This presentation illustrates the research study which I pursued during my M.S. program at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville. This is a qualitative Meta-Analysis of science teachers professional development in formative assessment.

1. Professional Development of
Science Teachers in Formative Assessment:
A Qualitative Meta-analysis of the Research
Literature
Thesis Defense by
Javed Iqbal M.S.(Teacher Education)

2. Road Map
• Background
• Problem statement
• What is formative assessment
• Benefits of formative assessment
• Rationale
• Significance
• Research Question
• Methodology
• Criteria for selection of articles
• Article search process
• Analysis methods
• Discussion
• Implications
• Limitations

3. Problem Statement:
• Dearth of professional development opportunities on formative
assessment for science teachers in the context of Pakistan.
• Formative assessment practices are not implemented on regular
basis
• Formative assessment is poorly understood and exercised in science
classroom.
• There is limited research on formative assessment in science
education.
(AAAS 2003 ;Bryce, Wilmes & Bellino, 2016; Black, 2011; Deniel & Gumer, 2001;Gearhart et al.,
2006; Gibbs & Simpson, 2005; Iqbal, 1999; NRC, 2007).

4. (AAAS, 1999; Deniel & Gumer, 2000; Falk, 2011 Lyon, 2013; NRC, 2007; NSTA, 2016; Stiggins,
2002).
What is formative
Assessment?
Ongoing Process
Providing
feedback
Assisting
students in
learning
Collect data
about students
learning
Adjust
instructional
practices
Stimulate
students’
learning

5. Benefits of Formative Assessment
• Benefits of formative assessments for students:
• Track their learning progression.
• Self regulated learning.
• Enrich their conceptual understanding.
• Benefits for teachers:
• Informs about the impact of their instructions on student learning.
• Modify their instructions according to students performance.
• Meet the learning targets.

6. Rationale
• My experience of working;
• as a science teacher
• Teacher educator
• Courses 550 MEDU & 550 SCED
• Different studies, such as Towndrow, Tan, Yung, & Cohen (2008); Buck
and Trauth-Nare (2009), Araceli Ruiz-Primo and Furtak (2006) and
Caulfield-Sloan and Ruzicka (2015) Aschbacher and Alonzo (2006) and
Cowie and Bell (1999).
• Lack of meta-analysis

7. Significance
Existing Body
of Knowledge
• Giving new insights and perspectives
• Add knowledge
Science
Teacher and
Educators
• Enhance understanding
• Develop practices
UTK (Science
Education )
• Taking inform decisions
My Self
• Professional growth

8. Research Questions
1. What do research findings in the extant literature say about the
impact of formative assessment oriented PD sessions in science
education on students’ learning outcomes?
2. What are issues highlighted by the extant research literature
regarding conducting professional development session on
formative assessment?
3. Which common themes can be derived from the research on
the professional development of science teachers in the field of
formative assessment?

9. Methodology
(Gewurtz et al.,2008;Zimmer, 2006; Gini & Pozzoli 2013)
Interpretive Analysis
Construction of new knowledge
Secondary research
Research studies as unit of
analysis
Integrated comprehensive view
•Systematic Synthesis
Systematic literature review
Assimilation of findings
Qualitative Meta-
Analysis

10. Criteria for Selection of Articles
Criteria Discerption
Timeframe Last two decades
Domain Science Education
Level K-12
Assessment
Approach
Formative Assessment
Standard of
Journals
Peer Reviewed

11. Article Search
First Search
1233
Google Sch,
EBESCO & ERIC
60 articles
Abstract were
Reviewed
16 articles
Finalized

12. Analysis Methods
Each article was
thoroughly read
Analysis and
findings were re-
read
Relevant text was
transferred to
another word
document
Data was
structurally coded
Themes were
extracted from the
codes
Themes were
categorized
according to
research question

13. Analysis: Impact of Formative Assessment
Based Sessions
• Teachers’ Instructional practices
• Teachers show thorough understanding of formative assessment.
• Express positive attitude.
• Enhances assessment skills.
• Students academic achievements
• Increase in students’ academic performance.
• Students share their views each other.
• Improve their responses.
(Araceli Ruiz-Primo & Furtak 2006; Buck et al., 2010 Forbes, Sabel, & Biggers, 2015; Lyon, 2013).

14. Analysis: Issues in Assessment based PD
Sessions
• Teachers lack understanding in formative assessment.
• It is not common in classroom.
• It is not properly executed in the classroom .
• Students reluctance in showing their current level of understanding.
(Buck, Trauth-Nare, & Kaftan, 2010; Klieger & Bar-Yossef,2010; Sabel, Forbes, & Flynn, 2016 ).

