Formative Assessment in Secondary Mathematics: Moving Theory to Recommendations for Evidence-Based Practice

Author:
Rachael H. Kenney Purdue University, West Layfayette, IN

Search for other papers by Rachael H. Kenney in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Michael Lolkus CPM Educational Program, Sacramento, CA

Search for other papers by Michael Lolkus in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Yukiko Maeda Purdue University, West Layfayette, IN

Search for other papers by Yukiko Maeda in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Mathematics teacher educators play a key role in supporting secondary mathematics teachers’ development of effective, research-based formative assessment (FA) practices. We used qualitative research synthesis as a tool to identify actionable recommendations for mathematics teacher educators as they work with teachers on FA practices in secondary classrooms. These recommendations can strengthen the research-based practices of mathematics teacher educators as they support teachers’ collections and uses of FA data to move student thinking forward in secondary mathematics. We share and discuss recommendations for mathematics teacher educators to connect pedagogical content knowledge of students, teaching, and curriculum to FA practices. We also highlight the usefulness of the qualitative synthesis method, meta-aggregation, for generating research-based connections between theory and practice in mathematics education.

Supplementary Materials

    • Teaching Mathematical Thinking (10.01 MB)
    • Fraction Multiplication (404 KB)
    • Instructional Practices for Improving Mathematics Achievement 15 2022 (440 KB)

Contributor Notes

Rachael H. Kenney, Purdue University, West Layfayette, IN 47907; rhkenney@purdue.edu

Michael Lolkus, CPM Educational Program, Sacramento, CA 95822; mikelolkus@cpm.org

Yukiko Maeda, Purdue University, West Layfayette, IN 47907; ymaeda@purdue.edu

  • Collapse
  • Expand
Mathematics Teacher Educator
  • 1.

    *An, S., & Wu, Z. (2012). Enhancing mathematics teachers’ knowledge of students’ thinking from assessing and analyzing misconceptions in homework. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(3), 717753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-011-9324-x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Andersson, C. (2015). Professional development in formative assessment: Effects on teacher classroom practice and student achievement [Doctoral dissertation, Umeå universitet].

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017). The impact of formative assessment on student achievement: A study of the effects of changes to classroom practice after a comprehensive professional development programme. Learning and Instruction, 49, 92102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.12.006

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Andrade, H., & Cizek, G. J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of formative assessment. Routledge.

  • 5.

    Aromataris, E., & Munn, Z. (Eds.). (2020). JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01

  • 6.

    *Austin-Hurd, B. G. (2016). How educators conduct formative assessment with middle school student in order to improve student achievement (Publication No. 3745101) [Doctoral dissertation, Capella University). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (1757740794). https://search.proquest.com/docview/1757740794?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Ball, D., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Beesley, A. D., Clark, T. F., Dempsey, K., & Tweed, A. (2018). Enhancing formative assessment practice and encouraging middle school mathematics engagement and persistence. School Science and Mathematics, 118(1–2), 416. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12255

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 821. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170408600105

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    *Bonham, J. L. (2018). A study of middle school mathematics teachers’ implementation of formative assessment (Publication No. 10745351) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (2025939881). https://search.proquest.com/docview/2025939881?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 315. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Borko, H., Koellner, K., & Jacobs, J. (2014). Examining novice teacher leaders’ facilitation of mathematics professional development. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 149167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.11.003

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1997). Looking in classrooms. Longman.

  • 15.

    Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., & Hiebert, J. (2019). Research pathways that connect research and practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50(1), 210. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.50.1.0002

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., Cirillo, M., Kramer, S. L., & Hiebert, J. (2020a). Timely and useful data to improve classroom instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 51(4), 387398. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc-2020-0056

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., Cirillo, M., Kramer, S. L., Hiebert, J., & Bakker, A. (2020b). Addressing the problem of always starting over: Identifying, valuing, and sharing professional knowledge for teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 51(2), 130139. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc-2020-0015

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Carney, M. B., Brendefur, J. L., Hughes, G., Thiede, K., Crawford, A. R., Jesse, D., & Ward Smith, B. (2019). Scaling professional development for mathematics teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 80, 205217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.01.015

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Charalambous, C. Y., Hill, H. C., Chin, M. J., & McGinn, D. (2020). Mathematical content knowledge and knowledge for teaching: Exploring their distinguishability and contribution to student learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 23(6), 579613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-019-09443-2

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: The irony of ‘No Child Left Behind’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320701503207

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 4653.

  • 22.

