Keywords
learning outcomes
current assessment
formative assessment
assessment methods
teachers
How to Cite
Abstract
The article deals with the issues of the conceptual component of pedagogical assessment activity, namely, teachers’ perceptions of different types of work as a prerequisite for their use in assessing students’ learning achievements. Based on the results of an online survey of teachers (N=349) using the method of semantic differential, the author analyzed the models of semantic space formed by teachers of such concepts as testing, written tasks, discussion of tasks, problem tasks, observation of students’ work in class, creative work, student projects, self-assessment, student self-assessment, dictations, homework. The generalized affective attitude of teachers to the listed types of work and teachers’ perceptions of the functional potential and performance characteristics of each of them are characterized.
It has been determined that teachers consider projects, creative works, and problem tasks to be the most profound, effective, and informative types of work, but at the same time, they are challenging to apply and time-consuming; teachers consider self-assessment and mutual assessment to be subjective, unreliable, and uninformative, and self-assessment, testing, and dictations to be superficial types of work in terms of their informativeness about students’ academic achievements.
According to the results of the factor analysis, it was found that the most significant characteristics for most types of works are those that characterize the activity component (usability), namely, ease of use (resource efficiency) and speed of assessment. It has been determined that increasing the likelihood of using a particular type of work for assessment depends on the teacher’s awareness of the significance of its potential.
It is noted that the prerequisites for decision-making on the use of a particular type of work for assessing students’ learning achievements are not only the teacher’s perception of them but also the motivational guidance, which may be the subject of further study of the conceptual and activity characteristics of the evaluative pedagogical competence.
References
Ващенко, Л. (2021). Оцінювання навчальних досягнень у закладах загальної середньої освіти: погляд учасників освітнього процесу. Неперервна професійна освіта: теорія і практика, 2 (67), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.28925/1609–8595.2021.2.7
Жук, Ю., Гривко, А. & Ващенко, Л. (2021). Дослідження особистісного ставлення вчителів до поточного та підсумкового оцінювання як умови вибору стратегій контрольно-оцінювальної діяльності. Український педагогічний журнал, 4, 96–105. https://doi.org/10.32405/2411–1317–2021–4–96–105.
Про чисельність і склад педагогічних працівників закладів загальної середньої освіти Міністерства освіти і науки України, інших міністерств і відомств та приватних закладів (2023/2024 н. р.) (дані форми № 83-РВК “Звіт про чисельність і склад педагогічних працівників закладів загальної середньої освіти”) (2024): Інформаційний бюлетень. МОН України, ДНУ «Інститут освітньої аналітики», Відділ освітнього інформаційного забезпечення, Київ.
Barnes, N., Fives, H., and Dacey, C. M. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs about assessment. International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs. Ed. H. Fives, and M. G. Gill. New York: Routledge, 284–300.
Bray, A. et al. (2020). A Short Instrument for Measuring Students’ Confidence with ‘Key Skills’ (SICKS): Development, Validation and Initial Results.Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100700
Brown, G. T. L., Lake, R., and Matters, G. (2011). Queensland teachers’ conceptions of assessment: the impact of policy priorities on teacher attitudes. Teach. Teach. Educ., 27 (1), 210–220. https://doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.003
Buehl, M. M., & Beck, J. S. (2015). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs. Ed. H. Fives, & M. G. Gill. New York: Routledge, 65–84.
DeLuca, C., Valiquette, A., Coombs, A., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2018). Teachers’ approaches to classroom assessment: a large-scale
survey. Assess. Educ. Principl. Policy Pract., 25, 355–375. https://doi:10.1080/0969594X.2016.1244514
Deneen, C. C., Brown, G. T. L., & Ciuffetelli Parker, D. (2016). The impact of conceptions of assessment on assessment literacy in a teacher education program. Cogent Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1225380
Escolà-Gascón, Á., & Gallifa, J. (2022). How to measure soft skills in the educational context: Psychometric properties of the SKILLS‑in-ONE
questionnaire. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 74, 101155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101155
Friborg, O., Martinussen, M., Rosenvinge, J. H.: Likert-based vs. semantic differential-based scorings of positive psychological constructs: a psychometric comparison of two versions of a scale measuring resilience. Personal. Individ. Differ., 40(5), 873–884 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.08.015
Grob, U., Maag Merki, K. & Büeler, X. (2003). Young Adult Survey. Theoretische Begründung und empirische Befunde zur Validierung eines Indikatorensystems zu überfachlichen Kompetenzen. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, 25, 2, 309–330.
Hanson, J. M., & Florestano, M. (2020). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Critical Component for Effective Instruction. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2020, 164: Effective Instruction in College Classrooms: Research-Based Approaches to College and University Teaching, 49–56, https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20423
Herppich, S., et al. (2018). Teachers’ assessment competence: Integrating knowledge-, process-, and product-oriented approaches into a competence-oriented conceptual model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.001
Izci, K. (2016). Internal and External Factors Affecting Teachers’ Adoption of Formative Assessment to Support Learning. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 10(8), 2774–2781.
Karaagac, M. K., & Threlfall, J. (2004). The tension between teacher beliefs and teacher practice: the impact of the work setting. In Proceedings of the 28th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 137–144). Norway, July 14–18, 2004. http://emis.impa.br/EMIS/proceedings/PME 28/RR/RR 276_Karaagac.pdf
Lehmann, E. L., & D’Abrera, H. J. M. (1998). Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks (Rev. ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 292–323.
Monteiro, V., Mata, L., & Santos, N. N. (2021). Assessment Conceptions and Practices: Perspectives of Primary School Teachers and Students. Frontiers in Education, 6, 631185. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.631185
Osgood et al. (1957). The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press, Chicago.
Osgood, C.E. (1964). Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures. Am. Anthropol., 66, 171–200.
Siarova, H.; Sternadel, D.; Mašidlauskaitė, R. (2017). Assessment practices for 21st century learning: review of evidence. NESET II report, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2766/76518
Skiera, B., Reiner, J., & Albers, S. (2022). Regression Analysis. In: Homburg, C., Klarmann, M., Vomberg, A. (eds) Handbook of Market Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_17
Stoklasa, J., Talášek, T. & Stoklasová, J. (2019). Semantic differential for the twenty-first century: scale relevance and uncertainty entering the semantic space. Qual Quant, 53, 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0762-1
Takahashi, H., Ban, M., & Asada, M. (2016). Semantic Differential Scale Method Can Reveal Multi-Dimensional Aspects of Mind Perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01717
Van den Brink, W.P., & Koele, P. (2002). Statistiek, deel 3 [Statistics, part 3]. Amsterdam: Boom.
Siegel, S. & Castellan, N.J. (1989). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Urhahne, D. & Wijnia, L. (2021). A review on the accuracy of teacher judgments, Educational Research Review, 32, 100374, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100374
Xu, Y. & Brown, G.T.L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010
Barnes, N., Fives, H., and Dacey, C. M. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs about assessment. International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs. Ed. H. Fives, and M. G. Gill. New York: Routledge, 284–300. (in English).
Bray, A. et al. (2020). A Short Instrument for Measuring Students’ Confidence with ‘Key Skills’ (SICKS): Development, Validation and Initial Results.Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100700 (in English).
Brown, G. T. L., Lake, R., and Matters, G. (2011). Queensland teachers’ conceptions of assessment: the impact of policy priorities on teacher attitudes. Teach. Teach. Educ., 27 (1), 210–220. https://doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.003 (in English).
Buehl, M. M., & Beck, J. S. (2015). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs. Ed. H. Fives, & M. G. Gill. New York: Routledge, 65–84. (in English).
DeLuca, C., Valiquette, A., Coombs, A., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2018). Teachers’ approaches to classroom assessment: a large-scale
survey. Assess. Educ. Principl. Policy Pract., 25, 355–375. https://doi:10.1080/0969594X.2016.1244514 (in English).
Deneen, C. C., Brown, G. T. L., & Ciuffetelli Parker, D. (2016). The impact of conceptions of assessment on assessment literacy in a teacher education program. Cogent Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1225380 (in English).
Escolà-Gascón, Á., & Gallifa, J. (2022). How to measure soft skills in the educational context: Psychometric properties of the SKILLS‑in-ONE
questionnaire. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 74, 101155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101155 (in English).
Friborg, O., Martinussen, M., Rosenvinge, J. H.: Likert-based vs. semantic differential-based scorings of positive psychological constructs: a psychometric comparison of two versions of a scale measuring resilience. Personal. Individ. Differ., 40(5), 873–884 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.08.015 (in English).
