Formative assessment for all: a whole‐school approach to pedagogic change

Abstract

AcknowledgementsThe authors gratefully acknowledge the advice given by Nick Boreham and Richard Edwards during the drafting of this paper. We are, of course, indebted to the staff at Discovery School for their willing participation in the research project.Formative assessment for all: a whole school approach to pedagogic change Scotland's Assessment is for Learning initiative (AifL) seeks to introduce a coordinated national system for assessment in schools. Formative assessment is a major plank in this. The initiative has moved beyond its pilot phase and it is intended that it will be adopted by all Scottish schools by 2007. This paper draws upon the case study of a primary school that has adopted a whole school approach to enacting the formative assessment principles of AifL since 2004. The paper utilises Margaret Archer's social theory to analyse and explain the processes of change that have underpinned the development of formative assessment in the school. It argues that meaningful change in schools can be stimulated by encouraging sociocultural interaction amongst practitioners, via the impetus provided by a central initiative 1 combined with the creation of spaces for dialogue and the extension of professional trust and autonomy.Key words: formative assessment; assessment for learning; change; innovation; morphogenesis; morphostasis IntroductionContinual change seems to be the order of the day within schooling systems worldwide.According to Levin (1998) change has reached 'epidemic' proportions. Nevertheless much of the recent literature suggests that attempts to reform schooling (especially in the related fields of curriculum and pedagogy) have been generally unsuccessful in leading to embedded, long term change in practice (e.g. Swann & Brown, 1997; Helsby & McCullough, 1997;Cowley & Williamson, 1998;Cuban, 1998;Spillane, 1999;Priestley, 2005). Cuban suggests that centrally initiated curriculum change is unlikely to be successful unless it actively engages the 'practitioners who are the foot-soldiers of every reform aimed at improving student outcomes' (Cuban, 1998, p. 459). Similarly, Ruddock (1991, pp. 27-8) reminds us of the 'power of the school and classroom to accommodate, absorb or expel innovations that are at odds with the dominant structures and values that hold habits in place'. According to Priestley (2005), the form and extent of innovation is greatly dependent on the attitudes and values of such practitioners, especially teachers. Top-down innovation tends to disregard the power of teachers to mediate change; successful innovation is often better achieved through a process of adaptation, combining central impetus with active engagement by practitioners. External reform initiatives thus develop in a dialectical fashion, reflecting the dynamic two-way relationship between the initiative, and the context for enactment, including the local change agents.2 Margaret Archer's (1988) social theory provides a useful framework for understanding the processes of change in schools. Archer makes an analyt...

Evidence‐Based Professional Development of Science Teachers in Two Countries

“…In later interviews, many had either gained confidence to pursue their individual developmental goals or recognised that the concerns they had were not as critical as they had first envisaged, but rather were ways of protecting themselves in case they failed to make the changes they wanted in their classrooms. The difficulties that many teachers face when introduced to new approaches in the classroom is how to work these new ideas into their existing practice so that a different overall practice emerges (Priestly & Sime, 2005 Cochran-Smith, 1994). Teachers are therefore challenged to justify not only to themselves but also to their students, colleagues and other interested parties as to why they are bringing in these new practices.…”

The limiting power of Cypriot primary school teachers' private reflections on practice

“…Research literature on teachers' collaboration and reflective practices has shown that professional exchange about teaching can boost professional development where as its absence can have a negative effect (Arthur et al 2010;Beresford and West 1998;Brady 2009;Bryk et al 1999;Butler et al 2004;Conner 2004;Day, Hadfield and Kellow 2002;Huntley 2005;Hopkins and Stern 1996;Hopkins, Naysmith and Palma 1998;Jolliffe and Hutchinson 2007;Lieberman 2009;McCotter 2001;Minnet 2003;Priestley and Sime 2005;Sarsar 2008;Saunders 2005;Talbert and McLaughlin 2002;Wilson 2008). With this study, I explored further why reflection on practice which remains private can have a limiting effect on professional development.…”

Conceptualizing pre‐emptive formative assessment

“…Whilst there are pockets of successful implementation reported in schools: in England (e.g., ; in Scotland (e.g., Priestley & Sime, 2005); in Conceptualizing pre-emptive formative assessment 173…”