    *Davis, A. A. (2017). A case study of mathematics teachers’ use of short-cycle formative assessment strategies (Publication No. 10753754) [Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (2009458498). https://search.proquest.com/docview/2009458498?accountid=1336

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Davis, B., Brown, L., Cedillo, T., Chiocca, C. M., Dawson, S., Giménez, J., Hodgen, J., Jaworski, M. K., & Siemon, D. (2009). Development of teaching in and from practice. In B. Jawarski (Ed.), The professional education and development of teachers of mathematics (pp. 149166). Springer.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Davis, B., & Simmt, E. (2006). Mathematics-for-teaching: An ongoing investigation of the mathematics that teachers (need to) know. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(3), 293319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-2372-4

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Depaepe, F., Verschaffel, L., & Kelchtermans, G. (2013). Pedagogical content knowledge: A systematic review of the way in which the concept has pervaded mathematics educational research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 1225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.001

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    *Dyer, E. B., & Sherin, M. G. (2016). Instructional reasoning about interpretations of student thinking that supports responsive teaching in secondary mathematics. ZDM, 48(1–2), 6982. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0740-1

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Elliott, R. L., Kazemi, E., Lesseig, K., Mumme, J., Carroll, C., & Kelley-Petersen, M. (2009). Conceptualizing the work of leading mathematical tasks in professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 364379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109341150

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Falk, A. (2012). Teachers learning from professional development in elementary science: Reciprocal relations between formative assessment and pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 96(2), 265290. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20473

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Gotwals, A. W., Philhower, J., Cisterna, D., & Bennett, S. (2015). Using video to examine formative assessment practices as measures of expertise for mathematics and science teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 405423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9623-8

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Graeber, A., & Tirosh, D. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge: Useful concept or elusive notion. In International handbook of mathematics teacher education (Vol. 1, pp. 115132). Brill Sense.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Harrison, C. (2005). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Mapping teacher change. Teacher Development, 9(2), 255264. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13664530500200251

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Hill, H., & Ball, D. L. (2009). The curious—and crucial—case of mathematical knowledge for teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(2), 6871. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F003172170909100215

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372400. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.39.4.0372

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Hoover, M., Mosvold, R., Ball, D. L., & Lai, Y. (2016). Making progress on mathematical knowledge for teaching. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 13(1–2), 334. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1363

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Horn, I. S. (2018). Accountability as a design for teacher learning: Sensemaking about mathematics and equity in the NCLB era. Urban Education, 53(3), 382408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916646625

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Kaftan, J. M., Buck, G. A., & Haack, A. (2006). Using formative assessments to individualize instruction and promote learning. Middle School Journal, 37(4), 4449. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2006.11461545

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Kalinec-Craig, C. A. (2017). The rights of the learner: A framework for promoting equity through formative assessment in mathematics education. Democracy and Education, 25(2), 111.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Kazima, M., Pillay, V., & Adler, J. (2008). Mathematics for teaching: Observations from two case studies. South African Journal of Education, 28(2), 283299.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Kenney, R. H., Bloome, L., & Maeda, Y. (2016). Unpacking teachers’ perspectives on the purpose of assessment: Beyond summative and formative. In M. Wood, E. Turner, M. Civil, & J. Eli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. The University of Arizona.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40.

    *Kim, H. J. (2019). Teacher learning opportunities provided by implementing formative assessment lessons: Becoming responsive to student mathematical thinking. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(2), 341363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9866-7

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Leahy, S., & Wiliam, D. (2012). From teachers to schools: Scaling up professional development for formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 4971). Sage.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015). Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 179187. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000062

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43.

    Marra, R. M., Arbaugh, F., Lannin, J., Abell, S., Ehlert, M., Smith, R., Merle-Johnson, D., & Rogers, M. P. (2011). Orientations to professional development design and implementation: Understanding their relationship to PD outcomes across multiple projects. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(4), 793816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9223-6

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Maeda, Y., Caskurlu, S., Kozan, K., & Kenney, R. H. (2022). Development of a critical appraisal tool for assessing the reporting quality of qualitative studies: A worked example. Quality & Quantity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01403-y

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45.

    Maeda, Y., Caskurlu, S., Kenney, R. H., Kozan, K., & Richardson, J. C. (2022). Moving qualitative synthesis research forward in education: A methodological systematic review. Educational Research Review, 35, 100424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100424

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46.

    Maeda, Y., Kenney, R. H., & Lolkus, M. (in press). Meta-aggregation: Methodological guidance and lessons learned on a promising approach to qualitative synthesis for mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47.

    Matthews, M. E. (2013). The influence of the pedagogical content knowledge framework on research in mathematics education: A review across grade bands. Journal of Education, 193(3), 2937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9223-6

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48.

    Matos, J. F., Powell, A., Sztajn, P., Ejersb⊘, L., Hovermill, J., & Matos, J. (2009). Mathematics teachers’ professional development: Processes of learning in and from practice. In R. Even & D. L. Ball (Eds.), The professional education and development of teachers of mathematics (pp. 167183). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09601-8_19

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 49.

