Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021): July-December [Edit closure: 01/07/2021]
Suggested quote (APA, seventh edition)
Dolorier Zapata, R. G., Villa López, R. M., & Cisneros Flores, A. R. (2021). Formative assessment strategies and teacher performance in the assessment for learning in Regular Basic Education. Delectus, 4(2), 12-20. https://doi.org/10.36996/delectus.v4i2.131
Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University of Education, Perú
Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University of Education, Perú
Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University of Education, Perú
The objective of this research was to determine how the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies and the performance of assessment for learning of teachers of Regular Basic Education (RBE) who conduct the pre-professional practice of the Faculty of Initial Education of theEnrique Guzmán y Valle National University of Education, Peru (NUE) are related.This is a quantitative, descriptive-correlational study. It was worked with a non-experimental cross-sectional correlational design, the population consisted of the 15 teachers of Preprofessional Practice, being this a probabilistic sample.The questionnaire was used to measure the variables. The descriptive results indicated that 46.7% (7) make a theoretical argument of the strategies of regular formative assessment; likewise, of the 15 respondents it can be observed that 66.7% (10) show a satisfactory teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE.Concluding that the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the performance of assessment for learning of RBE teachers conducting pre-professional practice (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.804; high positive correlation).Keywords: theoretical argumentation; assessment strategies; formative assessment; teacher performance; assessment for learning.
The various national and international tests in which Peru has participated provide a not very encouraging situation. On average, more than half of the students (in the different areas evaluated) do not achieve basic competencies. The paradox is that the percentage of school failures is below 10% at the national level. This situation creates a discouraging context: students pass, but do not learn.
This situation is not alien to the university or institutions where the same evaluation practices have been inherited in their classrooms. But the situation is aggravated if the university in question trains professionals in education, in which it is no longer just a diagnostic situation that must be solved in time; on the contrary, it is an urgency that needs to be corrected in the shortest possible time, since the education of a country is at stake.
In order to mediate this process, basic education has incorporated a new form of assessment (Ministry of Education, 2017), which is called formative assessment, as a response to contemporary pedagogical trends and the need to shift the conception of assessment to an assessment for learning. This change coincides with the legitimization of the educational policy around competencies.
In this sense, moving from evaluating what is wrong and what is right (passes and fails), to more complex forms (standards, performances, evidence, performances) means a major conceptual change, to the extent that the entrenched evaluation practice is based on what is best for the teacher and, generally, this has been delimited by his or her own evaluation experience. This generates a significant liability for any change in the management of teacher evaluation in the classroom.
At the beginning of 2017, formative evaluation was implemented in all schools in the country, and initial education teachers were evaluated based on this approach. Only in the first stage of the evaluation, 1% failed; this means that both the approach and its application are widely mastered. This situation made it necessary to identify the theoretical arguments that teachers have about formative evaluation and their subsequent coherence with its application in real educational spaces. One of the spaces where evaluative behaviors are acquired is in the transition to become a teacher, which is located in the pre-professional internship, which lasts two and a half years, in which the student intervenes pedagogically in school classrooms according to the educational level of his/her specialty.
Currently, the peruvian Government invests millions to implement training, coaching, mentoring, among other strategies to ensure that formative assessment is applied in educational contexts. But it seems that ancestral behaviors still prevail in the evaluation, which seek approval, but not learning, and make valid strategies in formative evaluation, such as self-evaluation, become a strategy that facilitates a good grade and not the desired reflection, a situation that may be reproduced in the training institutions of the Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University of Education, Peru (NUE).
Formative evaluation is that evaluation that takes place at the moment of teaching and learning, carried out by the teacher or the students themselves, in order to make timely decisions, responding efficiently to the data and evidence collected, which contain the student's current need or situation, allowing the teacher to introduce changes to satisfy that cognitive need.
On the other hand, in order to be formative, it is not enough for assessment to be continuous and permanent; it needs to have the intention of raising a diagnosis to improve student performance in favor of their learning, as Perrenoud (1999) points out, "... an assessment is formative if, at least in the teacher's mind, it is intended to contribute to the regulation of ongoing learning" (p. 54). If information is only collected as a mere mechanization of didactic processes and the intention is to calculate the scores obtained, rather than to improve performance, formative assessment loses its nature.
There are several points of view about the strategies that formative assessment should use to make its task more effective, one of them is proposed by Allal & Perrenoudl (1980), who divide it into four duly delimited situations: 1. collection of primary information, which is limited to gathering data on what the student knows and the representations he/she has about the activity he/she performs, 2. observation of the student by the teacher when performing the task, 3. recording of what is observed in duly validated instruments to delimit the steps taken in the resolution of the task, and 4. adaptation of strategies to meet the educational needs of the student so that he/she can successfully complete the task.
