Collaborative research for assessment for learning

Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

Collaborative research for assessment for learning Beverley Cooper*, Bronwen Cowie School of Education, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 18 July 2008 Received in revised form 6 August 2009 Accepted 28 October 2009

This paper reports on a collaborative research study between three secondary teachers and two university researchers, initiated by the teachers, into the practice and impacts of assessment for learning in science, geography and history classes. The research provides insights into how teachers and researchers can collaborate to develop a research and practice agenda. The study illustrates the need for a dynamic interconnection between the personal, micro or school-related level and the macro or policy level factors. The findings highlight the importance of external support, shared teacher knowledge and beliefs, professional experimentation, and shared reflection on student responses to classroom innovations. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Assessment for learning Collaborative research Secondary school Policy

1. Introduction Teachers are being encouraged to engage with research evidence and to participate in research studies related to their classroom practice with the aim to raise student achievement. Following the review by Black and Wiliam (1998), there has been a worldwide focus on the teacher use of assessment for learning practices to improve student achievement. This paper reports on collaborative research between a group of secondary teachers and university researchers, initiated by the teachers, into the practice and impacts of assessment for learning in chemistry, geography and history classes. It provides insights into one way that teachers and university researchers might work collaboratively to develop a research and practice agenda that is driven by the teachers rather than the researchers. The findings highlight the contribution of external support, shared teacher knowledge and beliefs, systematic professional experimentation, and shared reflection on student responses to classroom innovations if changes to teacher's thinking and practice are to be sustained. 1.1. Defining AfL It is now widely recognised that Assessment for Learning (AfL), has an important role to play in enhancing student learning and achievement (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Formative assessment is the process used by teachers and students to recognise and respond to

* Corresponding author at: Tel.: þ64 7 8384382; fax: þ64 7 8384977. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (B. Cooper), [email protected] (B. Cowie). 0742-051X/$ e see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.040

student learning in order to enhance that learning, during the learning (Cowie & Bell, 1999). Typically it revolves around strategies such as: wait time; clarifying and sharing learning intentions and criteria for success; comment-only marking; orchestrating classroom discussions using questioning and other learning tasks to elicit evidence of student understanding; providing timely feedback and peer and self-assessment (Black & Wiliam, 1998, 2009). Teachers can plan to elicit and act on information about class and individual progress (Cowie & Bell, 1999) but the quality of interactive feedback is a critical feature in determining the quality of learning activity, and is therefore a central feature of assessment for learning pedagogy. Effective feedback is non evaluative, supportive, timely and specific in providing information about how a learner might modify their thinking or behaviour to improve their learning (Shute, 2008). 1.2. Teacher assessment for learning practice: a personal challenge Teacher implementation of AfL is not without its challenges and has been the focus of numerous research and professional development initiatives internationally. One line of research focuses on exploring teacher personal knowledge and beliefs. Sato, Coffey, and Moorby (2005) working in the United States point to the role of teacher personal beliefs and background as an influence on how, or even if, teachers explore how AfL practices might be incorporated into their wider responsibilities. Black and colleagues provide evidence that different teachers adopt and adapt different practices consistent with their understandings of effective teaching (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam, 2003). They argue that teacher beliefs about their own learning and student learning and agency underpins the way AfL becomes embedded in classroom practice.

980

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

The promotion of learner autonomy lies at the heart of AfL and if teachers don't appreciate this it appears that AfL can be implemented as a series of ritualised teaching strategies and hence loses much of its efficacy (Lee & Wiliam, 2005; Marshall & Drummond, 2006; Sadler, 1989). Changing teacher assessment practice is not simply a matter of increasing teachers' assessment literacy through professional development about activities such as wait time it requires conceptual shifts for all stakeholders (Tierny, 2006, p. 259).

important that the teachers wanted to change their practice (Priestly, 2005) and so the study began with the teachers examining their own practice, particularly the way they questioned and gave feedback to students. This was followed by classroom experimentation and careful reflection on practice. The collaborative study that is the focus of this paper differs from the initiatives previously described as it was initiated by a teacher rather than us as researchers.

