Supporting Teachers to Use Formative Assessment for Adaptive Decision Making

View More View Less
  • 1 University of Nevada, Reno
  • 2 Utah State University

Formative assessment helps teachers make effective instructional decisions to support students to learn mathematics. Yet, many teachers struggle to effectively use formative assessment to support student learning. Therefore, teacher educators must find ways to support teachers to use formative assessment to inform instruction. This case study documents shifts in teachers’ views and reported use of formative assessment that took place as they engaged in professional development (PD). The PD design considered the formative assessment cycle (Otero, 2006; Popham, 2008) and embedded it within a pedagogical framework (Lamberg, 2013, in press) that took into account the process of mathematics planning and teaching while supporting teachers to learn math content. Teachers restructured their definition of student understanding, which influenced how they interpreted student work and made instructional decisions. Teachers’ pre-PD instructional decisions focused on looking for right and wrong answers to determine mastery and focused on pacing decisions. Their post-PD decisions focused on student thinking and adapting teaching to support student thinking and learning. Implications for PD to support teachers to use formative assessment and research are discussed.

Footnotes

This article was edited by Kristen Bieda, associate editor of MTE at the time the manuscript was initially submitted.

Contributor Notes

Teruni Lamberg, Associate Professor, University of Nevada, Reno, College of Education, MS 280 Reno, NV 89557; Terunil@unr.edu

Linda Gillette-Koyen, University of Nevada, Reno, College of Education, MS 280, Reno, NV 89557; koyenl@yahoo.com

Diana Moss, Assistant Professor, Utah State University, 5100 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-5100; diana.moss@usu.edu

(Corresponding author is Lamberg Terunil@unr.edu)(Corresponding author is Gillette-Koyen koyenl@yahoo.com)(Corresponding author is Moss diana.moss@usu.edu)
Mathematics Teacher Educator
  • 1.

    Alibali, M. W. , & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners’ and teachers’ gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 247286.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Black, P. (2003). The nature and value of formative assessment for learning. Improving Schools, 6(3), 722.

  • 3.

    Black, P. , & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 774.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Black, P. , & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability, 21(1), 531.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Buck, G. , & Trauth-Nare, A. (2009). Preparing teachers to make the formative assessment process integral to science teaching and learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(5), 475494.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Choppin, J. (2011). Learned adaptations: Teachers’ understanding and use of curriculum resources. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(5), 331353.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Christoforidou, M. , Kyriakides, L. , Antoniou, P. , & Creemers, B. (2014). Searching for stages of teacher’s skills in assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 40, 111.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Cobb, P. , Confrey, J. , diSessa, A. , Lehrer, R. , & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 913.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Coffey, J. E. , Hammer, D. , Levin, D. M. , & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 11091136.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Curry, K. , Mwavita, M. , Holter, A. , & Harris, E. (2016). Getting assessment right at the classroom level: Using formative assessment for decision making. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, & Accountability, 28(1), 89104.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Dixon, H. , & Haigh, M. (2009). Changing mathematics teachers’ conceptions of assessment and feedback. Teacher Development, 13(2), 173186.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Even, R. (2005). Using assessment to inform instructional decisions: How hard can it be? Mathematics Education Research Journal, 17(3), 4561.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Gibson, S. A. , & Ross, P. (2016). Teacher’s professional noticing. Theory into Practice, 55(3), 180188.

  • 14.

    Jacobs, V. R. , Lamb, L. L. , & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169202.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Lamberg, T. (2013). Whole class mathematics discussions: Improving in-depth mathematical thinking and learning. Boston, MA: Pearson.

  • 16.

    Lamberg, T. (2018). Leaders who lead successfully: Guidelines for organizing for innovation. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.

  • 17.

    Lamberg, T. (in press). Work smarter, not harder: A framework for math teaching and learning. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.

  • 18.

    Lamberg, T. , & Middleton, J. A. (2009). Design research perspectives on transitioning from individual microgenetic interviews to a whole class teaching experiment. Education Researcher, 38(4), 233245.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Liljedahl, P. , Chernoff, E. , & Zazkis, R. (2007). Interweaving mathematics and pedagogy in task design: A tale of one task. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 239249.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Martino, A. M. , & Maher, C. A. (1999). Teacher questioning to promote justification and generalization in mathematics: What research practice has taught us. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(1), 5378.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Morris, A. K. , Hiebert, J. , & Spitzer, S. M. (2009). Mathematical knowledge for teaching in planning and evaluating instruction: What can preservice teachers learn? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(5), 491529.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Moss, D. L. , & Lamberg, T. (2016). Using a framework for three levels of sense making in a mathematics classroom. The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 72(2), 2531.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards (mathematics). Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Nock, M. K. , Michel, B. D. , & Photos, V. I. (2007). Single-case research designs. In D. McKay (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in abnormal and clinical psychology (pp. 337350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Otero, V. K. (2006). Moving beyond the “get it or don’t” conception of formative assessment. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 247255.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Panorkou, N. , & Kobrin, J. (2017). Enhancing teachers’ formative assessment practices through learning trajectory-based PD. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 5(2), 178201.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

  • 29.

    Pyle, A. , & DeLuca, C. (2013). Assessment in the kindergarten classroom: An empirical study of teachers’ assessment approaches. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(5), 373380.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Riggan, M. , & Oláh, L. N. (2011). Locating interim assessments within teachers’ assessment practice. Educational Assessment, 16(1), 114.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114145.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Sondergeld, T. A. , Bell, C. A. , & Leusner, D. M. (2010). Understanding how teachers engage in formative assessment. Teaching & Learning, 24(2), 7786.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Smith, M. S. , & Stein, M. K. (2011). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • 35.

    Stylianou, D. A. (2010). Teachers’ conceptions of representation in middle school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(4), 325343.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Sullivan, P. , & Mornane, A. (2014). Exploring teachers’ use of, and students’ reactions to, challenging mathematics tasks. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(2), 193213.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Suurtamm, C. , & Koch, M. J. (2014). Navigating dilemmas in transforming assessment practices: Experiences of mathematics teachers in Ontario, Canada. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(3), 263287.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Veldhuis, M. , & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2014). Primary school teachers’ assessment profiles in mathematics education. PLoS One, 9(1), e86817.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Wiliam, D. (2010). An Integrative summary of the research literature and implications for a new theory of formative assessment. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 1840). New York, NY: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40.

    Wilson, P. H. , Sztajn, P. , Edgington, C. , & Myers, M. (2015). Teachers’ uses of a learning trajectory in student-centered instructional practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(3), 227244.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Yeh, C. , & Santagata, R. (2015). Preservice teachers’ learning to generate evidence-based hypotheses about the impact of mathematics teaching on learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 2134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Yin, R. (2014). Case study research design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • 43.

    Zaslavsky, O. (2007). Mathematics-related tasks, teacher education, and teacher educators. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(4–6), 433440.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 212 212 33
Full Text Views 164 164 14
PDF Downloads 101 101 11
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0