Designing, developing and validating the K-12 teachers’ Formative Assessment Literacy Inventory (FALI) in mainland China

Abstract

Chinese teachers’ formative assessment literacy remains limited within Confucian, high-stakes examination systems. This study reports the development and validation of the Formative Assessment Literacy Inventory (FALI) for K-12 teachers in mainland China. In the pilot study (N = 96), expert panel review and Rasch analysis were conducted to refine item quality, resulting in satisfactory model fit (Infit MNSQ = 0.99; Outfit MNSQ = 1.22). After removing misfitting items, in the main study (N = 309), two rounds of Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported a Conceptual-Practical-Socio-emotional three-dimensional structure, with adequate model fit and satisfactory reliability (CFI = .908; TLI = .881; RMSEA = .067; SRMR = .090). The results indicated that teachers’ formative assessment literacy remained marginally above the 60% passing threshold, suggesting that the socio-emotional dimension may play a potential bridging role between the conceptual and practical dimensions. Overall, the validated FALI offers a reliable and culturally grounded inventory for diagnosing and enhancing teachers’ formative assessment literacy in Confucian K-12 educational contexts.

Keywords

• Formative assessment literacy
• Inventory validation
• K-12 teacher professional development
• Confucian context

Ethical Statement

University of Calgary Ethics Committee, REB24-053.

References

1. American Federation of Teachers, National Council on Measurement in Education, & National Education Association. (1990). Standards for teacher competence in educational assessment of students. Buros Center for Testing.
2. Andrade, H.L., & Heritage, M. (2018). Using formative assessment to enhance learning, achievement, and academic self-regulation. Routledge.
3. Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. Sage.
4. Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 principles research-based principles to guide classroom practice. Assessment Reform Group.
5. Bennett, R.E., (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678
6. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
7. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
8. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 8-21.

9. Bond, T.G., Yan, Z., & Heene, M. (2020). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (4th ed.). Routledge.
10. Brookhart, S.M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 30(1), 3-12.
11. Brown, T.A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
12. Campbell, C., & Mertler, C.A. (2004). Assessment Literacy Inventory. https://learn.maricopa.edu/courses/811364/quizzes/1226231
13. Chanpet, P., Chomsuwan, K., & Murphy, E. (2020). Online project-based learning and formative assessment. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(3), 685-705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9363-2
14. Coombs, A., & DeLuca, C. (2022). Mapping the constellation of assessment discourses: A scoping review study on assessment competence, literacy, capability, and identity. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 34(3), 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09389-9
15. DeLuca, C., & Bellara, A. (2013). The current state of assessment education: Aligning policy, standards, and teacher education curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 356-372.
16. DeLuca, C., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy: A review of international standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(3), 251-272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6
17. DeLuca, C., Rickey, N., & Coombs, A. (2021). Exploring assessment across cultures: Teachers’ approaches to assessment in the U.S., China, and Canada. Cogent Education, 8(1). Article 1921903. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1921903
18. DeLuca, C., Schneider, C., Coombs, A., Pozas, M., & Rasooli, A. (2020). A cross-cultural comparison of German and Canadian student teachers’ assessment competence. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(1), 26-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1703171
19. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39 50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
20. Fu, R. (2024). Exploring K-12 teachers’ assessment literacy and self-efficacy in China. Canadian Journal for New Scholars in Education, 15(2). 24-32.
21. Fu, R., & Koh, K. (2026). Developing and validating teacher formative assessment literacy questionnaire in the high-stakes examination culture: A case of China. Frontiers in Psychology. 17, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1771941
22. Gentrup, S., Lorenz, G., Kristen, C., & Kogan, I. (2020). Self-fulfilling prophecies in the classroom: Teacher expectations, teacher feedback and student achievement. Learning and Instruction, 66, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101296
23. Gotch, C.M., & French, B.F. (2014). A systematic review of assessment literacy measures. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(2), 14-18.
24. Graham, L.J., White, S.L.J., Cologon, K., & Pianta, R.C. (2020). Do teachers’ years of experience make a difference in the quality of teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 96, Article 103190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103190
25. Guo, Q., & Xu, Y. (2021). Formative assessment use in university EFL writing instruction: A survey report from China. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(2), 221 237. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1798737
26. Hair, J.F., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Black, W.C. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Pearson Prentice.
27. Klenowski, V. (2009). Assessment for learning revisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 16(3), 263-268.
28. Kline, R.B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
29. Koh, K. (2019). Developing teachers’ assessment literacy. In S.R. Steinberg (Ed.), Developing teachers’ assessment literacy: A tapestry of ideas and inquires (pp.75-86). Brill Sense.
30. Lam, R. (2013). Formative use of summative tests: Using test preparation to promote performance and self-regulation. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22, 69-78.
31. Leong, W.S., Ismail, H., Costa, J.S., & Tan, H.B. (2018). Assessment for learning research in East Asian countries. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 59, 270 277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.09.005
32. Linacre, M. (2024). Winsteps (Version 5.8.3) [Computer software]. Software for Rasch Measurement and Rasch Analysis. https://www.winsteps.com/index.htm
33. McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Muthén, L., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., & Nguyen, T. (2018). Mplus (Version 8.0) [Computer software]. Muthen & Muthen. https://www.statmodel.com/demo.shtml
35. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
36. Paramore, K. (2015). “Civil religion” and Confucianism: Japan’s past, China’s present, and the current boom in scholarship on Confucianism. The Journal of Asian Studies, 74(2), 269 282. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911814002265
37. Pastore, S., & Andrade, H.L. (2019). Teacher assessment literacy: A three-dimensional model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 84, 128-138. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.003
38. Popham, W.J. (2008). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 4–11.
39. Ratnam-Lim, C.T.L., & Tan, K.H.K. (2015). Large-scale implementation of formative assessment practices in an examination-oriented culture. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(1), 61-78.
40. Saito, H., & Inoi, S. (2017). Junior and senior high school EFL teachers’ use of formative assessment: A mixed methods study. Language Assessment Quarterly, 14(3), 213 233. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1351975
41. Stiggins, R.J. (1999). Evaluating classroom assessment training in teacher education programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(1), 23-27.
42. Stiggins, R.J. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758-765.
43. Tan, C. (2018). Comparing high-performing education systems understanding Singapore, Shanghai, and Hong Kong. Routledge.
44. Tan, C. (2020). Beyond high-stakes exam: A neo-Confucian educational programme and its contemporary implications. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52(2), 137 148. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1605901
45. Tinoca, L., & Oliveira, I. (2013). Formative assessment of teachers in the context of an online learning environment. Teachers and Teaching, 19(2), 214 227. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.741836
46. Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2008). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53–82). Erlbaum.
47. Wright, B.D., & Linacre, J.M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 370-371.
48. Xiao, Y., Cai, Y., Ge, Q., & Yang, Y. (2023). The potential of using formative assessment to enhance academic achievement in the Confucian-Heritage Culture: A comparison between Hong Kong and Shanghai. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 32(6), 867-876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00702-0
49. 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
50. Yan, Z., & Brown, G.T.L. (2021). Assessment for learning in the Hong Kong assessment reform: A case of policy borrowing. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, Article 100985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. stueduc.2021.100985
51. Yan, Z., & Pastore, S. (2022a). Assessing teachers’ strategies in formative assessment: The Teacher Formative Assessment Practice Scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 40(5), 592-604. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829221075121
52. Yan, Z., & Pastore, S. (2022b). Are teachers literate in formative assessment? The development and validation of the Teacher Formative Assessment Literacy Scale. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 74, Article 101183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101183
53. Yan, Z., King, R.B., & Haw, J.Y. (2021). Formative assessment, growth mindset, and achievement: Examining their relations in the East and the West. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 28(5-6), 676-702. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1988510
54. Yin, X., & Buck, G.A. (2015). There is another choice: An exploration of integrating formative assessment in a Chinese high school chemistry classroom through collaborative action research. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(3), 719-752.
55. Zhang, Z., & Crawford, J. (2024). EFL learners’ motivation in a gamified formative assessment: The case of Quizizz. Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 6217-6239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12034-7
56. Zhu, M., Liu, O.L., & Lee, H.S. (2020). The effect of automated feedback on revision behavior and learning gains in formative assessment of scientific argument writing. Computers and Education, 143, Article 103668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103668