In modern society, education is perceived as fundamental aspect and the basic need for social and economic development. Broadly, education is a form of acquiring knowledge, values, beliefs, skills, and habits through discussion, teaching, storytelling, training, or researching directly. Educationalists describe educational system in a formal, informal, or non-formal setting differentiated by the nature and description of learning materials and outcome. For instance in formal setting, the structure well defined, structured, and mostly characterised by assessment of knowledge or skills acquired. Here, the education system is supported by government, department, private sectors that develop curriculum and values to be observed with well-elaborated curriculum and time stipulated. Conversely, the informal education type harbours the education offered by community, parents, or experts in particularly field with not structured or any assessment elements. According to Mahajan (2017), learners learn through educators, experts’ experiences and wisdom, and daily life experiences and elements such as media, peer groups, and friends. On the other hand, non-formal education is any format characterised by well-planned and organized learning system but do not need structural form such learning institution, structured course, time, involvement by public or private sector, or curriculum. Essentially, all this education systems are characterised by such factors as prior knowledge, environment, motivation, and importantly wellbeing and safety are key factors that drive student’s behaviour in the learning process. As illustrated by Roorda et al. (2011), learning environment like schools in formal education and practitioners influence significantly these factors through approaches and measures take in handling the process and challenges encountered. According to Hegazy and Barton (2017), these factors act as appraisal components in educational assessment and expectation to both the learners and practitioners is response aligned to core elements in education. As pointed by Brandom et al. (2005), conducting examinations as a form of learning assessment is an exemplary technique for estimating students’ performance, as it provides insights on students’ learning process as well as providing grounds for developing strategies for improvement in response to assessment outcome. Moreover, Ananiadou and Claro (2009) assert that it is the responsibility of schools and their instructional frameworks to shape the learning environment for the students so that they gain knowledge and skills improving in their respective fields. In fulfilling this responsibility, schools management and parents have to acknowledge that the improvement of the educational learning process can occur through "summative appraisals” (ibid) According to Dann (2012) and Black et al. (2011), a summative appraisal can be defined as an assessment at the end of the learning process, whereas a formative appraisal is assesses acquired knowledge, skills, or beliefs at the end given learning period. Torrance (2012) argued that formative assessment depends on “ongoing feedbacks” of the students’ learning. Torrance (2012) and Andrade & Cizek (2010) asserted that formative appraisal plays a significant role in improving students’ push towards learning. Ideally, in the developmental evaluation, regular assessment aid educational learning process including their conceptualization and understanding of concepts and instructions (ibid). In writing, Stiggins & Chappuis (2012) claimed that assessments are designed to enable students better understand and accomplish higher expectations of education buy readjusting instructions and structure to accommodate their learning progress. Furthermore, evaluation of students is not only beneficial to learners but also to teachers by allowing acknowledgment of individual learning abilities and required improvements (Hattie, 2012; Boud, 2013).
In the study, Clark (2010) found that a large number of practitioners perceive continues evaluation as vital element in advancing learning process. The findings indicated importance of educators to adjust their teaching and education process to accommodate or collaborate with the students through adopting techniques aligned to needed or appropriate learning outcome. Based on illustration forwarded by Brozo et al. (2007), teaching that includes appraisals guides the students toward learning objectives and even motivates them towards the achievement set before learning. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) examined the utilization of these developmental evaluations through the instructional frameworks of eight nations that include Australia (Queensland), Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, Italy, New Zealand, and Scotland. In this perspective, this research paper primarily focuses on the advanced developmental evaluation, which is taken as a basic roadmap towards a significant improvement of teaching strategies based on OECD findings. It explores influence of the findings including strategy set for removing hindrances, implementation of developmental evaluation, and empowering extensive application. Therefore, it seeks to assess formative appraisal as element of improving students’ learning process its core elements in relation to other assessment techniques primarily summative.
