Larissa Aust, Jeanne-Celine Linker, Luise Eichholz, Jana Schiffer, Marcus Nührenbörger, Christoph Selter, Elmar Souvignier
{"title":"在学校实践中实施形成性评估:构建干预的问题?","authors":"Larissa Aust, Jeanne-Celine Linker, Luise Eichholz, Jana Schiffer, Marcus Nührenbörger, Christoph Selter, Elmar Souvignier","doi":"10.1177/00224871251350680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Only limited evidence exists on how to best make the effective yet broad concept of formative assessment (FA) accessible to teachers. Thus, this study investigated the effects of two differently structured FA approaches (curriculum-embedded assessment [CE] vs. planned-for-interaction assessment [PI]) on implementation outcomes over time. A total of <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 118 mathematics teachers participated in a six-session professional development program offered over one school year and implemented one of the two approaches in their classrooms. Implementation success was assessed via teachers’ self-reports. Hierarchical linear models for repeated measurement revealed higher ratings for CE for the initial phase of implementation. Over time, differences between the approaches decreased for feasibility and cooperation, but remained quite constant in terms of acceptability, fidelity and perceived learning outcome. The approaches did not significantly differ regarding sustainability. Thus, for implementing FA, it seems worthwhile to provide teachers with clear guidelines and an explicit structure.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"69 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing Formative Assessment Into School Practice: A Matter of Structuring the Intervention?\",\"authors\":\"Larissa Aust, Jeanne-Celine Linker, Luise Eichholz, Jana Schiffer, Marcus Nührenbörger, Christoph Selter, Elmar Souvignier\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00224871251350680\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Only limited evidence exists on how to best make the effective yet broad concept of formative assessment (FA) accessible to teachers. Thus, this study investigated the effects of two differently structured FA approaches (curriculum-embedded assessment [CE] vs. planned-for-interaction assessment [PI]) on implementation outcomes over time. A total of <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 118 mathematics teachers participated in a six-session professional development program offered over one school year and implemented one of the two approaches in their classrooms. Implementation success was assessed via teachers’ self-reports. Hierarchical linear models for repeated measurement revealed higher ratings for CE for the initial phase of implementation. Over time, differences between the approaches decreased for feasibility and cooperation, but remained quite constant in terms of acceptability, fidelity and perceived learning outcome. The approaches did not significantly differ regarding sustainability. Thus, for implementing FA, it seems worthwhile to provide teachers with clear guidelines and an explicit structure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Teacher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871251350680\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871251350680","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Implementing Formative Assessment Into School Practice: A Matter of Structuring the Intervention?
Only limited evidence exists on how to best make the effective yet broad concept of formative assessment (FA) accessible to teachers. Thus, this study investigated the effects of two differently structured FA approaches (curriculum-embedded assessment [CE] vs. planned-for-interaction assessment [PI]) on implementation outcomes over time. A total of N = 118 mathematics teachers participated in a six-session professional development program offered over one school year and implemented one of the two approaches in their classrooms. Implementation success was assessed via teachers’ self-reports. Hierarchical linear models for repeated measurement revealed higher ratings for CE for the initial phase of implementation. Over time, differences between the approaches decreased for feasibility and cooperation, but remained quite constant in terms of acceptability, fidelity and perceived learning outcome. The approaches did not significantly differ regarding sustainability. Thus, for implementing FA, it seems worthwhile to provide teachers with clear guidelines and an explicit structure.
期刊介绍:
The mission of the Journal of Teacher Education, the flagship journal of AACTE, is to serve as a research forum for a diverse group of scholars who are invested in the preparation and continued support of teachers and who can have a significant voice in discussions and decision-making around issues of teacher education. One of the fundamental goals of the journal is the use of evidence from rigorous investigation to identify and address the increasingly complex issues confronting teacher education at the national and global levels. These issues include but are not limited to preparing teachers to effectively address the needs of marginalized youth, their families and communities; program design and impact; selection, recruitment and retention of teachers from underrepresented groups; local and national policy; accountability; and routes to certification. JTE does not publish book reviews, program evaluations or articles solely describing programs, program components, courses or personal experiences. In addition, JTE does not accept manuscripts that are solely about the development or validation of an instrument unless the use of that instrument yields data providing new insights into issues of relevance to teacher education (MSU, February 2016).