Investigating Teacher Candidates’ Use of Formative Assessment: Action Research Model

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 25 Sayı: 6, 2385 - 2400, 15.11.2017

Pınar Karaman Ayhan Karaman

Öz

The purpose of this action research study was to identify the views of teacher candidates

about the contribution of practicing formative assessment activities in an authentic learning

environment to their pedagogical improvement. In this study, 12 senior preschool teacher

candidates performed a variety of formative assessment activities as a part of their teaching

practicum in a kindergarten. The data reflecting the specific experiences of the teacher

candidates in the process of conducting formative assesment activities in a half-semester

term were collected from the field notes prepared by the teacher candidates and the responses

given by the teacher candidates to open-ended questions posed by the researcher. The data

obtained from the teacher candidates were analyzed using a content analysis approach. The

findings of the study revealed that the formative assessment practices of the teacher candidates

generally supported their pedagogical development at a basic level. The time limitations

and incompetency of teacher candidates in performing appropriate assessment strategies

for preschool-age children were identified by teacher candidates as the potential challenges

encountered during the formative assessment practices.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Formative assessment, preschool teacher candidates, action research

Öğretmen Adaylarının Biçimlendirici Değerlendirme Uygulamalarının İncelenmesi: Eylem Araştırması Modeli

Öz

Eylem araştırması metodolojisi kullanılarak gerçekleştirilen bu araştırma, öğretmen

adaylarının gerçek öğrenme ortamında yaptıkları biçimlendirici değerlendirme uygulamalarının,

pedagojik gelişimlerine katkısı hakkındaki düşüncelerini belirlemeyi amaçlamıştır. Dördüncü

sınıfa devam eden 12 okul öncesi öğretmen adayıyla gerçekleştirilen bu çalışmada, öğretmen

adayları bir anaokulunda gerçekleştirdikleri öğretim faaliyetleri esnasında biçimlendirici

değerlendirmeye yönelik çeşitli uygulamalar yapmışlardır. Öğretmen adaylarının biçimlendirici

değerlendirmeye yönelik bir dönem boyunca yaşadıkları tecrübeleriyle ilgili veriler, öğretmen

adaylarının sahada tuttukları notlar ve araştırmacı tarafından yöneltilen açık uçlu sorulara

verdikleri cevaplar aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Verilerin çözümlemesinde içerik analizi yöntemi

kullanılmıştır. Öğretmen adaylarının yaptıkları biçimlendirici değerlendirme uygulamalarının,

pedagojik gelişimlerine temel düzeyde yardımcı olduğu söylenebilir. Zaman kısıtlamaları

ve okul öncesi yaş grubuna uygun değerlendirme yapmanın zorlukları, öğretmen adayları

tarafından potansiyel sorunlar olarak ifade edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Biçimlendirici değerlendirme, okul öncesi öğretmen adayları, eylem araştırması