With respect to assessment for learning, Assessment Reform Group was the institution that coined the term assessment for learning as the process that creates the best conditions for learning to occur. Assessment for learning is based on the framework of formative assessment, understood as the comparison between actual and reference levels, which allows the identification of the gap that is then modified to reach the desired goal (Sadler, cited in Shepard, 2006); (Black & Dilan, 1998). This type of evaluation makes it possible to assess student progress on a frequent basis (OECD, 2005), gathering information so that the teacher can adjust sessions, units and programs in favor of the educational demand and not necessarily only to avoid or correct the errors found in the construction of learning.
Related to the teacher's effective performance in the formative evaluation approach in the classroom, according to the research conducted by Ravela et al. (2004) where information is gathered on the experiences in formative evaluation (evaluation for learning) of teachers in Uruguay, Colombia, Peru and Chile. In the case of Peru, some characteristics were found, based on an interview with teachers who pointed out: they do not give any kind of feedback when handing in corrected assignments, the feedback is always positive, they give praise or applause as a form of feedback, and they think that formative evaluation is linked to the integral formation of the student (improvement of discipline, punctuality, among others); in this context, the performance of Peruvian teachers is developed.
Feedback is not only a question or a procedure for diagnosing student recall, but also a strategy that involves three basic questions that allow students to improve their performance. These are: where are we going, where are we, and how can we move forward? These questions make feedback powerful in that: (a) they know what the success they are pursuing consists of, (b) they are aware that we aim to close the gap between where they are at and where they need to be, and (c) they understand that the most important thing in that we give them feedback on where they need to go (Hattie & Yates, 2018, p.87).
The management of formative evaluation (knowledge and application) should be analyzed for improvement purposes, recognizing what kind of concepts or theoretical foundations are available to teachers of pre-professional practice at NUE, specifically in the Faculty of Initial Education. What they impart to their students is an institutional priority, in favor of ensuring the professional training required by the nation.
In this sense, the problem is formulated as follows: how does the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies relate to the performance of assessment for learning of Regular Basic Education (RBE) teachers who conduct the pre-professional practice of the Faculty of Initial Education at NUE? The objective of this research was to determine how the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies and the performance of assessment for learning of RBE teachers who conduct the pre-professional practice of the Faculty of Early Childhood Education of NUE are related.
It is hypothesized that the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the performance of the assessment for learning of the teachers of the pre-professional practice of the Faculty of Initial Education of the National University of Education.
The quantitative approach was used, in view of the fact that the variables will be measured from the indicators explicitly stated in each of the dimensions prioritized by the research. The type of research is descriptive-correlational, it seeks to identify what type of relationship exists between the two variables. Likewise, the descriptive method was used, since it only seeks to describe the existing relationship between the two variables, based on the systematic analysis and interpretation of the behavior of its dimensions in a specific time.
It is a correlational study, not causal, since it only seeks to identify the type of relationship between variables within the specific context of the study. The hypothetical-deductive method was used; this procedure starts from statements that are called hypotheses and seeks to demonstrate them in order to then deduce conclusions that can be confronted with the facts of the problem. The descriptive method was also used, which allows us to know, analyze, describe and, above all, interpret in an orderly manner a set of elements or events corresponding to a study variable. Likewise, the analytical-synthetic method is based on an empirical analysis and its essential aspects were operationalized in categories with a high level of generalization, characterization and abstraction. Finally, the inductive-deductive method was used; according to this, the research was initiated on the basis of concrete facts from which the problematization, categorization and conceptualization of the variables were carried out.
The study population consisted of the 15 preprofessional practice teachers of the School of Initial Education of UNE, in the 2020-I semester. The sample was made up of the 15 teachers who conduct the pre-professional practice of the 2020-I semester. In this case, it is a census sample, because 100% of the population was selected, as it was considered a manageable number for the research. The technique was the survey. According to Hernández et al. (2014), among the various data collection techniques, the most relevant of those addressed under the previous topic is the survey. A questionnaire of perception of the work of theoretical argument of formative evaluation strategies was used as an instrument.
In the validity of expert judgment for both instruments, a result of 90% was obtained, which exceeds the minimum of 70% to be considered valid, therefore, they can be used to measure the variables in the participating teachers.
In reference to the questionnaire on the theoretical argument of formative assessment strategies, the Cronbach's Alpha result was 0.952, indicating excellent reliability, and for the instrument on teacher performance in assessment for learning in RBE, the Cronbach's Alpha result was 0.837, indicating excellent reliability.
