Review of Teacher Assessment: Evidence of What Works Best and Issues for Development

Citation

Stanley G, MacCann R, Gardner J, Reynolds L & Wild I (2009) Review of Teacher Assessment: Evidence of What Works Best and Issues for Development. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA). Oxford University Centre for Educational Assessment. http://oucea.education.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2009_03-Review_of_teacher_assessment-QCA.pdf

Abstract
This review of teacher assessment has looked at teacher assessment in practice in a number of countries to see what works best and to consider the implications for Assessing Pupils' Progress (APP). APP is an innovative approach to integrate teaching and assessment to improve and keep track of student learning. It involves professional capacity building to make teachers sensitive to the developmental progression of their students. In addition to published research evidence from other countries the review had access to evaluation reports carried out during the piloting of APP. The emphasis of the review was to capture research evidence of the conditions under which teacher assessment works effectively and reliably. The review has shown that in assessment systems similar to the APP it is possible to gain high levels of reliability. However high levels of reliability cannot be taken for granted. Some systems have disappointingly low levels of reliability despite the implementation of training schemes for assessors. The APP uses a well structured system with assessment focuses clearly described. The evaluation reports indicated that for most teachers the reliability of judgments based on the APP system are satisfactory for purpose. An examination of the overall distribution of levels awarded under APP compared with those resulting from external moderation and from optional tests showed a reassuring similarity. This indicates the likelihood of acceptable validity when fully implemented. The review looks at issues that may be worth considering as the system is implemented and makes suggestions for a future evaluation strategy.

People

Professor John Gardner

Professor, Education