Two teacher educators’ approaches to developing preservice elementary teachers’ mathematics assessment literacy: Intentions, outcomes, and new learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.3.1.47Keywords:
preservice teacher education, assessment literacy, instructional activities and practices, faculty developmentAbstract
The purpose of this study was to examine and reflect on two teacher educators’ approaches to developing preservice elementary teachers’ mathematics assessment literacy. We explored the similarities and differences in preservice teachers’ conceptions of good assessment practices and their critique of assessment items. We found that we, as course instructors, had different assumptions pertaining to the role of preservice teachers in the development of assessment and offered different assessment-related course activities. Despite these differences, there were more similarities than differences between the two groups of the preservice teachers with regard to their overall perceptions about good assessment practices and their critique of assessment items. However, we also observed differences in the criteria they used in critiquing assessment items. Discussions and implications are presented in accordance with these findings as a means to improve our own teaching and student learning.
Metrics
References
Apple, M. W. (1986). Teachers and texts: A political economy of class and gender relations in education. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Apple, M. W. (1995). Education and power. New York: Routledge.
Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1974) Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that PSTs bring to teacher education. The Elementary School Journal, 90(4), 449-465.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
Black, P., Harrison C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 9-21.
Broadfoot, P. (2000). Assessment and intuition. In T. Atkinson & G. Claxton (Eds.), The intuitive practitioner: On the value of not always knowing what one is doing (pp. 199-219). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Chick, N. (2013). Difference, privilege, and power in the scholarship of teaching and learning: The value of humanities SoTL. In K. McKinney (ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning: In and across the disciplines (pp. 15-33). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Ensor, P. (2000). Recognizing and realizing “best practice” in initial mathematics teacher education and classroom teaching. In J. Bana, & A. Champman (Eds.), Mathematics education beyond 2000. Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (pp.235-242). Fremantle, Western Australia: MERGA.
Feiman-Nemser, S. & Remillard, J. (1996). Perspectives on learning to teach. In F. Murray (ed.), The Teacher Educator’s Handbook (pp.63-91). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gilpin, L. S. (2011). Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Trades. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(2). Article 4. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/ij-sotl/vol5/iss2/4
Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gregory, E., Ellis, J. P., & Orenstein, A. N. (2011). A proposal for a common minimal topic set in introductory biology courses for majors. The American Biology Teacher, 72(1), 16-21.
James, M., & Pedder, D. (2006). Professional learning as a condition for assessment for learning. In J. Gardner (Ed.)., Assessment and learning (pp. 27-44). London, UK: Sage.
Kahl, S., Hofman, P., & Bryant, S. (2013). Assessment literacy standards and performance measures for teacher candidates and practicing teachers. Dover, NH: Measured Progress.
Kastberg, S., Sanchez, W. B., Ednfield, K. W., Tyminski, A., & Stump, C. (2012). What is the content of Methods? Building an understanding of frameworks for Mathematics Methods Courses. Proceedings for the Thirty-fourth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Kosnik, C., & Beck, C. (2009). Priorities in teacher education: The 7 key elements of preservice preparation. New York: Routledge.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.
Popham, W. J. (2009, June 4). Is Assessment Literacy the “Magic Bullet”? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.hepg.org/blog/19.
Rogers, T. (1991). Educational assessment in Canada: Evolution or extinction? The Alberta Journal of Educational Research 37, 179-192.
Shepard, L., Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., & Rust, F. (2005). Assessment. In L. Darling-Jammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 275-326). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758-765.
Taylor, C. (1994). Assessment for measurement or standards: The peril and promise of large scale assessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 13(2), 231–262.
Taylor, P. M., & Ronau, R. (2006, Fall). Syllabus study: A structured look at mathematics methods courses. AMTE Connections, 12-15.
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General systems theory. New York: Braziller.
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3-14.
