Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
study Teaching, Learning and Assessment for Adults: Improving Foundation Skills. This is a study of national policy contexts and formative assessment practices in relation to adult literacy, numeracy and language learning in seven countries. The OECD study also commissioned literature reviews in French, German, Spanish, and English: the last of these is the present paper.
Typology: Summaries
1 / 127
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Derrick, J. and K. Ecclestone, (2008), “English-language Literature Review”, in Teaching, Learning and Assessment for Adults: Improving Foundation Skills , OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/
Please cite this paper as:
C e n t r e f o r E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h a n d I n n o v a t i o n
Please cite this paper as: Derrick, J. and K. Ecclestone (2008), “English- language Literature Review”, in Teaching, Learning and Assessment for Adults: Improving Foundation Skills , OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/
TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT FOR ADULTS
IMPROVING FOUNDATION SKILLS
English-language Literature Review Jay Derrick and Kathryn Ecclestone
of summative outcomes for accountability thus directly affects ideas and practices in relation to formative assessment (see Derrick et al. , in press; Ecclestone et al. , in progress). The gap in research on formative assessment for adult learning and growing evidence about the impact of strongly target-driven summative systems make it important to differentiate between activities that look like formative assessment but which may be little more than coaching or continuous summative assessment, and to examine the political, social and cultural factors that affect how teachers and students practise formative assessment in different learning and assessment contexts (Ecclestone, 2002, 2004, Torrance et al., 2005, Ecclestone et al. , in progress). We hope that this literature review will make a contribution to the illumination of these important issues, and ultimately make a positive material difference to the work of teachers and learners in adult education services.
The material surveyed directly in this review was gathered and selected between June 2005 and February 2007, through a combination of means, including Internet searches on key words, suggestions from colleagues, bibliographical trails, and personal knowledge and experience. We started with a number of overview studies of adult learning, including Edwards et al. (1998), Cullen et al. (2002), and in particular found Tusting and Barton (2003) and Zachry and Comings (2006) very useful. But finding relevant material has not been a systematic process, because attempts to search systematically for material on formative assessment and adult learning produced few results, except in relation to teaching and learning in higher education. These we decided to exclude in order to ensure this review had its main focus clearly in the learning and skills sector, (that is, in adult learning in post-compulsory education not provided in universities and in workplaces), in informal adult learning, and in adult basic education; we hope however, that this review will complement other research focusing directly on higher education. Of course, the fact that relevant material was not found through systematic searches does not mean that „formative assessment‟ is a topic which is irrelevant to, or which has been ignored by writers on adult learning, but that the term „formative assessment‟ has only rarely been used until recently in the context of adult or lifelong learning. It appears in a UNESCO report as early as 1978, which, in examining conceptual approaches to the evaluation of schooling and assessing their relevance for lifelong learning, argues that:
„There should be a much greater emphasis on formative assessment than is found in the school sector‟ (Skager, 1978). Apart from this isolated recommendation, the earliest explicit reference found to formative assessment in relation to lifelong or adult learning was in Boud (2000) , though relevant work published since then is much more likely to use the term. We have found only one book-length treatment of post-compulsory learning that uses the term „formative assessment‟ in its title (Ecclestone, 2002 ), and this is based on a study of two groups of 16-19 year-old vocational students in a qualification where goals of formative assessment for autonomy and motivation were built into a radical, controversial assessment model. Only one short published paper on adult education uses „formative assessment‟ in its title (Swain et al., 2006). However, many other studies focussing on a wide range of settings for adult learning deal with topics and concepts clearly related to formative assessment, though mostly not explicitly and almost never systematically. For example, many publications discuss „feedback‟ as an important component of adult learning but few link this to the notion of formative assessment.
The term „formative assessment‟ is not clearly defined and has not been current in the literature on adult learning until recently. However, other relevant terms and concepts have been widely studied as being central to effective adult learning. A relatively unsystematic approach is supported by Black and Wiliam (2003) who acknowledge the complexity of research reviews in social science and the difficulties of producing „objective syntheses‟ of research findings, and the dangers of the accidental but systematic exclusion of relevant material, particularly in fields which are under-theorised and not well-defined. In particular, in the relative absence of systematic academic studies, this review has sought to access „practitioner wisdom‟ wherever possible, and agrees with the definition of „evidence- based practice‟ given by NCSALL in the USA as „the integration of professional wisdom with the best available empirical evidence in making decisions about how to deliver instruction‟ (Comings, 2003). We therefore hope that our review contributes to the eventual development of a systematic conceptual framework for theorising formative assessment in adult learning. However, we are well aware that we have probably missed relevant material, particularly from English-speaking countries other than the UK, and that relevant new publications and reports are appearing with increasing rapidity.
