Dylan Wiliam

Formative e-assessment: some theoretical resources Dylan Wiliam www.dylanwiliam.net

A brief history of formative assessment
“ Formative assessment” has been used to describe:
The time at which the assessment is scheduled
Any assessment taken before the last one
A purpose for assessing
“ Assessment for learning”
A function that the assessment outcomes serve
Assessments that change teaching
Formative use of assessments

Feedback metaphor
Feedback in engineering
Positive feedback
Leads to explosive increase or collapse (bad!)
Negative feedback
Leads to asymptotic convergence to, or damped oscillation about, a stable equilibrium
Components of a feedback system
data on the actual level of some measurable attribute;
data on the reference level of that attribute;
a mechanism for comparing the two levels and generating information about the ‘gap’ between the two levels;
a mechanism by which the information can be used to alter the gap.
To an engineer, information is therefore feedback only if the information fed back is actually used in reducing the gap between actual and desired states.

Relevant studies
Fuchs & Fuchs (1986)
Natriello (1987)
Crooks (1988)
Banger-Drowns, et al. (1991)
Kluger & DeNisi (1996)
Black & Wiliam (1998)
Nyquist (2003)
Dempster (1991, 1992)
Elshout-Mohr (1994)
Brookhart (2004)
Allal & Lopez (2005)
Köller (2005)
Brookhart (2007)
Wiliam (2007)
Hattie & Timperley (2007)
Shute (2008)

Feedback
Kinds of feedback in Higher Education (Nyquist, 2003)
Weaker feedback only
Knowledge of results (KoR)
Feedback only
KoR + clear goals or knowledge of correct results (KCR)
Weak formative assessment
KCR+ explanation (KCR+e)
Moderate formative assessment
(KCR+e) + specific actions for gap reduction
Strong formative assessment
(KCR+e) + activity

Effect of formative assessment (HE) *corrected values 0.56 16 Strong formative assessment 0.39 41 Moderate formative assessment 0.29 49 Weaker formative assessment 0.36 48 Feedback only 0.14 31 Weaker feedback only Effect* N

Formative assessment An assessment functions formatively to the extent that evidence about student achievement elicited by the assessment is interpreted and used to make decisions about the next steps in instruction that are likely to be better, or better founded, than the decisions that would have been taken in the absence of that evidence. Formative assessment therefore involves the creation of, and capitalization upon, moments of contingency (short, medium and long cycle) in instruction with a view to regulating learning (proactive, interactive, and retroactive).

Some principles
A commitment to formative assessment
Does not entail any view of what is to be learned
Does not entail any view of what happens when learning takes place

Types of formative assessment
Long-cycle
Span: across units, terms
Length: four weeks to one year
Medium-cycle
Span: within and between teaching units
Length: one to four weeks
Short-cycle
Span: within and between lessons
Length:
day-by-day: 24 to 48 hours
minute-by-minute: 5 seconds to 2 hours

Unpacking formative assessment
Key processes
Establishing where the learners are in their learning
Establishing where they are going
Working out how to get there
Participants
Teachers
Peers
Learners

Aspects of formative assessment Activating students as owners of their own learning Understand learning intentions Learner Activating students as learning resources for one another Understand and share learning intentions Peer Providing feedback that moves learners forward Engineering effective discussions, tasks and activities that elicit evidence of learning Clarify and share learning intentions Teacher How to get there Where the learner is Where the learner is going

Five “key strategies”…
Clarifying, understanding, and sharing learning intentions
curriculum philosophy (goals and horizons)
Engineering effective classroom discussions, tasks and activities that elicit evidence of learning
classroom discourse, interactive whole-class teaching
Providing feedback that moves learners forward
feedback
Activating students as learning resources for one another
collaborative learning, reciprocal teaching, peer-assessment
Activating students as owners of their own learning
metacognition, motivation, interest, attribution, self-assessment
(Wiliam & Thompson, 2007)

… and one big idea
Use evidence about the outcomes of instruction to meet student needs

The learning milieu
Feedback must cause a cognitive engagement in learning
Mastery orientation vs. performance orientation (Dweck)
Growth pathway vs. well-being pathway (Boekaerts)

http://blogg.infodesign.no	46
http://feasst.wordpress.com	27
http://feasst.wlecentre.ac.uk	20
http://www.slideshare.net	6
http://assessmentforaslearning.pbworks.com	4
https://www.mturk.com	1
http://misterfeleppa.blogspot.com	1

Dylan Wiliam

by harvey_mellar on May 01, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

7 Embeds 105

Statistics

Dylan Wiliam Presentation Transcript