Recently, the OECD principles have increasingly been integrated in learning process and thus have high relevance in a contemporary educational environment concerned with formative assessment. Primarily, the OECD policy emphasises putting the welfare and perspective of the students at the centre of education strategies and structures. According to Sahlberg (2007) and Spector et al. (2016), the strategy emphasises on structuring the practices and approaches adopted by practitioners to focus on motivating and advancing learners’ learning processes and achievements predominantly through engagement and involvements as core elements. In this respect, it is essential to assess whether the Policy Principles of OECD named ‘Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classroom (OECD, 2005)’ promotes practice of formative assessment in educational institutions. In their writing, Muijs and Reynolds (2017) held the view that these education ideologies forwarded by OECD have a clear framework rooted in direct instructions and constructivism education philosophy. Broadly, the constructivism implies focusing on learners as active participants construed to acquiring knowledge rather than passive recipients (Xu, 2012; Bonk, & King, 2012). On the other hand, direct transmission holds that practitioners’ role as source of information and point of learning is to transfer knowledge through communication in a clear and structured manner, ensuring conducive learning environment by ensuring concentration and calmness in classroom, providing clear and reasonable questions and consequently offer explanation, right solution, and answers (ibid). Despite increasing focus for high-quality learning, the debate on factors constituting good practices coupled with complexity in instructions has made promotion of education and learning process particularly in formal setting a multifaceted and characterised with more ideological perspective (Biggs, 2011; Hollins, 2011; Walqui, & Van Lier, 2010). In essence, the OECD policies have extensive influence on the different aspect of the educational sector, especially on teaching approaches.
Brown & Knight (2012) and Black et al. (2010) held that the most prominent appraisal approaches in schools are summative assessment utilized to measure what has been learned by the students and how much they have gained from the teaching. Additionally, as indicated by Hattie (2012) and Shattock (2005), summative appraisal also measures the students’ learning stipulating the level knowledge or skills gained at the end of the instructional unit. Using this perspective, one can argue that training approach or instruction dissemination utilizing this approach promotes as a platform for openly supported schools designed to a quality teaching. Nevertheless, as expressed by Rindermann (2007), an ever-increasing number of global summative evaluations, for example, the OECD's International Student Assessment Program (PISA) is critical for contrasting the national training framework and the improvement of different nations. Therefore, the approach is useful in observing students’ learning whether it is in line with the set standards. Conversely, formative appraisal technique promotes the capacity of students to learn based on day-to-day learning. According to Elwood (2006), it must incorporate several elements for successfully integrated including changing the culture in classrooms environment, students’ perception, beliefs, and teaching strategies. Key element in using the approach is that teachers can track and monitor students’ learning process by establishing and communicating learning strategies and adjusting goals in accordance with students’ needs (OECD, 2005). In an attempt to have effective feedback, Stevens and Levi (2013) claimed that teachers vary instructions methods such as using written, verbal, or both approaches to assess students understanding of concepts. As such, this flexibility enhances the techniques of teaching, which executes and accomplishes more noteworthy fairness in students’ learning assessment (ibid). In this way, the formative appraisals play a vital role in improving not only the learning but also the teaching techniques. In retrospect, Richey & Klein (2014) and Black & Wiliam (2009) argued that, in the classroom, formative appraisals develop the extensive ability for the students to learn more.
Fundamentally, formative assessment is structured to collect in detail information that usable in improving instruction and learning process as it happens (Clark, 2012; Dunn, & Mulvenon, 2009). As illustrated by Black & Wiliam (2009) and Bennett (2011), a key aspect of formative learning assessment is to identify skills learners have challenges or difficulty acquiring, areas, concepts, and discussion that students in a given environment struggle conceptualize, and learning standard not achieved or implemented. As such, the differentiating factor is the way in which designed test or self-evaluation techniques are used rather than the content or structural aspect of the technique. Therefore, it is bounded by principles that have, over the years, propel it to prominence and continuous support as dependable and effective means of learning improvement.
