Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Formative Assessment in Mathematics Instruction: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Results of the Co2CA Project

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Competence Assessment in Education

Part of the book series: Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment ((MEMA))

Abstract

Formative assessment is considered a promising approach to improving teaching and learning, especially in the Anglo-American literature. However, empirical evidence supporting this assumption is surprisingly weak. In this chapter, we introduce the concept of formative assessment by identifying the core components of formative assessment (assessment and feedback) and describing the way we assume formative assessment (via students’ perception) affects learning processes and outcomes. Furthermore, we present the project “Conditions and Consequences of Classroom Assessment” (Co2CA), consisting of four studies in which we successively investigated the design and impact of formative assessment in mathematics instruction: (1) In a survey study, we described current practice of classroom assessment in mathematics, as perceived by teachers and students, and developed mathematical tasks as a basis for the assessment component in the following studies. (2) In an experimental study, we investigated the impact of written process-oriented feedback on learning in an internally valid setting. (3) In an intervention study, we implemented the instruments and results of the first two studies in mathematics instruction to analyze the impact of formative assessment in an ecologically valid setting. (4) Finally, we conducted a transfer study to make our results usable in educational practice: We developed a teacher training in formative assessment and investigated its impact on teachers’ general pedagogical and pedagogical content knowledge. This chapter focuses on a description of the designs and selected results of Studies 3 and 4.