Figure 1. Level of theoretical argument of formative evaluation strategies
Of the fifteen collaborators surveyed, the results with reference to this aspect indicate that 46.7% (7) make a fair theoretical argument of the formative evaluation strategies, followed by 33.3% (5) who make a bad argument, 13.3% (2) good and, finally, 6.7% (1) very good.
Figure 2. Level of teacher performance in assessment for learning in RBE
Figure 3. Representation of the comparison between the levels found according to the variables the theoretical argument of formative assessment strategies and teacher performance in assessment for learning in RBE.
Of the respondents who make a very good theoretical argument for formative assessment strategies, 6.7% show outstanding teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE; likewise, when they make a good theoretical argument for formative assessment strategies, 13.3% show outstanding teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE; on the other hand, when they make a theoretical argument for regular formative assessment strategies, 46.7% show satisfactory teaching performance in the assessment for learning in RBE; and finally, when they make a theoretical argument for poor formative assessment strategies, 20.0% show satisfactory teaching performance in the assessment for learning in RBE and, finally, 13.3% are in process.
According to Shapiro-Wilk being sig < 0.05, we accept that the results found indicate that the data distributions are not normal in the sample, in that sense, to contrast the hypotheses formulated the nonparametric statistic for correlations Spearman's Rho will be used.
Hypothesis testingTable 1.
|Theoretical argument for formative assessment strategies||Teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE|
|Spearman's Rho||Theoretical argument for formative assessment strategies||Correlation coefficient||1,000||,804**|
|Teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE||Correlation coefficient||,804**||1,000|
|**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).|
We can review results concerning the general hypothesis, appreciating the following: as for what was obtained in the application of Spearman's Rho in SPSS V 24, it can be said that the rho is equal to 0.804**. Likewise, these data are interpreted with a confidence of 99.99% (**), which leads to deduce that the margin of error is 0.01 bilateral, this being a positive significant relationship and also high between the variables of study, rejecting the Ho (p = 0.000).
After performing the statistical analysis, it was possible to demonstrate that the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the performance of assessment for learning of RBE teachers who conduct pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial Education of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.804; high positive correlation). Therefore, the higher the levels of theoretical argument of formative assessment strategies, the better the levels of teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE. In reference to these results, similar findings could be found in the thesis of Villafranca (2018). Where the results were processed by the non-probabilistic Spearman statistic of a relationship rho = 0.656, a figure that indicates a moderate relationship between the research elements, but with a p = 0.000 indicating its significance, concluding that the two variables have a significant correlation.
For his part, Quintana (2018) concluded that teachers have pre-established conceptions of formative evaluation, as well as solid knowledge about its process, the role they should perform in the evaluation process and the conceptual management of evaluation instruments and techniques. Likewise, it was possible to identify absent didactic behaviors, as in the case of feedback, regulation and continuous recording; their absence expresses an inadequate formative evaluation in the teaching practice.
Then, it was possible to demonstrate that the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the permanent learning assessment of RBE teachers who conduct the pre-professional practice of the Faculty of Initial Education of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.572; moderate positive correlation). In reference to these results, similar findings could be found in the thesis of Salinas (2016). Where after the information obtained was processed with the Spearman's Rho correlation coefficient, it was obtained that there is a relationship, although not of cause and effect, but a relationship of growth and/or parallel decrease.
It was also found that the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the timely decision making of RBE teachers conducting pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.573; moderate positive correlation). In reference to these results, similar findings could be found in the thesis of Pamo (2019). The research concluded that both variables maintain a closeness of growth, since, if one of them grows, the other also grows, their correlation is framed in a similar behavioral relationship, the better the valuation the better the other variable also increases.Finally, it was found that the theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the differentiated feedback of RBE teachers who conduct pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial Education of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.607; high positive correlation). In reference to these results, similar findings could be found in the thesis of Ortega (2015). The thesis reached the following conclusions: 60% of teachers apply formative evaluation in the classroom, which is evidenced when teachers seek to regulate and guide the learning process continuously to their students, and also found that teachers provide feedback during the teaching process seeking to achieve learning achievement in the student.
Theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the assessment for learning performance of RBE teachers conducting pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.804; high positive correlation). Therefore, the higher the levels of theoretical argument of formative assessment strategies, the better the levels of teaching performance in assessment for learning in RBE.
Theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the continuous learning assessment of RBE teachers who conduct pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial Education of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.572; moderate positive correlation).
Theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to timely decision making of RBE teachers conducting pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.573; moderate positive correlation).
Theoretical argumentation of formative assessment strategies is related to the differentiated feedback of RBE teachers conducting pre-professional practice at the Faculty of Initial of the National University of Education. (p < 0.05, Spearman's Rho = 0.607; high positive correlation).
The topics of formative assessment and its performance in the evaluation of learning constitute a field of research worth investing in, due to the impact it can have on the development of student learning. It was the realization of the scarcity of empirical studies that led the scientific community to make a strong call for investment in this area of knowledge. However, there is another reason why it is relevant and urgent to deepen our knowledge in the area of formative assessment. Our students need the best guidance and support to learn and all ways that can illuminate this path are welcome.
The way in which students perceive their ongoing assessment of learning is not independent of whether or not their teachers are characterized by having formative assessment practices. In that sense, formative assessment practices are recommended because they play an important role in the construction of this perception.
Formative assessment is recommended to improve the timely decision making of RBE teachers, since teachers are characterized by having more consistent formative assessment practices that have more positive expectations regarding the development of their learning.
The application of formative assessment is also suggested for differentiated feedback from RBE teachers, which most distinguishes students from teachers with formative assessment practices from others, in relation to the teacher's intervention in promoting their learning.
Conflict of interest
There has been no conflict of interest.
Allal, L., Cardinet, J., & Perrenoud, P. (eds.) (1980). L'évaluation formative dans un enseignement différencié [Formative assessment in differentiated instruction]. Lang.
Black, P. & Dylan, W. (1998). Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment, Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.https://doi.org/10.1177%2F003172171009200119
Hattie, J., & Yates, G. (2018). Aprendizaje visible y el estudio de sus procesos [Visible learning and the study of its processes] (Trad. M. Sánchez). Ediciones Paraninfo [Paraninfo Editions].
Hernández, R.; Fernández, C. & Baptista, P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación [Research methodology ] (3rd. ed.). McGraw - Hill.
Ministerio de Educación [Ministry of Education]. (2017). Currículo nacional de la educación básica [National curriculum for basic education]. Lima: MINEDU.
OCDE. (2005). Evaluación formativa: mejora del aprendizaje en las aulas de secundaria [Formative assessment: improving learning in secondary classrooms]. http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/34313907.pdf
Ortega, M. (2015). Evaluación formativa aplicada por los docentes del área de Ciencia Tecnología y Ambiente en el Distrito de Hunter, Arequipa [Formative evaluation applied by teachers in the area of Science Technology and Environment in the Hunter District, Arequipa]. Cayetano Heredia Peruvian University.
Pamo, M. (2019). Estudio contextualizado de las prácticas docentes en la evaluación formativa en el II ciclo de educación inicial de las instituciones educativas estatales de Tiabaya, 2018 [Contextualized study of teaching practices in formative assessment in the II cycle of initial education of state educational institutions of Tiabaya, 2018]. (Doctoral thesis). San Agustín de Arequipa National University, Arequipa, Perú. https://bit.ly/37KjFLv
Quintana, G. (2018). La evaluación formativa de los aprendizajes en el segundo ciclo de la Educación Básica Regular en una Institución Educativa Estatal de Ate [The formative evaluation of learning in the second cycle of Regular Basic Education in a State Educational Institution of Ate]. Perú: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú [Pontifical Catholic University of Peru.].
Ravela, P., Leymonié, J., Viñas, J., & Haretche, C. (2004). La evaluación en las aulas de secundaria básica en cuatro países de América Latina [Assessment in lower secondary classrooms in four Latin American countries]. Propuesta Educativa [Educational Proposal], 1 (41). 20-45. https://bit.ly/2Fyi67l
Salinas, P. (2016). Relación entre argumentos teóricos de la evaluación del aprendizaje y la gestión evaluadora del docente en el aula (Tesis de maestría) [Relation between theoretical arguments of learning assessment and teacher evaluative management in the classroom (Master's thesis)].San Martín de Porres University, Lima, Perú. https://bit.ly/2N1dYRF
Shepard, L. (2006). La evaluación en el aula [The assessment in the classroom] (Trad. M. Domís, 4th. ed.). México D.F.: Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación [National Institute for the Evaluation of Education].
Villafranca, F. (2018). Conocimiento de la evaluación formativa y la capacidad de elaboración de rúbricas de los docentes de la Red 16Ugel 02, 2018 [Formative assessment knowledge and rubric development skills of teachers in the 16Ugel 02 Network, 2018]. (Master's thesis). César Vallejo University, Lima, Perú.