Based on the study conducted by Williams (2014), the instructive accomplishment of a society is a key determinant of its financial development. The findings argue on importance of having a platform structured to enhance instruction dissemination as a critical in advancing education and learning process. Currently, numerous strategies have been adopted driven by the aim of changing the structure of schools, overseeing schools and courses, and enhancing advanced educational innovation (Bentley, 2012; Collins, & Halverson, 2010). Despite huge progress made by implemented strategies in the field, studies have demonstrated little effect brought by these efforts, particularly at the framework level. Findings by Macintosh and Whyte (2008) show fundamental problems with the most framework with training limited by the following:
The significance of instructors’ quality in advanced studies. Components of quality like values held by educators Nature of approaches taken by educators
Scholars argue on the idea of supplanting educators with more effective instructors has a potential of enhancing the nature and quality of instructions, but findings have indicated that its effect is moderate and constrained (Hiebert, & Morris, 2012; Darling-Hammond, & Richardson, 2009). These point out that the future monetary success of a society and largely a nation depends on enhancing the nature of quality held by instructors who work within a learning institution. In the hindsight, the emphasis of using a practitioner’s depended learning and assessment set the quality and advancement of learning to lie largely on augmentation of teacher-learner relationship. Any failure in implementation of this relationship result in negative perception by learners towards the entire learning process as well as affecting greatly on understanding subjects and concepts (Ozan, & Kıncal, 2018; Allen et al., 2011). As such, the objective of having advancing learning process through deployment of a common platform that pools individuals learning towards a common knowledge base pose a dangerous prospect to entire learning process.
OECD nations have increasingly changed their learning approaches focusing on an interest in the investigation advance developmental appraisal. Ideally, these emphasises that consideration of developing appraisal education can help in enhancing study accomplishment levels and better empower educators in addressing the issues of improper learning. Additionally, in most societies, national and local government play a major role and driving force in nature and learning process (Ananiadou, & Claro, 2009). Therefore, in one way or another they great influence educational standards and conducive environment for educational institutions. In formal education setting, a significant element in meeting educational objectives is involving government both local and national as a key shareholder.
Recently, practitioners have increasingly viewed formative evaluation technique as critical in promoting learning process. According to Matusovich et al. (2010), quantitative and subjective investigations of developmental appraisal view assessment as the most essential element of the educational learning. In their audit of English writing on developmental evaluation, Black and William (1998) exemplified that formal evaluation can enhance learning. Building from studies conducted on the influence of assessment in a learning environment, it is evident that the appraisals in educational learning are an effective and productive way of improving the learning outcome (Palmer, & Devitt, 2008; Volante, & Beckett, 2011). Despite argument of the assessment technique advancing learning process through allowing learning to be depended on learners thought patterns, findings on negative influence of the approach on general learning process indicating most practitioners rush the entire learning process in order to accommodate the assessment and other researchers have argued that teachers may set the assessment subjectively and lack accountability (most of this assessment are not standardised rather formulated based on teachers understanding and perception). Similarly, critics have argued on little evidence exist justifying learner motivation to learn as a result of continuous assessment stating strategies formulated have to be engage and involve students otherwise entire process would be a failure. Moreover, Albeit et al. (1998) stated that appraisals must be utilized for the development purposes and should not be limited by racial, social class, sex, and gender orientation, or economic status. On the contrary, by using this argument, the appraisals will lose their worth and limited in accomplishing the required evaluation (Roskos, & Neuman, 2012; Tillema, 2009). Previously, most "feeble" studies shifted from "disappointment" to “model” status with the focus of accommodating all learners taking into the individual background as well as the quality of education attained as per required standards.