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

Access this chapter

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 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andrade, H. L. (2010). Summing up and moving forward: key challenges and future directions for research and development in formative assessment. In H. L. Andrade & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 344–351). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Dubberke, T., Jordan, & Tsai, Y. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 133–180. doi:10.3102/0002831209345157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. E. (2010). Cognitively based assessment of, for, and as learning: A preliminary theory of action for summative and formative assessment. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 8, 70–91. doi:10.1080/15366367.2010.508686.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besser, M., & Leiß, D. (2014). The influence of teacher-training on in-service teachers’ expertise: A teacher-training-study on formative assessment in competency-oriented mathematics. In S. Oesterle, P. Liljedahl, C. Nicol, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 129–136). PME: Vancouver.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besser, M., Blum, W., & Klimczak, M. (2013). Formative assessment in every-day teaching of mathematical modelling: Implementation of written and oral feedback to competency-oriented tasks. In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, W. Blum, & J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching mathematical modelling: Connecting to research and practice (pp. 469–478). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Besser, M., Blum, W., & Leiß, D. (2015a). How to support teachers to give feedback to modelling tasks effectively? Results from a teacher-training-study in the Co2CA project. In G. A. Stillman, M. S. Biembengut, & W. Blum (Eds.), Proceedings of ICTMA 16. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besser, M., Leiß, D., & Klieme, E. (2015b). Wirkung von Lehrerfortbildungen auf Expertise von Lehrkräften zu formativem Assessment im kompetenzorientierten Mathematikunterricht [Impact of teacher training on teachers‘ expertise on formative assessment in competenc-oriented instruction]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungs- und Pädagogische Psychologie, 47, 110–122. doi:10.1026/0049-8637/a000128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besser, M., Leiß, D., Harks, B., Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., & Blum, W. (2010). Kompetenzorientiertes Feedback im Mathematikunterricht: Entwicklung und empirische Erprobung prozessbezogener, aufgabenbasierter Rückmeldesituationen [Competence-oriented feedback in mathematics instruction: Development and empirical test of process-oriented and task-based feedback situations]. Empirische Pädagogik, 24(4), 404–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 7–75. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–148. doi:10.1177/003172171009200119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998c). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. London: Kings College.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blum, W. (2011). can modelling be taught and learnt? Some answers from empirical research. In G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. Borromeo Ferri, & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling (pp. 15–30). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Blum, W., & Leiß, D. (2007a). How do students and teachers deal with modelling problems? In C. Haines, W. Blum, P. Galbraith, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): education, engineering and economics (pp. 222–231). Chichester: Horwood.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Blum, W., & Leiß, D. (2007b). Investigating quality mathematics teaching—the DISUM project. In C. Bergsten & B. Grevholm (Eds.), Developing and Researching Quality in Mathematics Teaching and Learning: Proceedings of MADIF 5 (pp. 3–16). Linköping: SMDF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromme, R. (2008). Lehrerexpertise [Teacher’s skill]. In W. Schneider & M. Hasselhorn (Eds.), Handbuch der Pädagogischen Psychologie (pp. 159–167). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (1997). A theoretical framework for the role of classroom assessment in motivating student effort and achievement. Applied Measurement in Education, 10, 161–180. doi:10.1207/s15324818ame1002_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bürgermeister, A. (2014). Leistungsbeurteilung im Mathematikunterricht: Bedingungen und Effekte von Beurteilungspraxis und Beurteilungsgenauigkeit [Performance assessment in mathematics instruction: Conditions and effects of judgement practice and judgement accuracy]. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bürgermeister, A., Kampa, M., Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Besser, M., Klieme, E., Leiss, D. (2011). Dokumentation der Befragungsinstrumente der Interventionsstudie im Projekt “Conditions and Consequences of Classroom Assessment”(Co2CA) [Documentation of the intervention study questionnaires in the project “Conditions and Consequences of Classroom Assessment”]. Frankfurt am Main: DIPF. - URN: urn:nbn:de:0111-opus-35284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bürgermeister, A., Klieme, E., Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., & Blum, W. (2014). Formative Leistungsbeurteilung im Unterricht [Formative assessment in instruction]. In M. Hasselhorn, W. Schneider, & U. Trautwein (Eds.), Lernverlaufsdiagnostik (pp. 41–60). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 14(7), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shemwell, J. T., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Shavelson, R. J., & Yin, Y. (2008). On the fidelity of implementing embedded formative assessments and its relation to student learning. Applied Measurement in Education, 21, 360–389. doi:10.1080/08957340802347852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harks, B. (2013). Kompetenzdiagnostik und Rückmeldung: zwei Komponenten formativen Assessments [Diagnostic of competencies and feedback: two components of formative assessment]. Doctoral Dissertation. Frankfurt/Main, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harks, B., Klieme, E., Hartig, J., & Leiß, D. (2014a). Separating cognitive and content domains in mathematical competence. Educational Assessment, 19, 243–266. doi:10.1080/10627197.2014.964114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harks, B., Rakoczy, K., Hattie, J., Besser, M., & Klieme, E. (2014b). The effects of feedback on achievement, interest, and self-evaluation: The role of feedback’s perceived usefulness. Educational Psychology, 34, 269–290. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.785384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harks, B., Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Hattie, J., & Besser, M. (2014c). Indirekte und moderierte Effekte von Rückmeldung auf Leistung und Motivation [Indirect and moderated effects of feedback on achievement and motivation]. In H. Ditton & A. Müller (Eds.), Feedback und Rückmeldungen: Theoretische Grundlagen, empirische Befunde, praktische Anwendungsfelder (pp. 163–194). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2003). Formative and summative interpretations of assessment information. Retrieved from https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/education/hattie/docs/formative-and-summative-assessment-%282003%29.pdf.

  • Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00220.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., Harks, B., Blum, W., Leiß, D., & Rakoczy, K. (2010). Leistungsbeurteilung und Kompetenzmodellierung im Mathematikunterricht [Assesment and modeling of competencies in mathematics instruction]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, Beiheft, 56, 64–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klieme, E., Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2009). The Pythagoras study. In T. Janik & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 137–160). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimczak, M., & Rakoczy, K. (2010). Richtlinien zur Aufzeichnung von Unterrichtsvideos im Projekt “Conditions and Consequences of Classroom Assessment” (Co2CA) [Guidelines to videotape instruction in the project “Conditions and Consequences of Classroom Assessment”]. Unpublished manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, S., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Neubrand, M., Baumert, J., Kunter, M., et al. (2011). Konzeptualisierung und Testkonstruktion zum fachbezogenen Professionswissen von Mathematiklehrkräften [Conceptualisation and test construction of content-related knowledge of mathematics teachers]. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, & M. Neubrand (Eds.), Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften: Ergebnisse des Forschungsprogramms COACTIV (pp. 135–161). Waxmann: Münster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulhavy, R. W., White, M. T., Topp, B. W., Chan, A. L., & Adams, J. (1985). Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 285–291. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(85)90025-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiß, D. (2010). Adaptive Lehrerinterventionen beim mathematischen Modellieren: empirische Befunde einer vergleichenden Labor- und Unterrichtsstudie [Adaptive teacher interventions for mathematical modeling: empirical results of a comparative experimental and field study]. JMD, 31, 197–226. doi:10.1007/s13138-010-0013-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiß, D., Schukajlow, S., Blum, W., Messner, R., & Pekrun, R. (2010). The role of the situation model in mathematical modelling: task analyses, student competencies, and teacher interventions. JMD, 31, 119–141. doi:10.1007/s13138-010-0006-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus (Version 7) [Computer Software]. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16, 310–322. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinger, P., Rakoczy, K., Besser, M., Klieme, E. (2016). Implementation of formative assessment: Effects of quality of program delivery on students’ mathematics achievement and interest. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2016.117066.

  • Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209–233. doi:10.1037/a0020141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., Blum, W., & Hochweber, J. (2013). Written feedback in mathematics: Mediated by students’ perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and Instruction, 27, 63–73. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rakoczy, K., Pinger, P., Harks, B., Besser, M., Klieme, E. (under revision). Formative assessment in mathematics instruction: Mediated by feedback’s perceived usefulness and students’ self-efficacy? Learning and Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5, 77–84. doi:10.1080/0969595980050104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shavelson, R. J., Young, D. B., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., et al. (2008). On the impact of curriculum-embedded formative assessment on learning: A collaboration between curriculum and assessment developers. Applied Measurement in Education, 21, 295–314. doi:10.1080/08957340802347647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shuell, T. J. (1996). Teaching and learning in a classroom context. In D. C. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 726–764). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X015002004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. (2006). Assessment for learning: A key to motivation and achievement. Edge, 2(2), 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2008). Integrating Assessment with Learning: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53–84). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). ConQuest: Generalised item response modelling software. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The preparation of this chapter was supported by grants to Eckhard Klieme and Katrin Rakoczy (KL 1057/10), Werner Blum (BL 275/16) and Dominik Leiß (LE 2619/1), from the German Research Foundation (DFG) in the Priority Programme “Competence Models for Assessing Individual Learning Outcomes and Evaluating Educational Processes” (SPP 1293). The authors, who acted jointly as principal investigators, gratefully acknowledge the significant contributions made by (in alphabetical order) Michael Besser, Anika Bürgermeister, Birgit Harks, Malte Klimczak, Petra Pinger, Natalie Tropper and other members of staff.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF), Frankfurt/Main, Germany

    Katrin Rakoczy & Eckhard Klieme

  2. University of Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

    Dominik Leiß

  3. University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany

    Werner Blum

Authors
  1. Katrin Rakoczy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eckhard Klieme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dominik Leiß
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Werner Blum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrin Rakoczy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Instructional Psychology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

    Detlev Leutner

  2. Faculty of Educational Sciences, Department of Instructional Psychology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

    Jens Fleischer

  3. German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF), Frankfurt/Main, Germany

    Juliane Grünkorn

  4. German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF), Frankfurt/Main, Germany

    Eckhard Klieme

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Leiß, D., Blum, W. (2017). Formative Assessment in Mathematics Instruction: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Results of the Co2CA Project. In: Leutner, D., Fleischer, J., Grünkorn, J., Klieme, E. (eds) Competence Assessment in Education. Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50030-0_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50030-0_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50028-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50030-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation