Prerequisites for teachers’ technology use in formative assessment practices: A systematic review

IF 9.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Research Review Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100568
Kristin Børte , Sølvi Lillejord , Jessica Chan , Barbara Wasson , Samuel Greiff
{"title":"Prerequisites for teachers’ technology use in formative assessment practices: A systematic review","authors":"Kristin Børte ,&nbsp;Sølvi Lillejord ,&nbsp;Jessica Chan ,&nbsp;Barbara Wasson ,&nbsp;Samuel Greiff","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>While researchers promote the interactive learning potential of digital tools, studies reveal that teachers adapt technology to existing practice instead of using the tools' potential for student active learning. Researchers also argue that formative assessment enhances students' learning, while studies find formative assessment difficult to implement. To investigate these paradoxes and better understand how teachers use digital tools in formative assessment and with what result, we conducted a systematic review of teachers' technology use in formative assessment practices in primary and secondary education. Systematic searches identified 22 relevant articles that are included in the review. We found unclear definitions of formative assessment across studies and document challenges teachers encounter when they use technology for formative assessment purposes. We conclude with three prerequisites for teachers' successful technology use in formative assessment practices: 1) clear definitions of formative assessment, 2) alignment between digital tools and pedagogical practice, and 3) data literacy to examine and interpret information and use this to improve students’ learning. The review also documents knowledge gaps in current research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 100568"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000611/pdfft?md5=04acfa9dd7d6d20a9ae340815680ca5f&pid=1-s2.0-S1747938X23000611-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000611","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While researchers promote the interactive learning potential of digital tools, studies reveal that teachers adapt technology to existing practice instead of using the tools' potential for student active learning. Researchers also argue that formative assessment enhances students' learning, while studies find formative assessment difficult to implement. To investigate these paradoxes and better understand how teachers use digital tools in formative assessment and with what result, we conducted a systematic review of teachers' technology use in formative assessment practices in primary and secondary education. Systematic searches identified 22 relevant articles that are included in the review. We found unclear definitions of formative assessment across studies and document challenges teachers encounter when they use technology for formative assessment purposes. We conclude with three prerequisites for teachers' successful technology use in formative assessment practices: 1) clear definitions of formative assessment, 2) alignment between digital tools and pedagogical practice, and 3) data literacy to examine and interpret information and use this to improve students’ learning. The review also documents knowledge gaps in current research.

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
教师在形成性评估实践中使用技术的先决条件:系统回顾
虽然研究人员提倡数字工具的互动学习潜力,但研究表明,教师使技术适应现有的实践,而不是利用工具的潜力来促进学生的主动学习。研究者也认为形成性评价能促进学生的学习,然而研究发现形成性评价难以实施。为了调查这些矛盾并更好地理解教师如何在形成性评估中使用数字工具以及产生了什么结果,我们对教师在中小学教育形成性评估实践中使用技术进行了系统回顾。系统检索确定了综述中包含的22篇相关文章。我们发现研究中形成性评估的定义不明确,教师在使用技术进行形成性评估时遇到的文件挑战。我们总结了教师在形成性评估实践中成功使用技术的三个先决条件:1)形成性评估的明确定义,2)数字工具与教学实践之间的一致性,以及3)检查和解释信息并使用它来改善学生学习的数据素养。该综述还记录了当前研究中的知识缺口。
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
Educational Research Review
Educational Research Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
19.40
自引率
0.90%
发文量
53
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.
期刊最新文献
A meta-analysis of the correlation between teacher self-efficacy and teacher resilience: Concerted growth and contextual variance Unveiling the competencies at the core of lifelong learning: A systematic literature review A systematic review on how educators teach AI in K-12 education Translating neuroscience to early childhood education: A scoping review of neuroscience-based professional learning for early childhood educators What is next in mobile-assisted reading? Insights from a decade of eye tracking research into cognitive processes
×
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