The approach is purposefully structured as student-focused design to address learners concerns and learning process. Based on illustration posted by Norton (2009), its ideology emphases on how learners receive information, the extent of their understanding, and consequently its application rather than delivery technique. Findings on the influence of developmental appraisals towards learning process indicate the approach influence the culture of the classrooms and developing students’ self- confidence in learning such as being able to commit errors and building trust without must repercussion (Ravet, 2013; Clark, 2012; Bennett, 2011). Arguably, this assertion allows developing a way of teaching and harbouring students’ learning that will play a vital role in establishing an autonomous society starting from cultural changes. On the other hand, the approach experiences numerous challenges particularly in the large or congested classroom that may render it ineffective. For example, this method of assessment is time-consuming and resource demanding including human capital and clear grasp of the concept by practitioners. Bennett (2011) highlighted that formative appraisal needs frequent and continuous data gathering, analysis, and then reporting for proper and evidence-based changes. Moreover, the process requires planning and exercising resulting implementation of few strategies and recommendation at a time in addition to the requirement for trained professionals hence perceived tiresome (Havnes et al., 2012; Torrance, 2012). As such, one shares the benefit of engaging with learners while similarly harbouring labour and expertise extensive processes that require intense involvement from both parties (learners and practitioners).
Brozo et al. (2007) viewed it as a platform that allows altering pre-formulated objectives to address the issues encountered during learning. In addition to monitoring student’s performance against different subjects and student, the approach allows adjusting goals to better meet students’ need, address the challenges encountered, and improve the weaknesses faced (Black, & Wiliam, 2009; Clark, 2012). Moreover, teachers can compare their appraisals techniques among themselves on the same students and environment or different setting. Nevertheless, teachers regularly find that discourse is more compelling than checking the improvement of the teaching process.
Recently, need for student-oriented education has intensified where techniques are bounded by formulated results rather than the process (Kilday et al., 2016; Lamote, & Engels, 2010). In writing, Wyatt-Smith et al. (2014) postulated that lessons aligned to student needs incorporate distinctive methods for deciphering new ideas, giving decisions on classroom work, and empowering their students through new and innovative views. In line with the principles stipulated by OECD (2005), it can be argued that teachers have to integrate different approaches and new concepts as independent variables in different classroom work. However, the biggest challenges for practitioners is knowing and understanding individual students’ needs, strengths, and weaknesses before implementation of this approach.
This evaluation requires teachers keenly observe, respond to logs, discuss, assess learners individually, design practice presentation, and formulate constructive quizzes collectively assessing students' comprehension of concepts and skills being taught (Torrance, 2012). They may use a diagnostic assessment to determine the level of understanding by a student at a particular time at any point of lesson or course helping formulate a teaching strategy (Rindermann, 2007; Read, 2008).
Using the approach, instructors can give oral or written criticism. Similarly, educators can change tactics to address the issues challenging students’ learning the process. Bell et al. (2010) held perspective that if schools utilize effectively developmental evaluations, educators can establish a viable learning conduct models that show self-appraisal aptitude while also allowing investigation of activities as integrated by different systems. Conversely, building from William (2014) assertion, this ‘learning and learning’ strategy aimed at developing autonomy and independence by students in learning presences a vital aspect for those with not additional learning help particularly at home.
Macintosh and Whyte (2008) acknowledged the presence of boundaries that limit utilizing developmental evaluation techniques. These include:
The inter-connection between developmental or formative appraisals and summative tests.
There is an absence of consistency between arrangements for appraisal and evaluation, which are observable in schools particularly in the classroom.
There is an emphasis on formative evaluation due to its favourable nature towards practicality.
In practice, the data accumulated during the assessment process is utilizable in creating developmental learning framework (William, 2014; Chen, 2010). In a learning environment such as classroom, teachers gather data and subsequently information about students’ understanding of concepts and rate of acquiring skills by assessing individual student (Stiggins, & Chappuis, 2012). At school levels, shareholders including parents and government entities utilize data to recognize qualities of learning offered and shortcomings then acts as basis of formulating evidenced-backed methodologies. Conversely, at arrangement level, authorities utilize data gathered through national or local testing, or screen school execution to control interest in school preparing and distinguishing core variables taking into account cost against the need for instruction as well as an implication.
