The practical implications of educational aims and contexts for formative assessment

출처: McMillan(2009). The practical implications of educational aims and contexts for formative assessment. 

Handbook of Formative Assessment, edited by Heidi Andrade, and Gregory J. Cizek, Routledge, 2009.

 

-서론-

• 형성평가는 어디에나 있으며, 형성평가의 중요성은 잘 확립되어 있음. 

• 형성평가는 주로 진행 중인 교수과정(instructioanl process)의 일부로 보는 것이 유용함. 

• 이에 학습이 진행됨에 따라 교수조정이 어떻게 일어나는지에 초점을 두며, 
  데이터를 어떻게 사용할지 안내된 대로 성과를 평가할 때 타당성을 입증해야할 필요가 있음. 

• 효과적 교수법은 교수스타일, 목표, 학생의 특성 및 학습맥락 등 많은 요소에 달려 있음. 

• 따라서 교사가 평가결과를 이용하여 무엇을 하는지, 교수변인이 전체 형성평가 과정의 
  다른 변형을 적용하는 효과에 미칠 영향을 강조해야함. 

관련 선행연구 

Narciss & Huth(2004): 교육목표와 학습자 특성이 형성적 피드백의 효과에 중요하다는 개념적 프레임 개발

Hattie & Timperley(2007): 형성평가에서 피드백의 역할을 직접적으로 연구 

 

educational aims(standards and objectives) & context of instruction 

Educational aims	standards, objectives, knowledge, understanding, motivation, metacognition, self-regulation
contextual factors	classroom envirionment, socicultural differences, student ability and achievement, grade level, subject
formative assessment	a process of connected components, involves both teachers and students, assessment during or following instruction, feedback, instructional adjustments

 

Formative assessment as a continuum of characteristics 

 

형성평가의 5가지 특징(Black & Wiliam, 1998; Popham, 2008; Sadler, 1989) 

(1) it si a process of several components, not simply a specific test or other assessment 

(2) it is used by both teachers and students

(3) it takes place during instruction

(4) it provides feedback to students

(5) it provides instrctional adjustment s or correctives

 

*variations of formative assessment characteristics 

 이들 특성을 모두 가질 수 없기에 형성평가 방식에 차이가 발생함 

 형성평가 방식의 차이는 교육목표와 맥락이 학교에서 형성평가가 시행되는 방식에 어떠한 영향을 주는지 그 중요성을 보여줌. 

 

특성	낮은수준	중간수준	높은 수준
evidence of student learning	mostly objective, standardized	some standardized and some anecdotal	varied assessment, including objecive, constructed response, and anecdotal
structure	mostly formal, planned, anticipated	informal, spontaneous "at the moment"	both formal and informal
participants involved	teachers	students	teachers and students
feedback	mostly delayed(e.g., give a quiz and give students feedback the next day) and general	some delayed and some immediate and specific	immediate and specific for low achieveing students, delayed for high achieving studnets
when done	moslty after instruction and assessment(e.g., after a unit)	some after and during instruction	moslty during instruction
instructional adjustments	mostly perscriptive, planned(e.g., pacing according to and instructional plan)	some prescirptive, some flexible, unplanned	moslty flexible, unplanned
choice of task	moslty teacher determined	some studnet determined	teacher and student determined
teacher-student interaction	most interactions based primarliy on formal roles	some interactions based on formal roles	extensive, informal, trusting, and honest interactions
role of student self-evaluation	none	tangetial	integral
motivation	extrinsic(e.g., passing a competency test)	both intrinsic and extrinsic	mostly intrinsic
attributions for success	external factors(teacher: luck)	internal stable factors(e.g., ability)	internal, unstable factors(e.g., moderate student effort)