    McCrory Calarco, J., Horn, I. S., & Chen, G. A. (2022). “You need to be more responsible”: The myth of meritocracy and teachers’ accounts of homework inequalities. Educational Researcher, 20(10), 0013189X2211113. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221111337

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 50.

    McCrory, R., Floden, R., Ferrini-Mundy, J., Reckase, M. D., & Senk, S. L. (2012). Knowledge of algebra for teaching: A framework of knowledge and practices. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(5), 584615. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.43.5.0584

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 51.

    *McManus, S. M. (2008). A study of formative assessment and high stakes testing: Issues of student efficacy and teacher views in the mathematics classroom (Publication No. 3306610) [Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (304546258). https://search.proquest.com/docview/304546258?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 52.

    Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.

  • 53.

    Mills, V. L., Strutchens, M. E., & Petit, M. (2018). Our evolving understanding of formative assessment and the challenges of widespread implementation. In E. Silver & V. L. Mills (Eds.), A fresh look at formative assessment in mathematics teaching (pp. 39). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 54.

    Moyer, P. S., & Milewicz, E. (2002). Learning to question: Categories of questioning used by preservice teachers during diagnostic mathematics interviews. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(4), 293315. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021251912775

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 55.

    National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics (NCSM) and Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (AMTE). (2014). Improving student achievement in mathematics through formative assessment in instruction: An AMTE and NCSM joint position paper. Accessed online athttps://www.amte.net/sites/default/files/overview_amte_ncsm_position_paper_formative_assessment.pdf.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 56.

    National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to action: Ensuring mathematical success for all.

  • 57.

    National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2018). Catalyzing change in high school mathematics.

  • 58.

    OECD. (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264007413-en

  • 59.

    Ohlsen, M. T. (2007). Classroom assessment practices of secondary school members of NCTM. American Secondary Education, 36(1), 414. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41406094

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 60.

    *Philhower, J. (2018). Investigating high school mathematics teachers’ formative assessment practices (Publication No. 10815272) [Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University ]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://search.proquest.com/docview/2042344819?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 61.

    Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Leiß, D., & Blum, W. (2017). Formative assessment in mathematics instruction: Theoretical considerations and empirical results of the Co2CA project. In D. Leutner, J. Fleischer, J. Grünkorn, & E. Klieme (Eds.), Competence assessment in education. Methodology of educational measurement and assessment. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50030-0_26

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 62.

    *Rathje, R. J. (2018). A qualitative case study of mathematics teachers' formative assessment feedback (Publication No. 10974599) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University ]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://search.proquest.com/docview/2129736126?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 63.

    Rogers, M. P., Abell, S., Lannin, J., Wang, C.-Y., Musikul, K., Barker, D., & Dingman, S. (2007). Effective professional development in science and mathematics education: Teachers’ and facilitators’ views. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(3), 507532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-006-9053-8

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 64.

    Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

  • 65.

    *Seashore, K. H. (2015). Learning through the use of instructional materials: Secondary mathematics teachers’ enactment of formative assessment lessons (Publication No. 3733419) [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1730386296?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 66.

    Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 414. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X029007004

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 67.

    Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in research on teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 336). MacMillan.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 68.

    Speer, N. M., King, K. D., & Howell, H. (2015). Definitions of mathematical knowledge for teaching: Using these constructs in research on secondary and college mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18(2), 105122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9277-4

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 69.

    Steinle, V., & Stacey, K. (2012, July). Teachers’ views of using an on-line, formative assessment system for mathematics. In Pre-proceedings:12th international congress on mathematical education topic study group 33 (pp. 67216730). ICME, Seoul, Korea.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 70.

    Tierney, W. G., & Clemens, R. F. (2011). Qualitative research and public policy: The challenges of relevance and trustworthiness. In J. Smart (Ed.), Overview of higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 26, pp. 5783). Agathon Press.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 71.

    Thunder, K., & Berry, R. Q., III. (2016). The promise of qualitative metasynthesis for mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(4), 318337. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.47.4.0318

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 72.

    *Wallinga, W. (2017). Examining the benefits of instructional assessment as experienced by secondary mathematics teachers (Publication No. 10685701) [Doctoral dissertation, University of New Hampshire ]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://search.proquest.com/docview/2013336163?accountid=13360

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 73.

    Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 5382). Erlbaum.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 74.

    Wilson, N. S. (2008). Teachers expanding pedagogical content knowledge: Learning about formative assessment together. Journal of In-Service Education, 34(3), 283298. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674580802003540

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 5468 3637 331
Full Text Views 514 220 11
PDF Downloads 728 295 36
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0