Findings by Looney and Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (2008) indicated that students or teacher can miss some learning lesson or coursework but if teachers are assured that students can learn subjects independently and thoroughly can with proceed. Moreover, educators expect the students to monitor and a time self-evaluate their respective learning and skills gained particular levels of learning against teaching techniques (Andrade, & Valtcheva, 2009; Hattie, 2012). Similarly, by allowing students to utilize learning apparatus such as rubrics, the assessment technique point-by-point assess working principles such as teachers’ perception and grasp of concepts. Instructors who teach in large classes, some of the time, utilize split classes, in which they can divide their classes into two groups focused on explaining each and every aspect of the teaching in detail while trying to optimise the knowledge and skills acquisition through reaching to as many as possible students directly. Additionally, appraisals techniques are significant aspects in developing teaching methods. Perry and Southwell (2011) held that utilising developmental appraisals could help organizations to build a far-reaching evaluation culture. According to Wyatt-Smith et al. (2014), the information gathered from assessment gives vitality and reason to create school and classroom change techniques. In schools with a well-structured appraisal culture, instructors consider what procedures function admirably indicating studies and conditions under which they work effectively (Kolb, 2014; Darling-Hammond et al., 2009). Benson (2013) claimed that in training sessions, educators can recognize basic instructions to remove confusion and can create methodologies that are fitting for their particular instructions. Boud (2013) asserted that instructors and schools utilizing self-evaluation as a strategy for forming tentative arrangements make use of information administration systems. Broadly, this allows sharing information acquired and development of informed decision. In this way, the partaking nations have in place progressive arrangements to advance more extensive the practices (Boud, 2013; Andrade, & Valtcheva, 2009). In this perspective, one can argue that all nations need to reinforce their key educational strategies and contribute more profoundly particularly on educators’ training and expertise improvement if they are to roll out genuine and goals-oriented improvements.
According to Elwood (2006), OECD has created standard strategies to advance extensive, top-bottom and longer-enduring developmental assessment and directive practices to address the issues of education. Studies have increasingly advocated the following approaches.
An approach that focuses on teaching and learning ought to capture the multifaceted nature of the learning procedure. According to Gallimore et al. (2009), this perception highlights the extent to which different pointers and result measures to better comprehend the execution of schools and instructors. As argued by Darling-Hammond (2008), approaches concentrated on instructing and learning requires long-term changes and strategies but it is critical to have goal-oriented techniques. The summative appraisal is a significant method in recognizing students’ abilities and respective progress focusing to follow adequate instructions set by society or in the workplace (Wyatt-Smith et al., 2014). Keeping this in mind, the end goal in determining and guaranteeing legitimacy and dependability of summative evaluations means management ought to consider strategizing measures to quantify advanced instructions.
Studies conducted by Dunn and Mulvenon (2009) found an extensive association between assessment done at the classroom and school level stating that they are connected and utilizable towards enhancing each other including the entire framework. The findings by Stiggins and DuFour (2009) outlined that, in a classroom setting, the policy of linking a series of well-tuned and well-designed assessments at the school level provides stakeholders with a better idea of how well and possibility of achieving stipulated goals. This postulates the idea that if the assessment is applicable at every stage of the system then the assessments is effective in advancing learning process. Conversely, educators should have vast knowledge to be able to identify and interpreting learners’ needs and ways of effectively engaging with learners as well as integrate developmental evaluations into routine practice. Lacking in this may jeopardise the entire process causing ultimate failure of the process.
Proponents of the formative assessment holds that strategies structure to promote can developed by putting resources into the assessment proficiency, growing "best practice" databases, focusing on an index and disperse requirements of the outcomes, and putting resources into additional research practice, and connected arrangements. The approach allows shareholders in education system to push advancing learning process by harbouring peer support and cooperation couple with extended strategy of involving individual and whole classroom (Vescio et al., 2008; Bentley, 2012). In this manner, however, there are significant gaps in comprehension and engagement especially a large classroom. Apparently, the advantages of developmental evaluation distinguished on a small scale have not yet been accomplished at the national level (Patton, 2010).
Building from a study conducted by Guskey (2010), assessment formally presented the view that evaluations require not to be utilized exclusively for measuring teaching process but educators ought to incorporate a developmental appraisal after an instructional period. According to Willims (2003), instructors need to give criticism and correct students as an approach to improving their learning. Here, teachers integrate developmental evaluation into their teaching by setting up a classroom culture that empowers association and the utilization of appraisal devices. For each situation, teachers give appraisals to note students who have abilities to identify and correct their own mistakes and errors in class. This is appropriate to some degree particularly the youngsters who feel safe for their mistakes. Astin (2012) and Bennett (2010) perceived the acts as a platform for uncovering misunderstood concepts. In addition to enthusiastic capacities such as mindfulness, poise, sympathy, participation, and adaptability, individual feelings and personal awareness need to be accounted for in order to influence learners’ confidence, inspiration, and capacity to modify their own learning.
In the study, Willims (2003) found that teachers think about the assessment target criteria by setting learning objectives for students and occasionally for weaker learners. Additionally, Duers &Brown (2009) noted the importance of teachers to keep students’ records and frequently updating as the foundation of learning objectives and teachings. Through such approaches, educators allow students to check their development then establishing certainty in helping them to improve their confidence and perspective learning from own mistakes. Given that this approach is much depended on experiences and environment of both the educators and learners, their behaviours will determine learning process. However, the learners need to be taught explicitly to manage their behaviours through sustained focus, beliefs, and values towards learning institution and educations.
Continuous change in instruction approach in addressing understudies implies modifying perception and acknowledging diverse views. According to Thoonen et al. (2011), integration of teaching strategies that are results-oriented and driven by the need to improve students’ appraisals by use of different tactics to assess and evaluate understanding is key to entire process and knowledge sharing. As elaborated by Borg (2015), instructors enable learners to prepare for and learn new ideas that are in line with their thinking and resonating with social and other problems encountered (Freire, 2018). Although early research had demonstrated need for re-evaluation of strategies for reasonable understudying, more detailed research is pertinent to address the effect of various evaluation techniques. Nevertheless, there is limited findings on whether the assessment provide solution to issues faced such as passionate, style, race, culture, financial strata, and additionally sexual orientation.
Ideally, the assessment holds that feedbacks on individual performance must be objective and constructive avoiding destroying learners’ morale and confidence. Studies have found naturally compelling condition (that is, controlled tests directed in the understudies' common classroom condition and their instructors) such as "self-intercession" criticism (even as acclaim) instead of input on current undertakings appears to affect negatively execution and learning process (William, & Thompson, 2017). Engaging with students constructively enhances the ability to grasps concepts and skills whereas using negative words or body language during this assessments severely impacts the learning process and subsequently the academic performance. It worth noting that negative feedbacks ultimately undermine outcome and like positive feedbacks have a significant influence on individual learning, understanding, and acquisition of new skills. As stated feed can contribute significantly in learning development of a learners but can also severely hinder learning. Therefore, instructors must be in position of identifying constructive and negative feedback appropriately delivering the feedbacks. Findings of studies conducted by Gielen et al. (2013), Boud & Molloy (2013), and Voerman et al. (2012) argued in the prospect that educators need be careful in choosing and apply feedbacks and engaging with learners because slight misunderstanding or ‘slip of the tongue’ can significantly disorient the learners greatly affecting their learning process.
