RESEARCH PAPER
The Impact of Assessment for Learning on Learner Performance in Life Science
 
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Faculty of Education, University of Zululand, SOUTH AFRICA
Online publish date: 2019-05-27
Publish date: 2019-05-27
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2019;15(11):em1775
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the impact of ‘assessment for learning’ on learner performance in Life Science. Simple random sampling was used to select four schools from the King Cetshwayo District of KwaZulu Natal Province, South Africa, to participate in the study. A quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest comparison group design was used, involving four schools - two forming the ‘treatment condition’ while the other two served as the ‘comparison group’. Altogether, 160 grade eleven learners participated in the study. Two teachers were trained to use assessment for learning (AfL) as an instructional approach, while the two teachers of the comparison group used their usual instructional approaches. Data were analysed using SPSS (V23) and the statistical technique used was the 2-factor ANOVA with repeated measures. The result revealed that learners following an AfL instructional approach performed statistically higher that those following normal classroom instruction. This result is discussed, and recommendations made in respect of both classroom practice and further research. The findings of this study had implications for policy, further research as well as instructional and assessment approaches to be used in the teaching of Life Science in the South African education system.
 
REFERENCES (25)
1.
Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles. Policy and Practice, 18(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/096959....
 
2.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/096959....
 
3.
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....
 
4.
Chappuis, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 40–44.
 
5.
Condie, R., Livingston, K., & Seagraves, L. (2005). Evaluation of the assessment for learning programme: Final report. Glasgow: Quality in Education Center, University of Strathclyde.
 
6.
DfES (Department for Education) (2007). Assessment for learning: Eight schools project report. London: DfES Publications.
 
7.
Duckett, I. (2005). Foreword. In Jones, C.A. Assessment for Learning. Vocational Learning Support Programme: 16–19, London, Learning and Skills Development Agency.
 
8.
Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 14(7), 1–11.
 
9.
Earl, L. M. (2014). Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning (2nd ed.), Cheltenham (Australia), Hawker Brownlow Education.
 
10.
Hayward, L., & Spencer, E. (2010). The complexities of change: Formative assessment in Scotland. Curriculum Journal, 21(2), 161-177. https://doi.org/10.1080/095851....
 
11.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty‐first century. Science education, 88(1), 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10....
 
12.
Kanjee, A., & Moloi, Q. (2014). South African teachers’ use of national assessment data. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 4(2), 90–113. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.....
 
13.
Kellard, K., Costello, M., Godfrey, D., Griffiths, E., & Rees, C. (2008). Evaluation of the developing thinking and assessment for learning development programme. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.
 
14.
Kirton, A., Hallam, S., Peffers, J. Robertson, P., & Stobart, G. (2007) Revolution, evolution or a Trojan horse? Piloting assessment for learning in some Scottish primary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 605-627. https://doi.org/10.1080/014119....
 
15.
Mehmood, T., Hussain, T., Khalid, M., & Azam, R. (2012). Impact of Formative Assessment on Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(17), 101–104.
 
16.
Neuman, W. L (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sixth Edition, University of Wisconsin, Whitewater.
 
17.
OFSTED. (2008). Assessment for learning: The impact of National Strategy support. London: Office for Standards in Education.
 
18.
Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318....
 
19.
Stiggins, R. (2005a). Assessment for learning defined. Retrieved on April 2, 2015 from http://ati.pearson.com/downloa....
 
20.
Stiggins, R. (2005b). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324-328. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172....
 
21.
Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M., Schuwirth, L. W. T., Driessen, E. W., Govaerts, M. J. B., & Heeneman, S. (2015). Twelve Tips for programmatic assessment. Medical Teacher, 37(7), 641-646. https://doi.org/10.3109/014215....
 
22.
Van Staden, S., & Motsamai, P. (2017). Differences in the quality of school-based assessment: Evidence in Grade 9 mathematics achievement. Pythagoras, 38(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythag....
 
23.
Webb, M., & Jones, J. (2009). Exploring tensions in developing assessment for learning: Assessment in Education, 16(2), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/096959....
 
24.
Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M (2007). Integrating assessment with learning: What will it take to make it work? In Carol A. Dwyer (Ed), The future of assessment (pp.53-82). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/978131....
 
25.
Willis, J. (2011). Affiliation, autonomy and assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 399-415. https://doi.org/10.1080/096959....
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215