1.3. Teacher assessment for learning practice: shaped by the context

1.5. The research goal and question

A second line of research, typically informed by sociocultural views of learning, has provided a more contextual explanation of how and why teachers might implement assessment for learning in their classrooms (see for example Black & Wiliam, 2006, 2009; Gipps, 1999; Pryor & Crossouard, 2007). School case studies of the implementation of assessment for learning across schools in Jersey (Jones & Webb, 2006) highlight the impact of variations in-school priorities and cultures for change, along with the role and importance of leadership and trust when school communities are responding to changes, whether imposed externally or developed internally. This said, when teachers reflected on and analysed examples of formative assessment that worked, and examples when it had not, they were able refine and develop their practice. Teachers involved in the Assessment Is for Learning programme in Scotland were also influenced by contextual factors (Hayward, Priestley, & Young, 2004). They appreciated taking research ideas into the classroom and were generally comfortable with the ideas and learner-centred classroom strategies that underpinned the formative assessment project. Nevertheless, they found the adoption of such approaches to be problematic because of the need to prepare children for national tests and the time involved. The study also highlighted the importance of credible leadership and regular dialogue with other professionals in scaffolding innovation. When the principal had a real and demonstrable commitment to the innovation they were powerful contextual catalysts for the teachers. Most commonly the teachers valued support from colleagues and the opportunity to talk with teachers from other schools. Local context clearly impacts on teacher AfL understanding and implementation. Carless (2005) explicates the influence of the broader context, in conjunction with more local factors, on teacher and school change. He proposed that teacher practice is shaped by a nested set of factors at the personal, school and political level. Carless described how the personal level encompasses teacher understandings of principles and practices of assessment for learning and the congruence of these with their existing beliefs. The next “micro” level of the change environment is that of school support, school culture and school resourcing. This is nested within a “macro” level of external factors such as policy, infrastructure and external agencies. In this study we highlight the interactive influence of personal, school and political factors on teacher assessment practice.

At the beginning of the study the overarching research question was negotiated between the teachers and university researchers. The question was: What do teachers see as the impact of their use of assessment for learning on student learning and student motivation and willingness to take more responsibility for their learning?

1.4. Collaborating to investigate and enhance teacher assessment for learning Teachers prefer information that is immediately and contextually relevant. Much of the research on assessment for learning involves collaboration through university school partnerships (Black & Wiliam, 1998, 2009; Sato et al., 2005; Tierny, 2006). The work of Torrance and Pryor (2001) is a rich example of this. They worked collaboratively with teachers within an action research frame to investigate and develop formative classroom assessment in primary schools by building on their own research. It was

2. Research design This study occurred in a large city high school of approximately 1500 students aged 13e18 years old, situated in a high socioeconomic area. The school is coeducational and classes are organised into 25e30 students of mixed ability. Colin an experienced head of department became interested in AfL work carried out by the Scottish Executive Education Department designed to empower the learner and help encourage independent learning methods during a staff sabbatical. He was particularly interested in self-evaluation by students of their own learning needs and their participation in negotiating personal learning targets to improve their achievement. At around the same time Colin's school management carried out a strategic planning exercise that identified that student performance in the recent national examinations did not adequately reflect the calibre of the student body when compared nationally and set raising achievement in external qualifications as a school wide strategic goal. Colin considered assessment for learning had the potential to support this goal and with the support of his principal approached the authors of this paper. 2.1. The participants Colin convinced some colleagues, also Heads of Department, that developing AfL practices would contribute to their obligations in relation to the strategic plan by raising student achievement. He invited the authors of this paper to present an overview of AfL principles to interested staff. After the presentation, the group strategised how the teachers and researchers could work together. Six teachers expressed interest in being involved in a research and development project that investigated the impact of AfL on their classroom practice and student learning in years 11e13 (15e18 year olds), these being external examination classes. Three teachers chose to participate in the full study; the other teachers withdrew due to other commitments. Each teacher selected a class to work with that they felt would benefit from using AfL strategies to support learning. Colin selected a year 12 Chemistry class (16/17 year olds), Simon a year 11 History class (15/16 year olds) and Campbell a year 11 Geography class. 2.2. The context for teacher assessment practice Assessment for Learning has been of interest in New Zealand since the late 1980s (Department of Education, 1989) but to date, there has been no research that documents teacher use of AfL strategies across a range of curriculum subjects in New Zealand secondary classrooms. AfL was mentioned explicitly in the New Zealand Curriculum Framework policy document (Ministry of

