Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Explorations in Technology Education Research pp 109–121Cite as

Teachers’ Assessment Practices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 562 Accesses

Part of the book series: Contemporary Issues in Technology Education ((CITE))

Abstract

This chapter is based on my doctoral thesis Navigare necesse est—Necessities and complexities regarding teachers’ assessment practices—which is grounded in my prior experience as a teacher of elementary science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects. It focuses on teachers’ assessment practices in primary and lower secondary technology education and contributes to the fields of technology education and educational assessment. In this chapter, I summarize my findings and describe methods of providing affordance for teachers’ assessment practices to bridge teaching and learning in technology education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. (2008). Formative assessment in the learning and teaching of design and technology education: Methods and techniques. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 13(3), 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education: Principles. Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(1), 8–21. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44835745_Working_Inside_the_Black_Box_Assessment_for_Learning_in_the_Classroom.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard, R. D., Hoy Wayne, K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard, R., Goddard, Y., Sook Kim, E., & Miller, R. (2015). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the roles of instructional leadership, teacher collaboration, and collective efficacy beliefs in support of student learning. American Journal of Education, 121(4), 501–530. https://doi.org/10.1086/681925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, C. (2009). Assessment for Learning. A Formative Approach to Classroom Practice). In A. Jones & M. deVries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 449–459). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartell, E. (2013). Looking for a glimpse in the eye: A descriptive study of teachers’ work with assessment in technology education. In I.-B. Skogh & M. J. De Vries (Eds.), Technology teachers as researchers: Philosophical and empirical technology education studies in the Swedish TUFF research school (1st ed., pp. 255–283). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hartell, E. (2014). Exploring the (un-) usefulness of mandatory assessment documents in primary technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(2), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9250-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartell, E. (2015). The cared for teacher. In J. Evers & R. Kneyber (Eds.), Flip the system: Changing education from the ground up (1st ed., pp. 241–246). London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartell, E. (2017). Teachers’ self-efficacy in assessment in technology education. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Springer international handbook of education: Handbook of technology education (1st ed., pp. 1–16). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38889-2_56-1.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hartell, E., & Ahlkvist, J. (2014). En kortfattade beskrivning om hur en skola i Haninge kommun har arbetat med att implementera formativ bedömning hållbart i verksamheten. In Bedömning för lärande, BFL, för praktik och forskning (pp. 1–3). Stockholm: IFOUS Retrieved from http://www.ifous.se/bfl-konferens/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartell, E., Holmberg, S., & Åkesson, J. (2015). Att leda framåt och inte till leda. In Att leda för BLF; forskning och praktik möter varandra (pp. 1–2). Stockholm: IFOUS Retrieved from http://www.ifous.se/bfl-2015/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers Maximizing impact on student learning. Exeter: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsh, Å. (2011). A tool for learning? An analysis of targets and strategies in Swedish individual educational plans. Nordic Studies in Education, 31(1), 14–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsh, Å., & Lindberg, V. (2015). Formativ bedömning på 2000-talet- en översikt av svensk och internationell forskning. Sweden: Stockholm. Retrieved from https://publikationer.vr.se/produkt/delrapport-fran-skolforsk-projektet-formativ-bedomning-pa-2000-talet-en-oversikt-av-svensk-och-internationell-forskning/

  • Jönsson, A. (2010). Lärande bedömning. Malmö: Gleerups.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R. (2007). Assessment. In M. de Vries, R. Custer, J. Dakers, & G. Martin (Eds.), Analyzing best practices in technology education (pp. 247–258). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Siobhan Leahy, Christine Lyon, Marnie Thompson, and Dylan Wiliam. Quality Assurance, 63(November), 1–7. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov05/vol63/num03/Classroom-Assessment@-Minuteby- Minute,-Day-by-Day.aspx

  • Leahy, S., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Embedding formative assessment-a professional development pack for schools. London: Specialist Schools and Academies Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindström, L. (2006). Creativity: What is it? Can you assess it? Can it be taught? The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 25(1), 53–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreland, J., Jones, A., & Barlex, D. (2008). Design and technology inside the black box assessment for learning in the design and technology classroom. London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • NAE. (2009). Allmänna råd och kommentarer. Den individuella utvecklingsplanen med skriftliga omdömen. Skolverkets allmänna råd 2008. Revised 2009. Statens Skolverk (NAE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, P. (2008). Learning to Teach and Teaching to Learn Primary science student teachers’ complex journey from learners to teachers. Norrköping: Linköping university.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, D., Dixon, J., & Archer, J. (2015). Changes in science teaching self-efficacy among primary teacher education students. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, (12), 40. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n12.3.

  • Pettersson, A. (2009). Bedömning- varför, vad och varthän? In L. Lindström & V. Lindberg (Eds.), Pedagogisk bedömning (2nd ed., pp. 31–42). Stockholm: Stockholm universitets förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, A. (2011). Comparative judgement for assessment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(2), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9189-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, A. (2012). The method of adaptive comparative judgement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(3), 281–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.665354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohaan, E. J., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2012). Analysing teacher knowledge for technology education in primary schools. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(3), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9147-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skolinspektionen. (2014). Teknik – gör det osynliga synligt Om kvaliteten i grundskolans teknikundervisning. Stockholm: Skolverket.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skollagen Svensk författningssamling 2010:800. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/Dokument-Lagar/Lagar/Svenskforfattningssamling/Skollag-2010800_sfs-2010-800/?bet=2010:800

  • Skolverket. (2011). Diskussionunderlag för grundskolan Diskutera kursplanen i ämnet teknik. Retrieved from http://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=2547

  • Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. Chippenham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2009). Assessment for learning: Why, what and how? In An inaugural professorial lecture by Dylan Wiliam. London: Institute of Education University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2016). Leadership for teacher learning. Creating a culture where all teachers improve so that all students succeed (1st ed.). West Palm Beach: Learning Sciences International.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

    Eva Hartell

Authors
  1. Eva Hartell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eva Hartell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Curtin University, Perth, Australia

    P John Williams

  2. University of Exeter Associate, Brighton, UK

    David Barlex

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hartell, E. (2019). Teachers’ Assessment Practices. In: Williams, P.J., Barlex, D. (eds) Explorations in Technology Education Research. Contemporary Issues in Technology Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3010-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3010-0_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3009-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3010-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation