Teacher Educators’ Assessment Approaches in Mathematics Method Courses for Prospective Primary Teachers

Year 2025, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 557 - 575, 30.08.2025

Bilge Yılmaz Aslan , Mehmet Fatih Özmantar , Bilge Kuşdemir Kayıran

Abstract

This study examines the assessment approaches employed by teacher educators (TEs) in mathematics method courses designed for prospective primary school teachers in Türkiye. Given the limited research on TEs’ assessment strategies, this study aims to address a significant gap in the literature by exploring how TEs conduct assessment in their courses. A comprehensive survey was administered to 90 TEs across 71 universities in Türkiye, with responses obtained from 65 TEs (72% response rate). The survey instrument was designed to capture the range of assessment methods and tools used by TEs. Frequency analysis revealed a strong preference for traditional assessment tools and formats, such as written exams, while performance-based assessments and project evaluations were moderately utilized. Additionally, a notable trend toward personalized assessment tools was observed, with many TEs developing their own instruments. The findings are discussed through three key perspectives: the authenticity of assessment, student involvement, and quality assurance. Results indicate that while traditional methods remain dominant, there is a need for more diversified and reflective assessment approaches that align with the complex realities of teaching. The study suggests that enhancing assessment practices could improve the preparation of future teachers by fostering deeper engagement with mathematical concepts and instructional strategies. These results contribute to the ongoing discussion on teacher education by emphasizing the need for assessment practices that balance standardization with adaptability. The study highlights implications for both policy and practice, advocating for a more comprehensive assessment framework in teacher education programs.

Keywords

Assessment , teacher educators , mathematics method courses , prospective teachers , teacher education

