Practice of Classroom Assessments for Learning
AbstractThis study was conducted to examine the effect of conducting classroom assessment and to find the effective ways of delivery for students’ learning. It is found that most useful method of delivery as asking questions, demonstrating examples on the board and discussing the problems while delivering through lectures. Assessments were carried out using three different ways and students’ performances were analyzed for comparison. Three methods used were fairly successful (60% to 79%) and students were able to gain high marks for the end examination. The best performance was shown when students carried out the assessment with the facilitation through interaction with the teacher (78% to 80%). Once assessments were completed by the students, demonstrations of the same on the board by the teacher acted as an effective feedback for large classroom (about 60 students) as they were able to evaluate their performances and corrected answers.
Dylan William. (2011 Apr.). “What is assessment for learning”. Studies in educational Evaluation 37. Pp. 3-14. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001.
M.J. Eady and L. Lockyer. (2013). “Tools for learning: technology and teaching strategies”, Learning to teach in the primary school, Queensland University of Technology, Australia, pp 71. Available: http://ro.uow.edu.au/asdpapers/403.
F.H. Thomas and A.J. Shah, A.J. (2007). “Using Learning Style Instruments to Enhance Student Learning”, Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 5(1).
Shahida Sajjad. (2006). “Effective Teaching methods at higher education level”, Department of Social Education, University of Karachi, Pakistan.
Caroline Gipps and Mary James. (1996 Sep.). “Assessment matched to learning”. Symposium of the BERA Assessment Policy Task Group, BERA Conference, Available: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000000085.htm.
C.A. Jones. (2005), “Assessment for learning”. Vocational learning Support Programme: 16-19, published by Learning and Skills development Agency.
Chan Yuen Fook and Gurnam Kaur Sidhu. (2015). “Investigating Learning Challenges faced by Students in Higher Education”. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 604 – 612, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.001.
Thomas A. Angelo and K. Patricia Cross. (1993). A Handbook for College Teachers. 2nd Ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
John Hattie and Helen Timperley. (2007 Mar.). “The Power of Feedback” Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), 81-112 DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487.
Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. (1994). “Promoting self-determined education”. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 38(1), 3-14. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383940380101.
D. Royce Sadler. (1989). “Formative assessment and the design of instructional system”. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714.
Dawn-Marie Walker. (2012 Sep.). “Classroom Assessment Techniques: An Assessment and Student Evaluation Method”. Creative Education, Vol.3, Special Issue, 903-907. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.326136.
David J. Nicol and Debra Macfarlane-Dick. (2006) “Formative assessmet and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice”. Studies in Higher Education. 31(2). pp. 199-218. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.
P. Black and D. William. (1998 Mar.) “Assessment and classroom learning”, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. Vol 5(1), pp. 7-75.
Maddalena Taras. (2010 Jan.). “Assessment for learning: assessing the theory and evidence”. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 3015-3022. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.457.
Kathleen Cotton. (1988). “Monitoring student learning in the classroom”. School Improvement Research Series, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Department of Education. U.S.
Boston Carol. (2002 Oct.). “The Concept of Formative Assessment”. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation College Park MD. Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED470206.pdf.
Taghi, Jabbarifar. (2009). “The importance of classroom assessment and evaluation in educational system”. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of Teaching and Learning, INTI University College, Malaysia.
William, E.K. (2008). Assessment in Engineering Programs: Evolving Best Practices, The Association for Institutional research Assessment in the Disciplines, Volume 3.
Caroline Gipps. (1994). “Beyond testing: towards a theory of educational assessment”. The Falmer Press (A member of the Taylor & Francis Group) London.
Michael A. Buhagiar. (2007 May). “Classroom assessment within the alternative assessment paradigm: revisiting the territory”. The Curr iculum Journal, 18(1), 39–56. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170701292174.
Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- By submitting the processing fee, it is understood that the author has agreed to our terms and conditions which may change from time to time without any notice.
- It should be clear for authors that the Editor In Chief is responsible for the final decision about the submitted papers; have the right to accept\reject any paper. The Editor In Chief will choose any option from the following to review the submitted papers:A. send the paper to two reviewers, if the results were negative by one reviewer and positive by the other one; then the editor may send the paper for third reviewer or he take immediately the final decision by accepting\rejecting the paper. The Editor In Chief will ask the selected reviewers to present the results within 7 working days, if they were unable to complete the review within the agreed period then the editor have the right to resend the papers for new reviewers using the same procedure. If the Editor In Chief was not able to find suitable reviewers for certain papers then he have the right to accept\reject the paper.B. sends the paper to a selected editorial board member(s). C. the Editor In Chief himself evaluates the paper.
- Author will take the responsibility what so ever if any copyright infringement or any other violation of any law is done by publishing the research work by the author
- Before publishing, author must check whether this journal is accepted by his employer, or any authority he intends to submit his research work. we will not be responsible in this matter.
- If at any time, due to any legal reason, if the journal stops accepting manuscripts or could not publish already accepted manuscripts, we will have the right to cancel all or any one of the manuscripts without any compensation or returning back any kind of processing cost.
- The cost covered in the publication fees is only for online publication of a single manuscript.