Grob, U., Maag Merki, K. & Büeler, X. (2003). Young Adult Survey. Theoretische Begründung und empirische Befunde zur Validierung eines Indikatorensystems zu überfachlichen Kompetenzen. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, 25, 2, 309–330. (in English).
Hanson, J. M., & Florestano, M. (2020). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Critical Component for Effective Instruction. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2020, 164: Effective Instruction in College Classrooms: Research-Based Approaches to College and University Teaching, 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20423 (in English).
Herppich, S., et al. (2018). Teachers’ assessment competence: Integrating knowledge-, process-, and product-oriented approaches into a competence-oriented conceptual model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.001 (in English).
Izci, K. (2016). Internal and External Factors Affecting Teachers’ Adoption of Formative Assessment to Support Learning. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 10(8), 2774–2781. (in English).
Karaagac, M. K., & Threlfall, J. (2004). The tension between teacher beliefs and teacher practice: the impact of the
work setting. In Proceedings of the 28th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 137–144). Norway, July 14–18, 2004. http://emis.impa.br/EMIS/proceedings/PME 28/RR/RR 276_Karaagac.pdf (in English).
Lehmann, E. L., & D’Abrera, H. J. M. (1998). Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks (Rev. ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 292–323. (in English).
Monteiro, V., Mata, L., & Santos, N. N. (2021). Assessment Conceptions and Practices: Perspectives of Primary School Teachers and Students. Frontiers in Education, 6, 631185. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.631185 (in English).
Osgood et al. (1957). The measurement of meaning, University of Illinois Press, Chicago.
Osgood, C.E. (1964). Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures. Am. Anthropol., 66, 171–200. (in English).
Pro chyselnist i sklad pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv zakladiv zahalnoi serednoi osvity Ministerstva osvity i nauky Ukrainy, inshykh ministerstv i vidomstv ta pryvatnykh zakladiv (2023/2024 n. r.) (dani formy № 83-RVK “Zvit pro chyselnist i sklad pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv zakladiv zahalnoi serednoi osvity”) (2024):
Informatsiinyi biuleten. MON Ukrainy, DNU «Instytut osvitnoi analityky», Viddil osvitnoho informatsiinoho zabezpechennia, Kyiv. (in Ukrainian).
Siarova, H.; Sternadel, D.; Mašidlauskaitė, R. (2017). Assessment practices for 21st century learning: review of evidence. NESET II report, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2766/76518 (in English).
Siegel, S. & Castellan, N.J. (1989). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill. (in English).
Skiera, B., Reiner, J., & Albers, S. (2022). Regression Analysis. In: Homburg, C., Klarmann, M., Vomberg, A. (eds) Handbook of Market Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_17 (in English).
Stoklasa, J., Talášek, T. & Stoklasová, J. (2019). Semantic differential for the twenty-first century: scale relevance and uncertainty entering the semantic space. Qual Quant, 53, 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0762-1 (in English).
Takahashi, H., Ban, M., & Asada, M. (2016). Semantic Differential Scale Method Can Reveal Multi-Dimensional Aspects of Mind Perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01717 (in English).
Urhahne, D. & Wijnia, L. (2021). A review on the accuracy of teacher judgments, Educational Research Review, 32, 100374, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100374. (in English).
Van den Brink, W.P., & Koele, P. (2002). Statistiek, deel 3 [Statistics, part 3]. Amsterdam: Boom. (in English).
Vashchenko, L. (2021). Otsiniuvannia navchalnykh dosiahnen u zakladakh zahalnoi serednoi osvity: pohliad uchasnykiv osvitnoho protsesu. Neperervna profesiina osvita: teoriia i praktyka, 2 (67), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.28925/1609-8595.2021.2.7 (in Ukrainian).
Xu, Y. & Brown, G.T.L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010 (in English).
Zhuk, Yu., Hryvko, A. & Vashchenko, L. (2021). Doslidzhennia osobystisnoho stavlennia vchyteliv do potochnoho ta pidsumkovoho otsiniuvannia yak umovy vyboru stratehii kontrolno-otsiniuvalnoi diialnosti. Ukrainskyi pedahohichnyi zhurnal, 4, 96–105. https://doi.org/10.32405/2411-1317-2021-4-96-105 (in Ukrainian).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.