References

• Aydın, M., Baki, A., Köğce, D., & Yıldız, C. (2009). Mathematics teacher educators’ beliefs about assessment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 2126-2130. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.372
• Başol, G., Çakan, M., Kan, A., Özbek, Ö. Y., Özdmir, D., & Yaşar, M. (2013). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Birgin, O., & Gürbüz, R. (2008). Examining the level of knowledge of prospective primary school teachers about measurement and evaluation. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (20), 163-179.
• Bosica, J., Pyper, J. S., & MacGregor, S. (2021). Incorporating problem-based learning in a secondary school mathematics preservice teacher education course. Teaching and Teacher Education, 102, 103335. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103335
• Brookhart,S. M., & Chen, F. (2015). The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Research Review, 67(3), 343-368. doi:10.1080/00131911.2014.929565
• Bruna, C. R. (2025). Enhancing Primary Teacher Training through Academic Portfolios in Advanced Mathematics Courses. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.06159. doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.06159
• Bunderson, C. V., Inouye, D. K., & Olsen, J. B. (1988). The four generations of computerized educational measurement. ETS Research Report Series, 1988(1), i-148. doi:10.1002/j.2330-8516.1988.tb00291.x
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö. E., Demirel, F., Karadeniz, Ş., & Çakmak, E. K. (2015). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Camarata, T., & Slieman, T. A. (2020). Improving student feedback quality: A simple model using peer review and feedback rubrics. Journal of medical education and curricular development, 7, 2382120520936604. doi:10.1177/2382120520936604
• Dahlback, J., Olstad, H. B., Sylte, A. L., & Wolden, A. C. (2020). The importance of authentic workplace-based assessment: A study from VET teacher education. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training (IJRVET), 7(3), 302-324. doi:10.25656/01:21232
• Deborah, L. J., Baskaran, R., & Kannan, A. (2010). A survey on internal validity measure for cluster validation. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey, 1(2), 85-102. doi:10.5121/ijcses.2010.1207
• Demir, M. (2015). Comparative investigation of alternative assessment methods used in Türkiye and United States elementary 4th grade mathematics curriculum. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). İnönü University, Malatya.
• Dickinson, P., & Adams, J. (2017). Values in evaluation–The use of rubrics. Evaluation and program planning, 65(2017), 113-116. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.07.005
• Farahian, M., & Avarzamani, F. (2018). The impact of portfolio on EFL learners’ metacognition and writing performance. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1450918. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2018.1450918
• Galang, A. D., Conde, R. L., & Sudarsana, I. K. (2021). Mga kwento ng guro at kwentong mag-aaral: student assessment processes, challenges and solutions In the New Normal Setup Leading To Quality Assurance Inputs. Jurnal Penjaminan Mutu, 7(2), 171-187. doi:10.25078/jpm.v7i2.2351
• Gulikers, J. T., Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2008). The effect of practical experience on perceptions of assessment authenticity, study approach, and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 172-186. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.012
• He, S., & Qi, C. (2022). The perceived impact of PBL program learning on shifting prospective teachers’ beliefs: A case study in China. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(12), em2195. doi:10.29333/ejmste/12693
• Hill, H., Umland, K., Litke, E. & Kapitula, L. (2012). Teacher Quality and Quality Teaching: Examining the Relationship of a Teacher Assessment to Practice. American Journal of Education, 118(4), 489-519. doi:10.1086/666380
• Karakuş, F., & Kösa, T. (2009). Primary Teachers’ Views Concerning the Assessment Methods Used by Them. Milli Eğitim, 38(181), 184-197.
• Kastberg, G., & Siverbo, S. (2013). The design and use of management accounting systems in process oriented health care–an explorative study. Financial Accountability & Management, 29(3), 246-270. doi:10.1111/faam.12014
• Karasar, N. (2009). Scientific research method: Concepts, principles, techniques. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
• Kilimci, S. (2006). The comparison of initial teacher training programmes of germany, france, england and Türkiye (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Çukurova Üniversitesi, Adana.
• Lorente, E., & Kirk, D. (2013). Alternative democratic assessment in PETE: an action-research study exploring risks, challenges and solutions. Sport, Education and Society, 18(1), 77-96. doi:10.1080/13573322.2012.713859
• Maher, N., & Muir, T. (2013). " I Know You Have to Put Down a Zero, but I'm Not Sure Why": Exploring the Link between Pre-Service Teachers' Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 15(1), 72-87.
• Muhammad, A., Lebar, O., & Mokshein, S. E. (2018). Rubrics as assessment, evaluation and scoring tools. International journal of academic research in business and social sciences, 8(10), 1417-1431. doi:10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i10/5309
• Murphy, L., Wilson, J., & Greenberg, S. (2017). Equine-assisted experiential learning in occupational therapy education. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(4), 366-376 doi:10.1177/1053825917712732
• Raji, M. O. (2023). Conceptions and Practices of Assessment: Case Studies of Nigerian Teacher Educators. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Ottawa.
• Rawlusyk, P. E. (2018). Assessment in higher education and student learning. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 21
• Sabancı, O., & Yazıcı, K. (2017). Examining Pre-service Teachers’ Efficacy Perceptions towards Measurement and Evaluation. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1) 128-153.
• Santagata, R., & Lee, J. (2021). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: a study of novice elementary school teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 24, 33-60. doi:10.1007/s10857-019-09447-y
• Schellekens, L. H., Kremer, W. D., Van der Schaaf, M. F., Van der Vleuten, C. P., & Bok, H. G. (2023, June). Between theory and practice: educators’ perceptions on assessment quality criteria and its impact on student learning. In Frontiers in Education. 8(2023), 1-9. doi:10.3389/feduc.2023.1147213
• Sewagegn, A. A. (2019). A Study on the Assessment Methods and Experiences of Teachers at an Ethiopian University. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 605-622. doi:10.29333/iji.2019.12238a
• Simpson, A. (2016). Designing pedagogic strategies for dialogic learning in higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(2), 135-151. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2015.1038580
• Şahin, Ç., & Öztürk, Y. A. (2014). Opinions of prospective teachers on alternative assessment-evaluation methods. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 22(1), 123-142.
• Şaşmaz Ören, F., & Meriç, G. (2014). Seventh Grade Students' Perceptions of Using Concept Cartoons in Science and Technology Course. Online Submission, 2(2), 116-136. doi:10.18404/ijemst.86308
• Tigelaar, D. E. H., & van Tartwijk, J. (2010). The Evaluation of Prospective Teachers in Teacher Education. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed., pp. 511-517). doi:10.4236/ce.2015.610093
• Tong, F. (2022). Psychological and pedagogical effects on engagement and achievement: implications for literacy and maths learning. Educational Psychology 42, 931 - 933. doi:10.1080/01443410.2022.2140275
• Twohill, A., NicMhuirí, S., Harbison, L., & Karakolidis, A. (2023). Primary preservice teachers’ mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs: The role played by mathematics attainment, educational level, preparedness to teach, and gender. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(2), 601-622. doi:10.1007/s10763-022-10259-5
• Vesga-Bravo, G. J., Angel-Cuervo, Z. M., & Chacón-Guerrero, G. A. (2022). Beliefs about mathematics, its teaching, and learning: Contrast between pre-service and in-service teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(4), 769-791. doi:10.1007/s10763-021-10164-3
• Yeşilyurt, E., & Yaraş, Z. (2011). Assessment of classroom teacher candidates’ perception of knowledge level about measurement and evaluation methods. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 12(4), 95-118.
• Yenice, N., Özden, B., & Tunç, G. A. (2017). The Investigation of Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Using Alternative Assessment and Evaluation Approaches. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 367-397.
• Yıldız, İ., & Uyanık, N. (2004). Matematik eğitiminde ölçme-değerlendirme üzerine [On measurement and evaluation in mathematics education]. Gazi Üniversitesi Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi.12(1) 97-104.