15. Analysis: Issues in Assessment based PD
Sessions
• Gaps in Pre service trainings on assessment.
• Pre-service teachers lack with sound understanding of formative
assessment.
• They had difficulty evaluating evidence of students’ thinking due to
their weak content knowledge.
• Discrepancy between classroom assessment and summative exam.
(Buck & Trauth-Nare, 2009; Sabel, Forbes, & Zangori 2015 )

16. Analysis: Common Themes
• Role of PCK and content knowledge
• Teacher with strong PCK implement formative assessment
confidently
• Give effective feedback
• Teachers with higher levels content knowledge were able to more
effectively evaluate students’ ideas
• The teachers with higher scores on the content exam discussed both
content and student understanding of the concept to a greater
extent
(Falk, 2011; Jones and Moreland 2005 )

17. Analysis: Common Themes
• Role of Questioning and Feedback
• Teacher whose students had the highest performance on our tests
was the teacher who held the most discussions
• Generate discussion in the classroom.
• Feedback guides instructions.
• Help students in identify their strengths their weaknesses in their
learning.
(Gearhart et al,2006; Ruzi-Primo and Furtak 2006)

18. Conclusion
• It is used for the assessment for learning
• Provide scaffolding
• Focus students needs
• Science teachers capacity building through PD sessions
• Reflective practitioner

19. Discussion: Framework

20. Discussion:
Principles of Formative Assessment
• Improving SLOs through ongoing support and feedback
• Focus on how students rather on how teachers deliver
• Whole class approach vs individual approach
• Relevancy with classroom realities, students level of competency and
teachers background .
• (AAAS, 1990; Cowie & Bell, 1999; Falk, 2011; Greenstein, 2010; Lyon, 2013; Sheperdson, 2001;
Stiggins, 2002; Weeden & Lambert, 2006).

21. Discussion: Sustainability
• (Marris, 1975).
Initiation
Implementation
Institutionalization
Reflection

22. Implications: Practice
• District management
• Teacher training institutes
• School management
Capacity Building
• Mentoring
• Learning communities
School Based
Support
• External and internal appraisal
• Classroom observationFollow up

23. Implication: Research
Quasi
Experimental
Quantitative
Survey
Action
Research
To examine the impact of formative
assessment
To improve classroom assessment
practice
To explore perceptions and beliefs of
science teachers

24. Implications: Policy
Science teachers’ voice should be included in large scale
assessment reforms
School based assessment policy and teachers appraisal
Establishment of assessment cell
Formative assessment needs to be included in teacher education
curriculum

25. Limitations
• Generalizability.
• Majority of studies from the context of the USA
• Novice researcher.
• My experience and subjectivity.

26. Thank You Very
Much

28. References
• American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Project 2061: Science for all
Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Araceli Ruiz-Primo, M., & Furtak, E. M. (2006). Informal formative assessment and scientific inquiry:
Exploring teachers’ practices and student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(3), 237–263.
• Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten
years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007
• Black, P. (2011). Second international Handbook of Science Education (Springer international handbooks
of education). Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag New York.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy, and Practice, 5, 7–74.
• Bryce, N., Wilmes, S. E. D., & Bellino, M. (2016b). Inquiry identity and science teacher professional
development. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(2), 235–251. doi:10.1007/s11422-015-9725-1
• Buck, G. A., Trauth-Nare, A., & Kaftan, J. (2010). Making formative assessment discernable to pre-service
teachers of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 402–421. doi:10.1002/tea.20344
• Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in
Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 6(1), 101–116.
• Caulfield-Sloan, M. B., & Ruzicka, M. F. (2015). The effect of teachers’ staff development in the use of
higher-order questioning strategies on third grade students' rubric science assessment
performance. Planning and Changing, 36(3), 157–174.

29. References
• Falk, A. (2011). Teachers learning from professional development in elementary science: Reciprocal
relations between formative assessment and pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 96(2),
Forbes, C. T., Sabel, J. L., & Biggers, M. (2015). Elementary teachers’ use of formative assessment to
support students” learning about interactions between the Hydrosphere and Geosphere. Journal of
Geoscience Education, 63(3), 210–221. doi:10.5408/14-063.1
• Gearhart, M., Nagashima, S., P fotenhauer, J., Clark, S., Schwab, C., Vendlinski, T., … Bernbaum, D. J.
(2006). Developing expertise with classroom assessment in K–12 science: Learning to interpret student
work. Interim findings from a 2-Year study. Educational Assessment, 11(3-4), 237–263.
doi:10.1080/10627197.2006.9652990
• Gibbs, G. and Simpson, C. (2005) ‘Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’
Learning’, Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 12(1), pp. 135–188.
• Greenstein, L. (2010). What teachers really need to know about formative assessment. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
• Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2005). The importance of pedagogical content knowledge in assessment for
learning practices: a case-study of a whole-school approach. Curriculum Journal,16(2),
• Klieger, A., & Bar-Yossef, N. (2010). Professional Development of Science Teachers As A Reflection Of
Large-Scale Assessment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,9(4), 771-791.
• Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

30. References
• Lyon, E. G. (2013). Learning to assess science in linguistically diverse classrooms: Tracking growth in
secondary science Preservice teachers’ assessment expertise. Science Education, 97(3), 442–467.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
• Marris, P. (1975). Loss and Change. New York: Anchor/Doubleday.
• National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and national science education standards. Washington DC:
National Academy Press.
• National Research Council. (2007). Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: National
Academies Press.
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting
concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
• Shepardson, D. P. & Gummer, E.S. (2001). A Framework for Thinking About and Planning Classroom
Assessment in Science. In D. P. Shepardson (Ed.), Assessment in Science (Ist ed.) (pp. 83–92). U.S.A:
Kluwer Academic Publisher.
• Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Assessment Crisis: The Absence of Assessment for Learning. Phi Delta
Kappan,83(10), 758-765.
• Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching
practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980.