5: Key Stages 3 and 4 and Post-16. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1996.
13.
PerrenoudPhillipe. “Towards a Pragmatic Approach to Formative Evaluation.” In Assessment of Pupils' Achievement: Motivation and School Success, ed. WestonPenelope. Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger, 1991: 92.
14.
RussellTerry A.QualterAnne, and McGuiganLinda. “Reflections on the Implementation of National Curriculum Science Policy for the 5-14 Age Range: Findings and Interpretations from a National Evaluation Study in England.”International Journal of Science Education17, no. 4 (1995): 481–492.
15.
SadlerD. Royce. “Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems.”Instructional Science18, no. 2 (June 1989): 119–144.
16.
StiglerJames W., and HiebertJames. “Understanding and Improving Classroom Mathematics Instruction: An Overview of the TIMSS Video Study.”Phi Delta Kappan79, no. 1 (September 1997): 14–21.
17.
Task Group on Assessment and Testing: A Report. London: Department of Education and Science and the Welsh Office, 1988.
18.
WiliamDylan, and BlackPaul. “Meanings and Consequences: A Basis for Distinguishing Formative and Summative Functions of Assessment.”British Educational Research Journal22, no. 5 (December 1996): 537–548.
19.
WineburgSam. “T.S. Eliot, Collaboration, and the Quandaries of Assessment in a Rapidly Changing World.”Phi Delta Kappan79, no. 1 (September 1997): 59–65.
