Promoting Student Ownership of Learning Through High-Impact Formative Assessment Practices

The most important instructional decisions, those with the greatest influence on student success, are made by learners themselves (Stiggins, 2008). Formative assessment, done well, contributes to student ownership of learning more than any other classroom-based instructional or assessment practice (Bloom, 1984). It is an economical, highly effective, and uniquely flexible method that can improve learning (Leahy, Lyon, Thompson, & Wiliam, 2005). Simply put, the teacher’s purpose in formative assessment is to give students the means, motive, and opportunity to take control of their own learning. And, through their involvement in formative assessment, students develop self-efficacy for specific learning and, more generally, they develop skills that contribute to increased self-regulation and self-assessment of learning. In order for students to be meaningfully involved in formative assessment, they must be guided by teachers who hold the beliefs, knowledge and skills that engender active student engagement in the learning process. This paper highlights interim findings from a five-year professional development initiative involving the Armstrong School District, a large, rural school district in Western Pennsylvania, and the Center for Advancing the Study of Teaching and Learning at the Duquesne University School of Education. The initiative rests on the fusion of formative assessment, teacher-student communication, and student ownership of learning. The professional development program employs online modules, peer study groups, classroom walkthroughs, and teacher inquiry into their classroom practices and the beliefs that drive them. The program explores seven formative assessment components: 1) Identifying and Clearly Communicating Learning Targets, .) Feedback that Feeds Forward, 3) Student Goal-Setting, 4) Student Self-Assessment, 6) Strategic Questioning, and 7) Formative Discourse. All components are linked to specific aspects of student motivation: intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, self-regulation, goal-setting, and student attributions. The paper describes the impacts of formative assessment on student ownership of learning, student achievement, motivation, and active engagement as well as provides insights into teachers’ experiences with student involvement. Findings show that not only have the teachers come to value and promote student ownership of learning using high impact formative assessment strategies, but that their efforts have resulted in high student engagement in learning and increased student achievement.

[1]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Authentic Intellectual Work and Standardized Tests: Conflict or Coexistence? Improving Chicago's Schools. , 2001 .

[2]  Connie M. Moss.  Professional Learning on the Cyber Sea: What Is the Point of Contact? , 2000, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[3]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Handbook On Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning , 1971 .

[4]  K. Ludmerer.  Creating the System , 2005 .

[5]  Dominique van de Walle,et al.  Impact Evaluation , 2008 .

[6]  P. Black,et al.  Teachers developing assessment for learning: impact on student achievement , 2004 .

[7]  Richard J. Stiggins,et al.  Student-Involved Assessment FOR Learning , 2004 .

[8]  Gary Natriello.  The Impact of Evaluation Processes on Students , 1987 .

[9]  A. Kluger,et al.  The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. , 1996 .

[10]  P. Black,et al.  Assessment and Classroom Learning , 1998 .

[11]  J. Pryor,et al.  Developing Formative Assessment in the Classroom: Using action research to explore and modify theory , 2001 .

[12]  D. Sadler.  Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems , 1989 .

[13]  Michael C. Rodriguez.  The Role of Classroom Assessment in Student Performance on TIMSS , 2004 .

[14]  Dylan Wiliam,et al.  Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by Day In classrooms that use assessment to support learning, teachers continually adapt instruction to meet student needs. , 2005 .

[15]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  The Instructional Effect of Feedback in Test-Like Events , 1991 .

[16]  B. Bloom.  The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring , 1984 .

[17]  Carole A. Ames,et al.  Achievement Goals in the Classroom: Students' Learning Strategies and Motivation Processes , 1988 .

[18]  A. Bailey,et al.  Who Is at Risk and Why? Teachers' Reasons for Concern and Their Understanding and Assessment of Early Literacy , 2006 .

[19]  Richard J. Stiggins,et al.  Classroom assessment for student learning : doing it right -- using it well , 2006 .

[20]  Jay Paredes.  Professional Learning: What , 1998 .

[21]  P. Tunstall,et al.  Teacher Feedback to Young Children in Formative Assessment: a typology , 1996 .

[22]  P. Winne,et al.  Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical Synthesis , 1995 .

[23]  D. Sadler.  Evaluation and the Improvement of Academic Learning , 1983 .

[24]  M. Scriven.  The methodology of evaluation , 1966 .

[25]  Larry Ambrose,et al.  The power of feedback. , 2002, Healthcare executive.

[26]  Samuel D. Miller,et al.  Changes in Elementary School Children's Achievement Goals for Reading and Writing: Results of a Longitudinal and an Intervention Study , 1999 .

[27]  T. Crooks.  The Impact of Classroom Evaluation Practices on Students , 1988 .

[28]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments , 2003 .

[29]  Donna DiPrima Bickel,et al.  Creating a System of Accountability: The Impact of Instructional Assessment on Elementary Children's Achievement Test Scores. , 2003 .