LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Crichton, Hazel; Mcdaid, Ann (2016)
Publisher: Routledge
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
It is generally accepted that Assessment for Learning (AfL) strategies are effective in teaching and learning. Approaches within this framework include the use of formative feedback, self and peer assessment and setting and discussion of learning intentions (LIs) and success criteria (SC). There has been a great deal of research into AfL strategies, but perhaps less into the way that the use of LIs and SC are actually perceived by teachers and their pupils. The purpose of the research described in this paper was to investigate teachers’ and pupils’ perceptions of AfL strategies, focusing specifically on LIs and SC within lessons. Findings showed that while both cohorts agreed on the usefulness of LIs and SC, in practice they were rarely discussed in class. Teachers displayed a variety of understandings regarding their purpose, and some learners, while appreciating their value for revision purposes, also expressed frustration at the tokenistic way in which they were implemented. The results of this study could be helpful in informing the wider education community about how LIs and SC are viewed by teachers and learners with a view to ensure understandings are consistent with research and policy through focused professional development courses.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Boyle, W.F. & Charles, M. (2010) Leading learning throughAssessment for Learning?, School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation 30, 3: 285-300, DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2010.485184 Brill, S. & McCartney, A. (2008) Stopping the Revolving Door: Increasing Teacher Retention. Politics and Policy 36, 5:750-774.
    • Centre for Professional Learning and Development, Nottingham Trent University (2015) Guides for Learning and Teaching: Writing Learning Outcomes.
    • www.ntu.ac.uk/cpld/document_uploads/169768.docx last accessed 08/07/15 Clarke, S. (2013) Outstanding Formative Assessment. Oxon: Hodder Education.
    • Dean, G. (2004) Improving Learning in Secondary English. London: David Fulton Publishers.
    • Frey, J. H. & Fontana, A. (1991) The group interview in social research. Social Science Journal 28, 2: 175-187.
    • Glasson, T. (2009) Improving Student Achievement: a practical guide to assessment for learning. Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.
    • Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M. & Wiliam, D. (2005) Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by Day. Educational Leadership, 63, 3:19-24.
    • Learning and Teaching Scotland (LTS) (2006) Assessment is for Learning - Self-Assessment Toolkit.
    • http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/assess/images/AifLToolkitforschools_tcm4-396095.pdf Lewis, A. (1992) Group Child Interviews as a Research Tool. British Educational Research Journal 18, 4: 413-21.
    • Mansell, W., James, M. & the Assessment Reform Group (2009) Assessment in schools. Fit for purpose? A Commentary by the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. London: Economic and Social Research Council, Teaching and Learning Research Programme.
    • Marshall, B. & Drummond, M. J. (2006): How teachers engage withAssessment for Learning: lessons from the classroom, Research Papers in Education 21,2: 133-149.
    • McDowell, L., Wakelin, D., Montgomery, C. & King, S. (2011) Does assessment for learning make a difference? The development of a questionnaire to explore the student response. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36:7, 749-765.
    • Nicol D. J. & Macfarlane‐ Dick D. (2006) Formative assessment and self‐ regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice, Studies in Higher Education 31,2: 199-218.
    • Northern Ireland Curriculum Partnership Management Board (2007) Assessment for Learning for Key Stages 1 and 2. Belfast: CCEA.
    • Ofsted (2008) Assessment for learning: the impact of National Strategy support. London: Ofsted.
    • Patton, M.Q. (2002) Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd edition). London: Sage.
    • Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    • Perrenoud, P. (1998), From Formative Evaluation to a Controlled Regulation of Learning Processes. Towards a Wider Conceptual Field, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 5, 1: 85-102.
    • Rabiee, F. (2004) Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 63, 4: 655-660.
    • Shavelson, R.J. (2008) Guest Editor's Introduction. Applied Measurement in Education 21, 4: 293-294.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article