The OECD Centre for Education Research and Innovation examines instructing, learning and evaluation of students in different levels, considering the fundamental aptitudes of grown-ups. Research on the development evaluation of optional schools and research on low-essential aptitudes grown-ups provides a clear perception of successful instructing, learning, and appraisal for the duration of the education cycle. Primarily, this review indicates how developmental appraisal can advance the objectives of learning. The aims include enhancing study accomplishment levels, improving study accomplishment, and enhancing learning abilities. This study discusses the limitation of extensive developmental evaluation through the adoption of improved techniques. From assessing of LLN students' instructing, learning, and evaluation, the study uncovers well- developed and structure approaches and practices across different nations’ education systems. Broadly, nations under OECD have adopted different strategies adjusting to contending needs and objectives of international partners. Despite the fact that countries’ approach differ, it worth noting that their structural and ideological elements of assessment have considerable similarity. In spite of this, there is still work to be done in application to different learning levels. In practice, the effects of various educating and appraisal strategies are constrained within LLN. In the event that the educators do not have a superior comprehension of what works as well as those that do not work, it will be difficult to draw much-required support or create compelling learning practices and structures. In a positive perspective, the current research bases including general strategies for developmental evaluation and the knowledge of professionals give a reasonable program for future innovative work. Notably, not only in the educational sector has appraisal acted as a central component in performance management, identification of knowledge gap, and training needs. Theoretically, the objective of the developmental evaluation is to enable teachers to build their own "learning and teaching" abilities. In addition, the formative appraisals help the teachers to improve their teaching strategies continuously changing in conformity to the needs and abilities of the learners. Building from assertion above, a guideline for formative appraisal may apply at school and strategy level recognizing areas for development and advancement of viable and valuable appraisal culture throughout the training framework. One can argue that the more steady utilization of the developmental evaluations all through the training framework can enable shareholders in the field to determine hindrances to more extensive practice in the classroom. Using this approach, teachers gather information on their students including learning needs and progress then integrating the collected information and acquired knowledge to make the instructional adjustment. This incorporates enactment of policy to advance, strengthen, and distinguish them as needs or rules for strategized direction to their national educational programs. Evidently, the approach acts a significant component in advancing learning process by supporting learning engagement, interaction, and involvement in entire process but importantly enables educators to identify and work towards reducing learners’ individual and collective weakness and advancing strength through continuous assessment. However, there are number of areas that require improvement and modification for adequately and effectively promotion of learning process. First, the formative assessment process is labour intense therefore educators need to be trained and involved extensively. Secondly, management and regulatory bodies need take significant role and responsibility in developing and managing assessment process such as standardizing and guidelines to be followed. Although this will greatly hinder the essence of continuous assessment but will ensure educators assess learners using a system uniform and applicable across board. Lastly, learners should take a more active role in identifying their weaknesses and strength then coordinating with educators in strategizing reduction or enhancement approaches.
Allen, J. P., Pianta, R. C., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., & Lun, J. (2011). An interaction-based approach to enhancing secondary school instruction and student achievement. Science, 333(6045), 1034-1037.
Andrade, H., & Cizek, G. J. (2010). An Integrative Summary of the Research Literature and Implications for a New Th eory of Formative Assessment. In Handbook of formative assessment(pp. 30-52). Routledge.
Astin, A. W. (2012). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and evaluation in higher education. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Bennett, R. E. (2010). Cognitively based assessment of, for, and as learning (CBAL): A preliminary theory of action for summative and formative assessment. Measurement, 8(2-3), 70-91.
Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5-25.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), 5.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Hodgen, J., Marshall, B., & Serret, N. (2011). Can teachers’ summative assessments produce dependable results and also enhance classroom learning?. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 451-469.
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.
Braskamp, L. A., Braskamp, D. C., & Merrill, K. (2009). Assessing progress in global learning and development of students with education abroad experiences. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 18, 101-118.
Brozo, W. G., Shiel, G., & Topping, K. (2007). Engagement in reading: Lessons learned from three PISA countries. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(4), 304-315.
Chen, R. J. (2010). Investigating models for preservice teachers’ use of technology to support student-centered learning. Computers & Education, 55(1), 32-42.
Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2010). The second educational revolution: Rethinking education in the age of technology. Journal of computer assisted learning, 26(1), 18-27.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters. Educational leadership, 66(5), 46-53.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council, 12.
Development, O. E. C., & Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, (2005). Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
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 & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.
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 & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.
Falchikov, N. (2013). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. Routledge.
Gallimore, R., Ermeling, B. A., Saunders, W. M., & Goldenberg, C. (2009). Moving the learning of teaching closer to practice: Teacher education implications of school-based inquiry teams. The elementary school journal, 109(5), 537-553.