We have organised discussion of the review material under relevant themes in discussions of formative assessment, even though these are not always wholly distinct headings and different terminology is apparently used for similar aspects of teaching and learning. A short summary of the
F. Publications dealing with formative assessment, where the primary focus is the education of children, but which reference lifelong or adult learning either explicitly or implicitly (4 studies). Sixty-five per cent (67%) of the studies reviewed come from the UK. Fifty-eight (59%) of the studies have a primary focus on adult literacy, numeracy or language teaching and learning.
Discussions of teaching, learning, and assessment in the context of the UK at the present time have to recognise that these are controversial and contested topics. Within the broad context of education as a whole, the increasing political attention paid to what teachers actually do in classrooms, as well as the charged debates about the increasingly selective processes by which learners in schools transfer between primary and secondary schooling, secondary and tertiary phases, and between tertiary and university or the world of work, have brought ideas about assessment onto the centre stage of political and media discussion. For adult learners, these debates are in some ways even more pointed: demonstrating the value to the taxpayer of continued state funding for provision of opportunities for adult learning has always been difficult in a system still dominated by and organised around the idea of education as something mainly for children and young people, undertaken full-time, and leading in an uncomplicated way to national qualifications. The range of purposes for learning and the meanings of success and achievement in learning are more complex and diverse in relation to adult learners, and one might expect this diversity to be reflected in political debates about and the regulation of assessment in this context, but this is not the case. Rather, adult learners have to fit into a system ever more narrowly-focussed on the goal of improving industrial and business productivity, and which utilises indicators of achievement, success and quality designed for that purpose alone. Recent research on teaching and learning in schools has raised powerful objections to these narrowly-focussed political goals for education and the current methodologies for assuring the quality of provision in schools, on the grounds that they do not work as well as viable alternative approaches to both pedagogy and to performance measurement and accountability to the taxpayer (Black and Wiliam, 1998, Black et al., 2002). The key concept in this critique is Formative Assessment (FA), sometimes described as „assessment for learning‟ as distinct from „assessment of learning‟:
Assessment for learning is any assessment for which the first priority in its design and practice is to serve the purpose of promoting students‟ learning. It thus differs from assessment designed primarily to serve the purposes of accountability, or of ranking, or of certifying competence. An assessment activity can help learning if it provides information to be used as feedback, by teachers, and by their students, in assessing themselves and each other, to modify the teaching and learning activities in which they are engaged. Such assessment becomes „formative assessment‟ when the evidence is actually used to adapt the teaching work to meet learning needs. (Black et al., 2002). According to the Assessment Reform Group, assessment for learning should:
1. be part of effective planning for teaching and learning so that learners and teachers should obtain and use information about progress towards learning goals; planning should include processes _for feedback and engaging learners;
enabling students to take charge of their own learning and to adapt their own habits and approaches;
providing students with opportunities to practice skills individually and collectively as part of the learning process, and particularly to exercise, discuss and reflect on qualitative judgements about the success of their practice;
promoting inquiry and reflection (with the language of discovering, reflecting, reviewing, finding out, engaging with, understanding, constructing knowledge, making sense of experience) (adapted from Hargreaves, ibid. ).
Further insights about the meaning of learning embedded in formative assessment practices emerged in a project in the Economic and Social Science Research Council‟s (ESRC) Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP) on „learning how to learn‟. This showed that teachers in the same subject team can change techniques such as classroom questioning, but there is a marked difference in whether teachers present and understand this in the spirit or letter of assessment for learning (AfL) (see Marshall and Drummond, 2006). This useful distinction illuminates how the spirit of AfL goes beyond extrinsic success in meeting targets and, instead, enables students to combine better performance with engagement and good learning habits in order to promote „learning autonomy‟. In contrast, the letter of AfL means that formative techniques promote a teacher-centred, transmission view of knowledge and learning, rather than transaction and transformation of understanding. However, as with all categories, these are not neatly separated from each other: teachers in this project often had a particular goal and focus of attention in mind, but shifted between these and others during a lesson (Marshall and Drummond, 2006). The same phenomenon is also apparent amongst vocational and adult education teachers (see Ecclestone et al. , in progress).
