will facilitate further learning.’ 5. may help if we are motivated to ‘Feedback improve.’ Hounsell (2003) identified three specific areas for improving feedback to students. These are: 1. specific criteria and the use of assignment ‘More proformas.’ 2. student involvement using self and peer ‘Greater assessment.’ 3. use of collaborative assignments, ‘Greater presentations, posters etc. bringing assessment and feedback into a more public domain.‘ Knight (2002) suggests the feedback needs to be ‘interactive, purposeful, relative to criteria, developmentally useful, understood, timely and appropriate to students’ conceptions’. There may be a trade-off between feedback-delay and feedback-detail (i.e. early feedback based on a cursory analysis may be more effective than delayed feedback based on profound analysis). Formative feedback is any feedback that is relevant to learning needs and which furthers the progress towards attainment of the intended programme learning outcomes. A teacher’s formative feedback is based on his/her inference through assessment of a learning needs: hence the term learner’s formative assessment. Formative assessment: Supports the learner in attaining specified learning outcomes. It does not normally penalise error. assessment is ‘Formative concerned with how judgements about the quality of student responses (performances, pieces, or works) can be used to shape and improve the competence by short-circuiting student’s the randomness and inefficiency of trial and error learning’ (Sadler, 1989).37 Nitko (1996)38 identifies four basic uses to which formative continuous assessment is put: 1. a ‘Sizing-up group.’ 2. individual learning ‘Diagnosing students’ needs.’ 3. the learning ‘Diagnosing group’s needs.’ 4. ‘Planning instruction.’ Sadler, D. R. (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems Instructional Science, 18 (1989):119-144. (in 37 Harlen W. (2008) Student Assessment and Testing Volume 2 Sage Library of Educational Thought and Practice London: Sage pp3- 28) Nitko, A.J. (1995) Curriculum-based continuous assessment: a framework for concepts procedures and policy Assessment in 38 Education, 2(3), 321-337 (in Harlen W. (2008) Student Assessment and Testing Volume 2 Sage Library of Educational Thought and Practice London: Sage 289-306)
will facilitate further learning.’ 5. ‘Feedback may help if we are motivated to improve.’ Hounsell (2003) identified three specific areas for improving feedback to students. These are: 1. ‘More specific criteria and the use of assignment proformas.’ 2. ‘Greater student involvement using self and peer assessment.’ 3. ‘Greater use of collaborative assignments, presentations, posters etc. bringing assessment and feedback into a more public domain.‘ Knight (2002) suggests the feedback needs to be ‘interactive, purposeful, relative to criteria, developmentally useful, understood, timely and appropriate to students’ conceptions’. There may be a trade-off between feedback-delay and feedback-detail (i.e. early feedback based on a cursory analysis may be more effective than delayed feedback based on profound analysis). Formative feedback is any feedback that is relevant to learning needs and which furthers the progress towards attainment of the intended programme learning outcomes. A teacher’s formative feedback is based on his/her inference through assessment of a learner’s learning needs: hence the term formative assessment. Formative assessment: Supports the learner in attaining specified learning outcomes. It does not normally penalise error. ‘Formative assessment is concerned with how judgements about the quality of student responses (performances, pieces, or works) can be used to shape and improve the student’s competence by short-circuiting the randomness and inefficiency of trial and error learning’ (Sadler, 1989).37 Nitko (1996)38 identifies four basic uses to which formative continuous assessment is put: 1. ‘Sizing-up a group.’ 2. ‘Diagnosing individual students’ learning needs.’ 3. ‘Diagnosing the group’s learning needs.’ 4. ‘Planning instruction.’ 37 Sadler, D. R. (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems Instructional Science, 18 (1989):119-144. (in Harlen W. (2008) Student Assessment and Testing Volume 2 Sage Library of Educational Thought and Practice London: Sage pp3- 28) 38 Nitko, A.J. (1995) Curriculum-based continuous assessment: a framework for concepts procedures and policy Assessment in Education, 2(3), 321-337 (in Harlen W. (2008) Student Assessment and Testing Volume 2 Sage Library of Educational Thought and Practice London: Sage 289-306)
A5.17%20Assessment%20and%20Standards%20Revised%202013.docx