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

Education, 1993) and implied within the supporting national curriculum statements. It is emphasised in the revised national curriculum statement released in 2007 (Ministry of Education, 2007) and in recent policy documents (Absolum, Flockton, Hattie, Hipkins, & Reid, 2009; Ministry of Education, 2009). The New Zealand Teachers Council Graduating Teachers Standards (2007) implemented in 2009 also emphasise the role of assessment and stipulate that graduating teachers should be able to: use evidence to promote learning; systematically and critically engage with evidence to reflect on and refine their practice; and gather, analyse and use assessment information to improve learning and inform planning. Currently the New Zealand Ministry of Education employs Assess to Learn facilitators who provide in-school professional development and support for assessment for learning practices. Many New Zealand teachers, particularly in the primary sector, are now familiar with the key aspects of AfL. The development of new standards based high stakes assessment for the senior secondary school (National Certificate in Educational Achievement, [NCEA]) has encouraged secondary teachers to review their assessment practices. Students can gain each standard at different levels of achievement: achieved, achieved with merit or achieved with excellence. To achieve at excellence level students need to be able answer questions that involve more complex higher order thinking, such as synthesise information and/or apply information to new contexts. There is a focus on teaching for understanding rather than recall to enable students to achieve at this level. National teacher professional development for the implementation of the NCEA, focussed on the purposes of different types of assessment and this included the effectiveness of assessment for learning. New Zealand teachers have been encouraged to engage with research through the publication of a series of syntheses of international research (see for example AltonLee, 2003). Research projects funded within the New Zealand Ministry of Education's Teaching and Learning Research Initiative (Ministry of Education, 2003) are expected to include teachers as active participants in the research process. This has not been without challenge for both teachers and researchers (Haigh & Dixon, 2007). At a school level the recognition from the partnership school that exemplary teachers should be rewarded with scholarships to support professional development opportunities was a factor in this study. Colin's visit to Scotland confirmed that AfL principles aligned with his beliefs about students needing to take responsibility for their own learning and that this would fit with the school strategic goal of raising achievement in the senior school. Incidentally, the institutions he visited were drawing on AfL work from the University of Waikato. He knew the Waikato researchers and decided to approach them to further his understanding. His presentation to school staff describing his sabbatical experience and his enthusiasm and vision were pivotal in recruiting his colleagues to participate in the project. 2.3. The collaborative research and development process The project was framed as a research and development initiative to meet the needs of both the teachers and the university researchers. Throughout the project we were ever mindful that it was a privilege to be invited to collaborate with a cross curricula group of teachers in a secondary school. We were careful to acknowledge the professional commitment of the teachers and to ensure that the teachers maintained control of the overall direction of the project whilst still meeting the demands of a rigorous research process. The teachers were named as co-researchers in the university ethical consent process. The teachers then gained ethical approval for the study from their school principal and the students in the class they had selected to work within the study. As well as

981

exploring their AfL practices the teachers developed an understanding of the requirements of research in terms of systematic data collection, deadlines, funding constraints, analysis, reporting processes and the need for the dissemination of findings to others. During our collaboration we took cognisance of Clarke and Hollingsworth's (2002) model for professional growth. In this they proposed it is important to take into account four interconnected change domains: external sources of information, teacher knowledge and beliefs, professional experimentation and salient classroom or student outcomes resulting from experimentation (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002). In line with this, we contributed research information to discussions about theory and practice and the teachers explored different teaching and learning approaches and monitored the impact of these. There were two parts to the data collection. The three teachers and two researchers were involved in a series of meetings facilitated by the university researchers, to develop a shared understanding of the principles of AfL and the research process. They shared and critiqued potential AfL strategies (some sourced by the researchers and others from the teachers themselves) and followed this with classroom trials of selected strategies. The difference between research and informal classroom trialling was explored and the teachers were provided with a template to assist them to develop their individual research plans. The teachers decided to focus on the achievement of one of their examination classes. Teachers developed individual research questions and plans with the assistance of the researchers, that focussed on an aspect of AfL that they believed would support the selected classes to take more responsibility for their own learning and thus raise their achievement. Timelines were negotiated with each teacher. These included schedules for regular meetings, the development of individual teacher research plans, collection of data, document collection by the teachers and the researchers, classroom observations, student surveys and interviews and the final report of their findings. The university researchers kept in regular contact with the teachers by phone, email and through face-to-face meetings. The researchers operated an open door policy and the teachers were encouraged to call in at the end of the day or make contact by phone or email to discuss what they had been trying out. The teachers prepared a final report of their study using a template we provided. We also provided assistance with the final report writing. During this time the researchers were involved in practicum visits for cohorts of students and made informal contact with the teachers if they were in the school. Group meetings occurred at the university or in the school depending on the needs of the teachers. Some times these were held after school hours and on occasions release time from classes was funded to ensure teachers could commit to the project. In the classroom trialling part of the data collection the teachers introduced the students to the new strategies, collected student work samples, recorded their own reflections and observations, conducted student surveys, and interviewed their students about the effectiveness of the new strategies. The student work samples, reflection diaries, student work samples and surveys were shared with the researchers. The university researchers carried out some classroom observations and the teachers also visited each others classrooms and conducted informal observation and talked to students. The teachers shared the same workspace and often collaborated informally and shared successes and failures, which they found invaluable. 3. Findings The findings are presented in two parts. In the first part the teachers' experiences are presented as stories of change, one from

982

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

each teacher involved in the project. We chose to report the findings in this way to maintain the integrity of each teacher's project. The second part of the findings is the story of the whole team collaboration. 3.1. Colin's experience Colin's research focus was on the impact that personal learning plans had on student motivation and achievement in his year 12 chemistry class (16 and 17 year olds). He also wanted to establish if there was any relationship between the students' self-assessed apparent understanding of topic specific learning outcomes and understanding as evidenced by topic test scores. Colin explained: .ideas such as encouraging ‘self evaluation by pupils of their own needs’, ‘negotiating personal learning targets’, ‘empowering the learner’, ‘helping with the development of independent learning methods’, as well as' improving pupil attainment’. I was quite impressed with these ideas and thought that it would have application in the designing of a personal learning programme for my Year 12 Chemistry students. He chose a year 12 class because the school perceived the overall year 12-examination results to be somewhat disappointing and the school strategic goal was to raise their achievement. He considered year 12 to be significant in students' social, emotional and intellectual development, all the more so because it was the second of the three years that students would participate in external examinations as described below. The other reason I chose Year 12 was that I believe that year 12 in secondary school, is an interesting year in terms of student development, socially, emotionally, and academically. It is sort of a transition year that the enthusiasm they had for the external exam system in Year 11 is now been tempered by their results, and they know that they still got another year to prove themselves as year 13's, . it is also year of massive social and emotional development in my view. Colin developed personal learning plans with each of his students, this process aimed at helping his students to individually plan ahead and to take more responsibility for their own learning to improve their achievement. He developed templates to guide him in his student questioning. He interviewed each student twice and surveyed him or her three times during the year to establish their personal goals, and to provide the students with time to monitor their achievement against their goals and to assess their own progress in understanding the specific learning outcomes for their chemistry course. He scheduled interviews during quiet classroom times and on one occasion while on a bus during a field trip. On each occasion he asked for feedback on his questionnaires and interview sheets from the researchers and he made modifications where necessary. He reported that the ‘snippets of information’ divulged by the students gave him a better understanding of their motivations for studying chemistry and their expectations of him and the course. He commented that he had gained insight into the way the students worked and developed relationships with a greater number of the students. I know the students a bit better. I think that these year 12 students are quite fragile and they do need someone to take an interest in them and to be on at them in a positive way e Are you up to the mark? How are those goals going? In the background they gave to me, some of them told me about their interests and I could talk to them about how is the springboard diving going? Or your ballet level 8 how is that doing? It is just means that we

have a personal understanding of them and perhaps they realise that someone is interested in them. He also developed a better understanding of each individual student's approach to learning and how they did, or did not, individually monitor their learning and how he might assist them with this. Overall, he was surprised at the students' lack of awareness of their own learning processes and the nebulous nature of their future plans. I was astounded to find that the majority of them do not self evaluate. Apparently, they do not reflect much on their learning. It is as if they live very much in the present with little or no concern about the future. I found that quite staggering. They sit the test on Friday; get results back on the Monday and then that is locked away in the past. They didn't really think about how well or how poorly they had done and what they could do to improve Colin also gained some insights into the effectiveness of his teaching through the students' self-monitoring of their achievement against the specific learning outcomes for their chemistry course. Colin asked them to “traffic light” their perceived understandings after they finished each topic of his course and again after they had sat the topic test. He was then able to collate this information and assess where he should put emphasis in revision programmes. I have clear understanding of how they [the students] operate. Their attitudes needed to focus on better learning and understanding and the SLO [Specific learning outcome] sheets that I got from them have indicated to me, weakness in my teaching that I can perhaps sort out for next year. Colin observed that students became more realistic with their self-assessment of their understanding of chemistry concepts as the year progressed. Initially students were happy to ‘green light’ SLOs when in actual fact an “amber light” was appropriate. As the programme evolved the students became more conservative in their ‘Traffic lighting’. He described the process of working with his students over time to develop their self-assessment skills as one of the “most invigorating and satisfying” of his career because it provided an outlet for his creativity and “opened up a new perspective on good teaching practice.” It confirmed to him that teaching was not just about content and that it was important to give students opportunities and processes to take responsibility for their own learning and to reflect on and review their progress. Most of the students who participated in the personalised learning programme interviews, surveys and traffic lighting of the SLOs, felt they were useful in keeping them focussed on learning. The students viewed the ongoing nature of the interviews with Colin as important. The following is a representative student commentary on the personalised learning programme. I think the programme was useful throughout the year as it kept me focussed on my original goals. The “traffic lighting” of SLOs helped in showing my strengths and weaknesses in each topic and this helped me with my study techniques. It was effective when there were interviews throughout the year because it made me realise how much effort I had to put in and how much revising I had to do to obtain the goals I had set from the beginning of the year. Also traffic lighting of the SLOs before and after showed how much I actually understood and what need to be revisited. Some students acknowledged that the personalised learning programme would have a long-term impact on their approach to study as one remarked:

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

The programme didn't really help me take more responsibility but it did emphasise the fact that I will have to put a lot more effort into my subjects THROUGHOUT the year and not try and cramp everything into my head at the very end. I have already made the decision to set aside three to four hours a day to review things throughout the year of 2007. I will stick to this decision because I have learned it is rewarding and I will most certainly get results. 3.2. Campbell's experience Campbell explored if the use of learning intentions and student negotiated success criteria could improve the questioning skills of both the teacher and the students in a year 11 geography class. Campbell considered that student achievement in external examinations was closely linked to their ability to answer high order questions because ‘excellence’ questions in NCEA fell into this category. He also felt that if the students understood the learning intentions they would be able to formulate more sophisticated questions and develop a deeper understanding of ideas to produce quality answers to examination questions. He discussed the formulation of learning intentions with the researchers and his colleagues and the researchers contributed professional development and resources in this area both individually and in the joint meetings. Campbell outlined and wrote on the white board his learning intentions for a lesson and negotiated success criteria with students. He noted that thorough planning of his lessons was important in this process. My planning became vital so that learning intentions could be developed for each lesson and series of lessons. A thorough knowledge of the topics covered was essential when I was negotiating success criteria with the students. Campbell's focus on learning intentions had a positive impact on his classroom practice and the students' ability to answer high order questions. He felt that by identifying specifically what would be learned in each lesson or sequence of lessons it conveyed to the student exactly what was to be accomplished. Because the success criteria were negotiated with the students they had ownership of the tasks and were more likely to complete activities due to them being able to see where the task was taking them. The activities became more relevant as the student was able to check their own progress. Campbell worked on his questioning skills and reported that: I have developed several new strategies that I have been able to trial and anecdotally I have noticed that my students have benefited by; providing better answers in more detail, more students are now involved in answering and discussions, student confidence in their own ability [to answer questions] has increased. I have noted that my planning and preparation has also improved and that I am trying to be more innovative in the activities that I do. Campbell worked to support his students to pose questions about the key ideas of a lesson/unit to themselves and their peers. Students were encouraged to develop their questioning techniques through the use of a question dice strategy. Initially students developed questions using simple What?, Where?, Who?, Why? When? and Which? prompts as the basis for their question. As students became more competent with creating their own questions they were able to develop questions that promoted higher order thinking such as analysis and evaluation. This generated productive discussions between the students because they were expected to have some understanding of the answers to the questions they asked.

983

By using the question dice students not only had to come up with the question, they also had to know what the answer was and be able to communicate the question effectively as well as decipher the answer The researchers' observations of Campbell's class provided evidence that students were engaged in lively and critical dialogue when set tasks involving peer questioning. Students were positive about the AfL strategies. They felt they developed a fuller understanding of an idea because they had to explain to others and were challenged to extend their thinking The learning intention helped to clarify what was to be learnt in each lesson. They [the questions] made me think about the answers and what we had learnt. They were informative. When we learn things, we may understand it but not know how to explain it, discussing different aspects allows us to put things into our own words and also interact with our classmates. It also helped when I got a question wrong. I was able to listen to the correct answer so I still learnt when I got a question wrong. Overall, Campbell felt that the use of learning intentions and questioning enabled him to make judgements about student progress with more confidence and to make adjustments to his teaching program to better cater for learner needs. 3.3. Simon's experience Simon chose to investigate the effect of using feedback comments rather than grades in his year 11 History class (15e16 year olds). His aim was to provide structured and specific feedback to students to improve their essay writing skills while using his time efficiently. Simon devised a feedback sheet to structure his comments and ensure he covered key skills that he felt needed to be addressed by the students if they were to achieve more highly in examinations. The feedback sheet included sections on essay structure, content and style along with a section where Simon noted what the student could do next time to improve their essay. There was no space for a grade. When they first received comment-only feedback Simon's students pressurised him to give them grades. Simon was able to resist this pressure and justify this action to his students because of the insights he gained from student responses to his feedback. From their comments Simon identified that many of his students had failed to understand fundamental concepts and the vocabulary essential for good history writing. He explained, “I wrote ‘Generalisations need work.’ A student asked what a generalisation was.” By monitoring student responses to his feedback he came to appreciate that his students needed specific feedback information to help them improve their essay writing. Some typical student comments were: It tells me what to improve but not how to improve it. I don't understand generalisation and how to add it in. I would like to have known what I should have put in certain places instead of what I put. Simon's experience was consistent with research elsewhere that “Students are wedded to idea of grades” and that changing classroom practices requires teachers to renegotiate with students classroom norms and expectations (see for example the work of Black et al., 2003). He recognised, “ Getting students to use the feedback to improve their work is the key thing.” Although he had read about the need for descriptive feedback in the literature it was only through the monitoring of his own student responses that he

984

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

came to appreciate the nature of descriptive feedback that was useful to his students. Simon modified his feedback template to take into account what he had learned from student comments. He expanded the space for his teacher comment and added a section for the student to comment. This had two prompts: I think I improved on. and next time I plan to.. Simon used the revised form to give the students detailed feedback. He then asked the students to complete the student comment section. Some student comments were ‘preceptive’ and reflective, indicating the students had analysed Simon's feedback. Simon added an overall grade of achieved (A), merit (M) and excellence (E) to the sheet once the students had added their comments. The students were asked to transfer their comment under “Next time I plan to.” to the top of their next essay to continue a dialogue between himself and the student about their achievement and progress. Simon reported that students were positive about this process. The students considered that they were better informed about what was expected and more in control of their learning. They were more aware of what they needed to do. Simon noticed a change in student attitudes and believed they became more focussed on how to improve their essay writing. Essay writing skills improved particularly for the “struggling” students. Simon commented that he could not specify if there had been an improvement in achievement for this particular group of students but he considered that their experience of learning History was more positive. He saw that developing self-assessment skills was a long-term process as they needed to develop both skills and the vocabulary of reflection. He also found the student feedback to him very useful to refine his teaching focus. He saw the next stage was to use peer discussion to complement the interpretation of his comments. He reported his involvement in the project had been “successful and rewarding” and it had reinforced the priority that he accorded to learning and teaching over externally driven summative assessment. 3.4. The team's collaborate research story There were many factors that contributed to the success of this research project including the support for the collaboration between the teachers and researchers from their institutions and the professional interest and commitment of the teachers. The teachers considered the involvement of the university researchers and the explicit negotiated and structured timelines were essential to the success of the project. External support and accountability were both crucial for maintaining a focus by the teachers on the development of their AfL practices as Colin explained. The involvement of external ‘moderators’/‘mentors’/ as ‘support people’ has been essential. Time lines have been set and adhered to. Milestones have been placed and reached. Without this, it would have been very difficult in the business of the school day/ week/term to keep at it. Teachers developing their own research questions with the support of the researchers meant they personalised the research to meet the learning needs of their selected class in the curriculum area being researched. The funding obtained by the researchers gave the teachers opportunities for classroom release time to develop and discuss their evolving understanding of AfL practices. Apart from the agreed after school joint meeting times the teachers negotiated the use of release time with the school management within the school day to meet their research focus. Joint meetings began with teachers reporting back on and discussing their practice, impacts on student learning and engagement, and their understanding of AfL. The teachers built on and critiqued each

other's ideas and often provided additional instances and examples of similar practices and student responses. The researchers provided examples from their experiences and suggested additional ideas and readings that they thought would enhance the teachers’ understandings. The cross curricula nature of the team was important in this because it enabled cross-fertilisation of ideas as teachers “fed off the positives they had experienced.” They felt they gained a more comprehensive understanding of assessment for learning by being able to “bounce ideas and get different points of view”, including those of the university researchers. Simon remarked that: By meeting and presenting as a result of this research project I believe it has stimulated me to look into formative assessment in a more structured way. The project has allowed me to develop strategies and trial these with classes. Having time off to reflect on what I have done has enabled me to modify and analyse the strategies to ensure the benefits are realised. By working with Colin and Simon, I have been able to feed off the positives that they have experienced. Because each of us is doing a different area, I believe we have all gained a greater idea of a lot more aspects of formative assessment than working as individuals. It also gives us the chance to bounce ideas and get different points of view. Discussion in team meetings centred on how, when and to what effect students had engaged in AfL processes. This dialogue assisted in the development of a shared understanding of the underlying principle of AfL as that of students taking more responsibility for their learning and assessment. The discussion always converged on the value of students taking responsibility for their own learning no matter how divergent the discussion and debate became. The teachers noted how the location of their workspaces facilitated the informal sharing of ideas and findings from their classroom research. They remarked how much they enjoyed learning from each other and that the value of cross-fertilisation of ideas from different curriculum areas. The teachers experienced significant success with the strategies they trialled and were keen to share this with others. The teachers presented their findings at three national conferences supported by the university researchers. One conference focussed on AfL and the other two were subject specific. They valued the opportunity to interact with fellow researchers and teachers and were delighted by the positive feedback they received after their presentations. The assessment conference we attended as part of our research project was a real highlight. In particular, it was great to meet with others trying to do similar things and we really appreciated the supportive comments about the practical and school-led nature of our efforts. It gave us a real boost. One teacher began a professional enquiry group within the school to assist other staff learn about and work with AfL strategies and all three shared their research with their departments.

4. Conclusion and significance of the study The study provides an example of how teachers can drive a research agenda for their own purposes in collaboration with university researchers. The impact of a single motivated teacher and the official endorsement by the school of the teacher's capacity to drive the initiative should not be underestimated in the change process (Priestly & Syme, 2005). As researchers it was rewarding to see the professional growth of the three teachers during the project as they developed a shared understanding of AfL principles. It was

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

a privilege to work with a group of teachers who were committed to enhancing their practice through a research and development process. The study highlights the importance of external support, involvement and input, shared teacher knowledge and beliefs, professional experimentation, and shared reflection on student responses to classroom innovations (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002). The involvement of the university researchers served as a catalyst to motivate the teachers to systematically experiment and reflect on their classroom practice. The project became a joint enterprise with its momentum sustained by regular contact with the researchers. The university researchers contributed ideas about AfL that extended the teachers' vocabulary assisting them in making explicit their tacit knowledge when analysing and sharing the impact of changes to their practice on student learning. This study demonstrates that collaborative research can be successful when there is a dynamic, mutually respectful interaction and interconnection between personal, micro or school-related level and macro or policy level factors (Carless, 2005). The impact of personal factors intersecting with school/micro factors is very evident in this study. Initially the motivation to be involved in the project was embedded in the ‘micro level’ where the internal support from the school for professional development provided an opportunity and incentive (Spillane, 1999) for Colin to extend his practice. It was the congruence between his beliefs and his understanding of the principles of AfL that sustained Colin's active initiation of the project. The school's strategic focus on raising examination achievement (a micro level factor) was a response to the high stakes testing environment (a macro level factor). External mandates in the forms of expectations and accountabilities have a role to play in embedding good practice (Swaffield & MacBeath, 2006) but it was Colin's vision and action of linking the personal, micro and macro environments that led to wider teacher involvement in AfL innovation. Formal support and recognition by the principal of the school for the teachers' involvement in the project at the micro level was significant as was the university researchers' ability to guide the teachers through the planning and development of research questions and plans and provide some resourcing. Also important was the teachers' perception that AfL could meet school strategic goals. Teacher understanding and valuing of the underlying principles of an educational innovation is essential. It was notable that in this study, students taking responsibility for their own learning (Marshall & Drummond, 2006), was a guiding theme for teacher decision-making and critical reflection. As the teachers involved built up their knowledge of the principles and practices of AfL there was an obvious congruence of their personal beliefs about teaching and learning and the underpinnings of AfL. However it is important that teachers pursue areas of personal professional relevance. Teachers working as co-researchers on their own research question, within the framework of an overall project question, is an effective approach to collaborative research. The three teachers contextualised and investigated different aspects of AfL, which they perceived, would enhance their classroom practice and interaction. Colin was convinced that individual learning plans would support students learning in the long-term and enable him to develop better relationships with students. Campbell recognised that he needed to be more focussed in his planning and saw the refinement of his ability to write learning outcomes and negotiate success criteria would assist both himself and the students to focus on higher order thinking and Simon perceived that improving his written feedback in a way that it was not too time consuming was the key to lifting student achievement in his history class. In collaborative research all participants benefit from sharing of ideas, concrete examples of successful and unsuccessful practice and drawing on each other's expertise (Black & Wiliam, 1998;

985

Fullan, 2005). Emotional, social and intellectual support, are important factors in sustaining classroom experimentation. Working with colleagues from different curriculum areas provides access to different perspectives and constructive feedback and support for innovation, as does the involvement of university researchers. Teachers gain motivation through the affirmation of their peers whom they respect professionally. Classroom experimentation and dialogue enables teachers to get beneath the surface features of AfL strategies to appreciate its implications for their teaching (Spillane, 1999). A spiral of discussion and classroom experimentation can develop a sense of obligation to each other and to a research project, which can motivate teachers to explore changes in their practice (Spillane, 1999). As a result of their focus on AfL the teachers considered they had greater insights into their students' understanding of the content, the ways individual students approached learning, and teaching strategies that contributed to better student engagement with their own learning and assessment. The teachers observed that students were more engaged in their learning and self-assessment, which was reinforced by student written, or verbal comments. As researchers we benefited from robust discussion with classroom practitioners about the intersection between theory and practice. The joint disseminating of findings at teacher conferences enhanced the profile of the research findings and confirmed the value of collaborative projects. The university researchers and teachers have continued to collaborate as the teachers have moved to work with colleagues within their departments to develop and extend their AfL practices. The next phase of the research process is to establish if AfL as an educational innovation can be sustained and diffused across departments in the school and to identify the factors that assist in embedding AfL in teachers' practice.

References Absolum, M., Flockton, L., Hattie, J., Hipkins, R., & Reid, I. (2009). Directions for assessment in New Zealand: Developing students' assessment capabilities. Wellington: Ministry of Education. Alton-Lee, A. (2003). Best evidence synthesis: Quality teaching for diverse students in schooling. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7e74. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Developing a theory of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 81e100). London: Sage Publications. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5e31. Carless, D. (2005). Prospects for the implementation of assessment for learning. Assessment in Education, 12(1), 39e54. Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947e967. Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education, 6(1), 101e116. Department of Education. (1989). Assessment for better learning: A public discussion document. Wellington: Department of Education. Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Gipps, C. (1999). Sociocultural aspects to assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24, 357e394. Haigh, M., & Dixon, H. (2007). ‘‘Why am I doing these things?”: engaging in classroom-based inquiry around formative assessment. Journal of In-service Education, 33(3), 359e376. Hayward, L., Priestley, M., & Young, M. (2004). Ruffling the calm of the ocean floor: merging practice, policy and research in assessment in Scotland. Oxford Review of Education, 30(3), 397e415. Jones, J., & Webb, M. (2006). Assessment for learning (AfL) across the school: A case study in whole school capacity building. In Paper presented at the British educational research association annual conference, University of Warwick, 6e9 September 2006. Lee, C., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Studying changes in the practice of two teachers developing assessment for learning. Teacher Development, 9(2), 265e283. Marshall, B., & Drummond, M. (2006). How teachers engage with assessment for learning: lessons from the classroom. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 133e149.

986

B. Cooper, B. Cowie / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 979e986

Ministry of Education. (1993). The New Zealand Curriculum Framework. Wellington: Learning Media. Ministry of Education. (2003). Teaching, learning and research initiative. Retrieved 04.08.09, from http://www.tlri.org.nz. Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media. Ministry of Education. (2009). Assessment: Teaching and learning. Retrieved 22.07.09, from http://www.tki.org.nz/r/assessment/one/formative_e.php. New Zealand Teachers Council. (2007). Graduating teacher standards: Aotearoa New Zealand. Retrieved 04.08.09, from http://www.teacherscouncil.govt.nz/ education/gts/index.stm. Priestly, M. (2005). Making the most of the curriculum review: some reflections on supporting and sustaining change in schools. Scottish Educational Review, 37(1), 29e38. Priestly, M., & Syme, H. (2005). Formative assessment for all: a wholeeschool approach to pedagogic change. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 475e492. Pryor, J., & Crossouard, B. (2007). A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment. Oxford Review of Education 1e20.

Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119e144. Sato, M., Coffey, J., & Moorby, S. (2005). Two teachers making assessment for learning their own. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 177e191. Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153e189. Spillane, J. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: the mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 143e175. Swaffield, S., & MacBeath, J. (2006). Embedding learning how to learn in school policy: the challenge for leadership. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 201e215. Tierny, R. (2006). Changing practices: influences on classroom assessment. Assessment in Education, 13(2), 239e264. Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing formative assessment in the classroom: using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 615e631.