Kaynakça

• Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment. A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practices, 18(1), 5–25.
• Bennett, K.R., & Cunningham, A.C. (2009). Teaching Formative Assessment Strategies to Preservice Teachers. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25:3, 99-105.
• Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: putting it into practice. Maidenhead, Open University Press.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, Principles, Policy and Practice, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 7–73.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Changing teaching through formative assessment: research and practice. The King’s-Medway-Oxfordshire formative assessment project. In Formative assessment improving learning in secondary classrooms (pp. 223–40). Paris: OECD.
• Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (2006). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods. Allyn & Bacon.
• Bowman, B., Donovan, S. & Burns, S. (Eds.) (2001). Eager to learn: Educating our pre-schoolers. Report of Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education National Research Council. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
• Bredekamp, S., & Rosegrant, T. (Eds.). (1992). Reaching potentials: Appropriate curriculum and assessment for young children (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
• Brown, L. (1988). Group self-evaluation: learning for improvement. School Improvement Plan. Secretariat, Education Department of Victoria Canada.
• Buck, G. A., Trauth-Nare, A., & Kaftan, J. (2010). Making formative assessment discernable to preservice teachers of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 402–21.
• Buldu, M. (2010). Making learning visible in kindergarten classrooms: Pedagogical documentation as a formative assessment technique. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1439-1449.
• Carmona, G., Stroup, W., & Davis, S. (2006). Introducing preservice teachers to formative assessment: Improving assessment design and accountability in school mathematics through a network-based learning environment. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group of the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Universidad Pedagogica Nacional, Meridia, Mexico.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). London, UK: Routledge Falmer.
• Confrey, J., & Makar, K. (2005). Critiquing and improving data use from high stakes tests: Understanding variation and distribution in relation to equity using dynamic statistics software. In C.
• Dede, J. P. Honan, & l. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technologybased educational improvement (pp. 198-226). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Falk, B. (1995). Authentic assessment in action: Studies of schools and students at work. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–51.
• de Zeeuw, G. (2003). Helping others: Projects or research? Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology. 13, 496–503.
• Epstein, A.S., Schweinhart, L.J., De-Bruin-Parecki, A., & Robin, K.B. (2004). Preschool Assessment: A Guide To Developing A Balanced Approach. Preschool Matters, 7, 1-12, Natioanal Institute for Early Education Research.
• Gotwals, A. W., & Birmingham, D. (2016). Eliciting, Identifying, Interpreting, and Responding to Students’ Ideas: Teacher Candidates’ Growth in Formative Assessment Practices. Res Sci Educ, 46,365–388.
• Guddemi, M., & Case, B. J. (2004). Assessing young children. Assessment report, PearsonEducation. Heritage, M., Kim, J., Vendlinski, T., & Herman, J. (2009). From evidence to action: A seamless process in formative assessment? Educational Measurement: Issues Practice, 28, 24–31.
• Johnson, A. P. (2002). A short guide to action research. Boston, London, Toronto: Allyn & Bacon.
• Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
• Kohler, F., Henning, J. E., & Usma-Wilches, J. (2008). Preparing preservice teachers to make instructional decisions: An examination of data from the teacher work sample. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 2108–2117.
• Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation. Science Education, 91, 822–39.
• Maclellan, E. (2004). Initial knowledge states about assessment: Novice teachers’ conceptualizations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 523–535.
• Mandinach, E. B., Honey, M., & Light, D. (2006, April). A theoretical framework for data-driven decision making. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
• MEB. (2006). Okul Öncesi Eğitim Programı, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
• MEB (2013). Okulöncesi Eğitim Programı, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
• Miller, D., & Lavin, F. (2007). “But now I want to give it a try”: Formative assessment, self-esteem and a sense of competence. The Curriculum Journal. 18(1), 3-25.
• Mills, G. (2006). Action research. A guide for the teacher researcher. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall
• National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1987). Standardized testing of young children 3 through 8 years of age. (Position statement). Washington, DC: NAEYC.
• National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2005). Screening and assessment of young English-language learners. Supplement to the NAEYC and NAECS/SDE joint position statement on early childhood curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation. Washington, DC: Author.
• National Council of teachers of English (NCTE) (2013). Formative assessment that truly informs instruction. A statement on an educational issue approved by the NCTE Board of Directors of the NCTE Executive Committie. Urbana, IL.
• Nilsson, P. (2013). What do we know and where do we go? Formative assessment in developing student teachers’ professional learning of teaching science, Teachers and Teaching, 19:2, 188-201
• Nuthall, G. (2007). The Hidden Lives of Learners. Wellington, NZ: NZCER Press.
• Otero, V. K., & Nathan, M. J. (2008). Preservice elementary teachers’ views of their students’ prior knowledge of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 497–523.
• Özlen-Demircan, H., Olgan, R. (2011). Assessment in early childhood education: Commonly used curriculum models and Turkish curriculum, TOJNED : The Online Journal Of New Horizons In Education, 1(3), 16-22.
• Price, J. N. (2001). Action research, pedagogy and change: The transformative potential of action research in pre-service teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(1), 43-7 4.
• Sapsağlam, Ö. (2013). Değerlendirme boyutuyla okul öncesi eğitim programları (1952-2013). Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), 63-73.
• Stiggins, R. (2009). Essential formative assessment competencies for teachers and school leaders. In H. L. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 233–50). New York: Routledge.
• Tillema, H.H. (2009). Student teachers assessment for learning to teach: Appraisal of practice teaching lessons by mentors supervisors, and student teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 155–167.
• Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing Formative Assessment in the Classroom: using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 27 (5), 615-631.
• Tripp, D. (1990). Socially critical action research. Theory in Practice, 29(3), 158-166.
• Volante, L., & Beckett, D. (2011). Formative assessment and the contemporary classroom: Synergies and tensions between research and practice. Canadian Journal of Education, 34, 239–255.
• Wininger, S., & Norman, A. (2005). Teacher candidates’ exposure to formative assessment in educational psychology textbooks: A content analysis. Educational Assessment, 10, 19-37.
• Yılmaz-Topuz, G., Erbil-Kaya, Ö.M. (2016). Okulöncesi eğitim öğretmenlerinin çocukları tanıma ve değerlendirme amaçlı yapılan çalışmalara ilişkin görüşleri. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 6(1), 27-62.