Gray, D. L., Chang, Y., & Anderman, E. M. (2015). Conditional effects of mastery goal structure on changes in students' motivational beliefs: Need for cognition matters. Learning and Individual Differences, 40, 9-21.
Havnes, A., Smith, K., Dysthe, O., & Ludvigsen, K. (2012). Formative assessment and feedback: Making learning visible. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 38(1), 21-27.
Hegazy, H., & Barton, G. (2017). Formative assessment in the middle years: a review of literature and alignment with the Guiding Principles for Junior Secondary. Australian Journal of Middle Schooling, 17(2), 6-19.
Kilday, J. E., Lenser, M. L., & Miller, A. D. (2016). Considering students in teachers' self-efficacy: Examination of a scale for student-oriented teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 61-71.
Looney, J., & Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (2008). Teaching, learning and assessment for adults: Improving foundation skills. Brussels: OECD.
Matusovich, H. M., Streveler, R. A., & Miller, R. L. (2010). Why do students choose engineering? A qualitative, longitudinal investigation of students' motivational values. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(4), 289-303.
Ng, C. H. C. (2008). Multiple‐goal learners and their differential patterns of learning. Educational psychology, 28(4), 439-456.
OECD. (2002). Babies and Bosses-Reconciling Work and Family Life (Volume 1): Australia, Denmark and the Netherlands (Vol. 1). Canongate US.
Ozan, C., & Kıncal, R. Y. (2018). The Effects of Formative Assessment on Academic Achievement, Attitudes toward the Lesson, and Self-Regulation Skills. EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES-THEORY & PRACTICE, 18(1), 85-118.
Ravet, J. (2013). Delving deeper into the black box: formative assessment, inclusion and learners on the autism spectrum. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(9), 948-964.
Rindermann, H. (2007). The g‐factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: The homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ‐tests across nations. European Journal of Personality, 21(5), 667-706.
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of educational research, 81(4), 493-529.
Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows, 9, 5-15.
Spector, J. M., Ifenthaler, D., Sampson, D., Yang, L. J., Mukama, E., Warusavitarana, A., ... & Bridges, S. (2016). Technology enhanced formative assessment for 21st century learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 58.
Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Oort, F. J. (2011). Can teachers motivate students to learn?. Educational Studies, 37(3), 345-360.
Torrance, H. (2012). Formative assessment at the crossroads: Conformative, deformative and transformative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 38(3), 323-342.
Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and teacher education, 24(1), 80-91.
Voerman, L., Meijer, P. C., Korthagen, F. A., & Simons, R. J. (2012). Types and frequencies of feedback interventions in classroom interaction in secondary education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1107-1115.
Walqui, A., & Van Lier, L. (2010). Scaffolding the academic success of adolescent English language learners: A pedagogy of promise (pp. 1-41). San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
Willms, J. D. (2003). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation: Results from PISA 2000. Publications de l'OCDE.
Xu, L. (2012). The Role of Teachers' Beliefs in the Language Teaching-learning Process. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(7).
Academic services materialise with the utmost challenges when it comes to solving the writing. As it comprises invaluable time with significant searches, this is the main reason why individuals look for the Assignment Help team to get done with their tasks easily. This platform works as a lifesaver for those who lack knowledge in evaluating the research study, infusing with our Dissertation Help writers outlooks the need to frame the writing with adequate sources easily and fluently. Be the augment is standardised for any by emphasising the study based on relative approaches with the Thesis Help, the group navigates the process smoothly. Hence, the writers of the Essay Help team offer significant guidance on formatting the research questions with relevant argumentation that eases the research quickly and efficiently.
DISCLAIMER : The assignment help samples available on website are for review and are representative of the exceptional work provided by our assignment writers. These samples are intended to highlight and demonstrate the high level of proficiency and expertise exhibited by our assignment writers in crafting quality assignments. Feel free to use our assignment samples as a guiding resource to enhance your learning.