Formative Assessment and Mathematics Education: the Perspective of In-Service Mathematics Teachers

Q3 Multidisciplinary Acta Scientiae Pub Date : 2022-11-21 DOI:10.17648/acta.scientiae.7043
Alejandra Balbi, Micaela Bonilla, María Alejandra Otamendi, Karina Curione, Pablo Beltrán-Pellicer
{"title":"Formative Assessment and Mathematics Education: the Perspective of In-Service Mathematics Teachers","authors":"Alejandra Balbi, Micaela Bonilla, María Alejandra Otamendi, Karina Curione, Pablo Beltrán-Pellicer","doi":"10.17648/acta.scientiae.7043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Although there is consensus on the favourable impact of formative assessment (FA) on learning, it is unclear to what extent general FA strategies are directly applicable to the specific field of mathematics education. Objective: Study the relevance of a questionnaire which describes 26 FA practices supported by Wiliam’s model in the particular context of mathematics education. Design: Mixed, the frequency and feasibility are consulted through a questionnaire and in-depth interviews. Participants : Thirty in-service mathematics teachers answered the survey and of ten invited, three agreed to be interviewed. Data analysis : We carried out a descriptive analysis for quantitative data and qualitative thematic analysis. Results : The strategies of collecting evidence, feedback, collaboration, and self-regulated involvement in learning are viable and frequent in mathematics education, however, the strategy of clarifying and sharing goals requires adaptation to the context. In addition, nine novel FA practices are described. The implementation of formative assessment creates tensions with the summative function, it is laborious to implement and consequently takes time outside the classroom. Conclusion : We identified that FA practices are frequent and feasible to implement. Clarifying and sharing goals requires the adequacy of the mathematical context.","PeriodicalId":36967,"journal":{"name":"Acta Scientiae","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Scientiae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17648/acta.scientiae.7043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Multidisciplinary","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although there is consensus on the favourable impact of formative assessment (FA) on learning, it is unclear to what extent general FA strategies are directly applicable to the specific field of mathematics education. Objective: Study the relevance of a questionnaire which describes 26 FA practices supported by Wiliam’s model in the particular context of mathematics education. Design: Mixed, the frequency and feasibility are consulted through a questionnaire and in-depth interviews. Participants : Thirty in-service mathematics teachers answered the survey and of ten invited, three agreed to be interviewed. Data analysis : We carried out a descriptive analysis for quantitative data and qualitative thematic analysis. Results : The strategies of collecting evidence, feedback, collaboration, and self-regulated involvement in learning are viable and frequent in mathematics education, however, the strategy of clarifying and sharing goals requires adaptation to the context. In addition, nine novel FA practices are described. The implementation of formative assessment creates tensions with the summative function, it is laborious to implement and consequently takes time outside the classroom. Conclusion : We identified that FA practices are frequent and feasible to implement. Clarifying and sharing goals requires the adequacy of the mathematical context.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
形成性评价与数学教育:在职数学教师的视角
背景:尽管形成性评估(FA)对学习的有利影响达成了共识,但尚不清楚一般的FA策略在多大程度上直接适用于数学教育的特定领域。目的:研究Wiliam模型支持的26种FA实践问卷在数学教育特定背景下的相关性。设计:混合,通过问卷调查和深入访谈来咨询频率和可行性。参与者:30名在职数学教师回答了调查,在10名受邀教师中,3人同意接受采访。数据分析:我们对定量数据和定性主题分析进行了描述性分析。结果:收集证据、反馈、合作和自主参与学习的策略在数学教育中是可行的,而且经常使用,然而,澄清和共享目标的策略需要适应环境。此外,还介绍了九种新颖的FA实践。形成性评估的实施与总结性功能产生了紧张关系,实施起来很费力,因此需要在课堂之外花费时间。结论:我们发现FA实践是频繁的,并且实施起来是可行的。明确和共享目标需要数学背景的充分性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Scientiae
Acta Scientiae Multidisciplinary-Multidisciplinary
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊最新文献
Preservice Mathematics Teachers' Beliefs about Problem-Solving in Culturally Diverse Classrooms Transitional-Apprehending Mental Model for Junior High School Students in Understanding the Concept of Integers Meaning of Problem in School Mathematics: From Exercise and Application to the Learning-Triggering Problem Learnings and Reflections by (Future) Teachers on Anticipation in Exploratory Mathematics Teaching Interdisciplinary Extension Program in Teaching: Challenges, Possibilities, and Unexpected Situations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1