Formative and diagnostic data and insights can come from a range of activities normally associated with 'teaching', such as classroom questioning and feedback, group work and peer assessment on a piece of previously assessed work, from summative assessment outcomes and from draft or interim assessments:
initial guidance interview;
initial diagnostic assessment (tests, assignments, etc.);
questions asked individually or in class to diagnose understanding and to build understanding with students;
written feedback and advice from teachers, oneself, peers: it is important to note that self and peer assessment are commonly assumed to be 'formative' but they might be used entirely for summative purposes;
oral feedback for answers to questions asked of students or to questions that students ask;
drafting assignments or work for feedback from teachers, self or peers;
using exemplars of good and poor quality work to assess the quality of one's and others' work in relation to the assessment criteria;
individual and group exercises in evaluation of students‟ work against different success criteria;
tutorials or reviews – group and individual, peer or teacher-led;
questions at the end of sessions to find out what was easy or difficult, what still needs to be learned; The focus of attention can be seen broadly as:
getting a better grade or mark;
improving skills and knowledge in a specific subject, topic or task;
reflecting on „learning to learn‟ processes (meta-cognition);
making, discussing, and reflecting on qualitative judgements of performance;
building a sense of positive identity, ego, confidence – personal development;
Competing meanings of learning in activities that are ostensibly „formative‟ make it important to show where instrumental learning can be a springboard for deeper forms and where it remains merely instrumental (see Ecclestone et al. , in progress). Narrow, prescriptive outcomes and criteria used for accountability and national measurement cannot easily serve the educational purposes of formative assessment. Validity is therefore crucial: if summative goals are narrow and lead to superficial learning, their validity
An important aspect of effective formative assessment practice is referred to variously in the literature as the need for an appropriate „atmosphere‟, „classroom culture‟, or „organisational environment‟, meaning a relaxed interpersonal climate in which learners are comfortable to interact, listen to others, even to disagree with or challenge others, including the teacher. Most commentators see the creation of such an atmosphere as one of the most important roles of the teacher, though one group also recognises that there are usually factors affecting the climate for interaction that are outside the teacher‟s control. Another group point out that an atmosphere conducive to learning is not simply a comfortable environment in which students can feel safe: on the contrary, learning implies a degree of challenge. Teachers concerned too much with „caring for‟ their learners, they argue, may be inhibiting successful learning.
Very many commentators on adult learning stress the importance of ensuring that there is an appropriate „atmosphere‟ in the class for effective learning. Among these are Absolum (2007), Hillier (2002), Knowles (1983), Barton et al. (2006), Ivanic et al. (2006), Beder (2005), and Brookfield (1990). They draw attention to the need to enable adult learners, particularly those new to formal learning, or who have had negative previous experiences of education, to be relaxed and comfortable, so that they are ready for effective learning, and to face any challenges involved. For adult educators this has always been one of the first rules for teachers, based on the assumption that for many adults, formal learning may be an unfamiliar and potentially threatening experience. The elements that contribute to the „atmosphere‟ of the class include the physical environment, the layout of the room, the behaviour of other students, and, most importantly, the behaviour of the teacher. Teachers are encouraged to work on generating friendly relations, goodwill and trust between all the members of the group, so that individual students are more willing to take risks, to expose themselves, as part of the sometimes difficult process of learning. The main way in which teachers work to develop and maintain this atmosphere is through their own behaviour – the way they relate to students, their communicative style, what they say, and what they do. Some commentators see this fundamental role for teachers as potentially the first stage in the development of a „community of practice‟ ( Marr, 2000 , Lave and Wenger, 1991), in which individual and collective learning is integrated with productive activity. However others argue that there is a danger in practice of over-emphasising the „nurturing‟ and „caring‟ aspects of teaching and learning, at the expense of learning for the real world. They point out that unconfident learners may enjoy coming to classes that are undemanding, sociable, and fun, and that teachers too, may find it easier to
collude with such learners, so that little productive learning takes place. Windsor and Healey (2006) , for example, in a discussion of tutorials as part of ESOL teaching and learning, argue for clarity about the limits of the role of the tutor in tutorials: „they are there to support the learners‟ learning, not their personal needs‟. Ecclestone (2004b) believes that there is now too much emphasis on the „well-being‟ of students, with consequently less emphasis on the need for students to acquire truly useful knowledge and skills, through a process of learning that may indeed be difficult and challenging. She argues that an unhealthy pre-occupation with health – specifically, the emotional well-being of the student – gets in the way of learning, with stultifying consequences for the learner and teacher alike, creating „a new sensibility that resonates with broader cultural pessimism about people‟s fragility and vulnerability‟. An important group of studies highlight the importance of organisational culture in relation to learning in the workplace, including: Evans (2002), Fuller and Unwin (2002), and Belfiore and Folinsbee (2004). Each of these studies focuses on the „managerial environment‟ or „management style‟ of the workplace. Belfiore and Folinsbee discuss the degree of involvement of workers in the training itself, and the management style of the workplace in relation to quality input from the workers, both of these being indicators of dialogic practice. Training is seen as more effective in terms of management objectives and sustainability if it starts with the realities of the workplace and individual workers, rather than a formal curriculum transmitted to passive trainees. Examples of ways in which improvements suggested by the employees demonstrate that they are critical thinkers and system analysts suggest that training and quality improvement processes should be participatory rather than teacher or manager-led and top-down. Evans (2002) discusses the contribution of the organisational context to workplace learning and argues that systematically utilising all the skills and knowledge of workers, including the tacit, is more likely to be effective in „democratic‟ as opposed to „technocratic‟ models of the learning society. These models are differentiated primarily along the spectrum of participation, involvement, and ownership of decisions taken in workplaces and in society as a whole. For Evans, the key concept (and practical goal of training and education) is transferability of skills and knowledge between different contexts. She argues that the greater the tacit dimension of these skills and knowledge (all knowledge has both tacit and explicit dimensions), then the more transfer has to involve high levels of social interaction. She cites research which suggests that for the purposes of genuine transferability of skills and knowledge, demonstration, manuals and written accounts are of little help.
The emphasis of many commentators (for example Young, 2000 , Barton et al., 2004, 2006, Ivanic, 2006, and Marshall and Wiliam, 2006 ), is on the learning environment needing to be a „safe space‟ in which learners under various kinds of pressure in their lives can face up to anxiety about past educational failure, allow their assumptions to be challenged, aspects of their identities to be developed and changed, and to „play‟ (Absolum, 2006) with newly-acquired and developing skills. James (1997) notes that some of the key barriers to learning may come from the culture of adult students themselves. She notes that processes of adult learning often evoke powerful emotional responses, when for example personal constructs are challenged, and that these responses may even be likely in some contexts of learning such as workplace training in the use of new technologies and more flexible work processes, or for more effective community participation and constructive citizenship. Her study of three groups of male „mature-age‟ adults training to be teachers after experience of working in a range of different trades, argues that these responses must be addressed if sustainable learning is to take place: „During their two years of teacher education, they were…. responsible for conducting classes in Victorian secondary schools…. Yet, instead of endeavouring to learn the new skills that could assist them, it was group solidarity, maintained through sexist and racist humour, on which they came to rely during their teacher education program. This solidarity apparently provided support through „trying‟ lectures and enabled them to withstand any challenges to their beliefs. Their practices were themselves often stress-inducing, very authoritarian methods, for example, generating considerable resentment among their adolescent students. Negativism towards almost everyone, including students, parents and the educational institution, emerged as a favourite coping strategy, unfortunately resulting in the avoidance of professional change….significant learning from their course, for most of them, appeared to be minimal‟ (James, 1997) The study piloted an intervention specifically aiming to deal with this resistance to learning, which utilised a short narrative case-study describing a trainee teacher like the group members themselves, facing a major life transition. Small group discussions were set up to explore how the degree to which the trainees‟ own experiences and feelings were similar to those of the protagonist of the case study. The study found that this approach was highly successful: „People began to speak of themselves, tentatively at first, and then with greater confidence, using the language of the narrative to
describe their own experiences. The narrative thus led to unprecedented self-disclosure‟ (James, 1997) , and she concludes that: „If people are to continue learning when identities are challenged, they need to understand how their aspirations can be realised by their study, what learning or lack of it will mean for future prospects, and how the culture of the group can enable or inhibit progress….culturally-specific narrative can be used to initiate these changes, but non-directively, in addition to enabling reflection and empowerment. Direct questioning of deeply-ingrained beliefs may often arouse only defensiveness and resentment….this study may have greatest relevance in situations in which communication skills and personal learning, sometimes related to vocational requirements, are the focus of the class‟ (James, 1997). In a similar vein, Nonesuch (2006) argues that students who feel resistant to aspects of the learning experience need the opportunity and perhaps encouragement to express this resistance, if it is to be addressed constructively. She quotes a small research study that actually found that such an approach can be associated with increased levels of learner „persistence‟, noting that the more complex and open their resistance to the teacher and the teaching, the more likely the student was to attend regularly:
These results suggest a positive association between conscious, active resistance and regular attendance. It also suggests that the more that conscious resistance is encouraged, the more likely it is that regular attendance will result (Pare, 1994).
This paradoxical result illustrates again the complexity of the communicative skills required of teachers if they are to realise the potential for learning and persistence in what seem at first to be the unlikeliest of resources. An analogous point made by Swan (2006) concerning the value of highlighting disagreements between learners themselves, or even between learners and the teacher, about strategies for solving problems, or interpretations of situations requiring mathematical analysis, was referenced earlier in the section on dialogue.
This section has aimed to unpack some practical aspects of developing an atmosphere and culture conducive to learning. This is often the first element of guides to teaching in adult education, and highlights the importance of students feeling relaxed and secure for effective learning to take place, and of the common need to address fears based on negative
