Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does Training in Alternative Assessment Matter? The Case of Prospective and Practicing Mathematics Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Alternative Assessment and Their Beliefs About the Nature of Mathematics

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explored the training of prospective and practicing mathematics teachers in alternative assessment and its impact on their attitudes toward alternative assessment methods and their beliefs about the nature of mathematics. Data were collected from 51 prospective teachers and 50 practicing teachers who took a course on alternative assessment in mathematics. Findings indicated a significant change in the correlation between the positivist and constructivist dimensions of their beliefs about the nature of mathematics following the course. No significant differences were found between the prospective and practicing teachers’ beliefs either before or after the course nor in their attitudes toward alternative assessment after the course. Before the course, however, the two groups differed significantly in their attitudes toward alternative assessment. Findings also revealed significant changes in attitudes toward alternative assessment and beliefs about the nature of mathematics following participation in the course. These changes in attitudes and beliefs were accompanied by a shift in the nature of the assessment tasks written by the participants. Participants who demonstrated more positive attitudes and constructivist beliefs tended to write more conceptual problems and less procedural exercises. Implications for mathematics teacher training and professional development in alternative assessment are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adu-Gyamfi, K. B., Michael, J., & Faulconer, J. (2010). Assessing understanding through reading and writing in mathematics. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching & Learning, 11(5), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Nouh, N. A., Taqi, H. A., & Abdul-Kareem, M. M. (2014). EFL primary school teachers’ attitudes, knowledge and skills in alternative assessment. International Education Studies, 7(5), 68–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baeten, M., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2008a). Students’ approaches to learning and assessment preferences in a portfolio-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 36(5–6), 359–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baeten, M., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2008b). The effects of hands-on experience on students’ preferences for assessment methods. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(1), 69–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, C., & Beaver, S. (2011). The effect of peer-assessment on the attitudes of pre-service elementary and middle school teachers about writing and assessing mathematics. Teacher Attributes, 5, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birenbaum, M., & Rosenau, S. (2006). Assessment preferences, learning orientations, and learning strategies of pre-service and in-service teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 32(2), 213–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. (2013). Formative and summative aspects of assessment: Theoretical and research foundations in the context of pedagogy. In J. McMillan (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 167–178). London, UK: SAGE Publications.

  • Bloxham, S., & West, A. (2004). Understanding the rules of the game: Marking peer assessment as a medium for developing students’ conceptions of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 721–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briley, J. S., Thompson, T., & Iran-Nejad, A. (2009). Mathematical beliefs, self-regulation, and achievement by university students in remedial mathematics course. Research in the School, 16(2), 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushman, L., Schnitker, B. (1995). Teacher attitudes on portfolio assessment, implementation, and practicability. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED388661).

  • Chichekian, T., & Shore, B. M. (2014). Concept maps provide a window onto pre-service elementary teachers’ knowledge in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l’éducation, 36(3), 47–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, C. P. (1972). Prospective Elementary teachers' intensity and ambivalence of beliefs about mathematics and mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3(3), 155–163.

  • Dochy, F. (2001). A new assessment era: Different needs, new challenges. Learning and Instruction, 10(1), 11–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earl L, M Katz (2006) Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment FOR, as and of Learning, Manitoba Education, ISBN 0–7711–3499-1, accessed at http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/wncp/full_doc.pdf

  • Ernest, P. (1989). The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Mathematics teaching: The state of the art (pp. 249–253). New York, NY: Falmer.

  • Even, R. (2005). Using assessment to inform instructional decisions: How hard can it be? Mathematics Educational Research Journal, 17(3), 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furinghetti, F., & Pehkonen, E. (2002). Rethinking characterizations of beliefs. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Toerner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (V.31, pp. 39–57). Springer Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • García-Ros, R., & Pérez-González, F. (2011). Assessment preferences of pre-service teachers: Analysis according to academic level and relationship with learning styles and motivational orientation. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(6), 719–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Dierick, S. (2000). Evaluating the consequential validity of new modes of assessment: The influence of assessment on learning including pre-, post-, and true assessment effects. In M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimizing new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 37–54). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

  • Gijbels, D., & Dochy, F. (2006). Students’ assessment preferences and approaches to learning: Can formative assessment make a difference? Educational Studies, 32(4), 399–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, H. P. (2009). The challenge of formative assessment in mathematics education: Children’s minds, teachers’ minds. Human Development, 52, 109–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godino, J. D., Batanero, C., Font, V., Contreras, A. & Wilhelmi, M. R. (2016). The theory of didactical suitability: Networking a system of didactics principles for mathematics education from different theoretical perspectives. Paper presented at 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany. Retrieved October 2, 2016 from http://enfoqueontosemiotico.ugr.es/documentos/icme13/TSG51_suitability_ICME13.pdf.

  • Good, R. (2011). Formative use of assessment information: It’s a process, so let’s say what we mean. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 16(3), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guernsey, L., & Ochshorn, S. (2011). Watching teachers work: Using observation tools to promote effective teaching in the early years and early grades. Washington, DC: New America Foundation.

  • Handal, B. (2003). Teachers’ mathematical beliefs: A review. The Mathematics Educator, 13(2), 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannula, M. (2002). Attitude toward mathematics: Emotions, expectations and values. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W. (2006). On the relationship between assessment for formative and summative purposes. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 61–80). London, UK: Sage Publications Ltd.

  • Hart, L. C. (2002). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs and practice after participating in an integrated content/methods course. School Science and Mathematics, 102(1), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janisch, C., Liu, X., & Akrofi, A. (2007). Implementing alternative assessment: Opportunities and obstacles. The Educational Forum, 71(3), 221–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelle, U. (2001). Sociological explanations between micro and macro and the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods [43 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1), Art. 5. Retrieved October 10, 2016 from http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/1-01/1-01kelle-e.htm.

  • Kenney, R., Shoffner, M., & Norris, D. (2014). Reflecting on the use of writing to promote mathematical learning: An examination of preservice mathematics teachers’ perspectives. The Teacher Educator, 49(1), 28–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, M. K., & Noh, S. (2010). Alternative mathematics assessment: A case study of the development of descriptive problems for elementary school in Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 6(3), 173–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llinares, S. (2002). Participation and reification in learning to teach: The role of knowledge and beliefs. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehknonen, & G. Torner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 195–209). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.

  • Mansvelder-Longayroux, D. D., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2007). The portfolio as a tool for stimulating reflection by student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, B. (2012). Portfolio assessment: Direct from the classroom. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(3), 335–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney, S., & Frazier, W. (2008). Embracing the principles and standards for school mathematics: An inquiry into the pedagogical and instructional practices of mathematics teachers in high-poverty middle schools. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81(5), 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, C., & Watson, A. (2002). The interpretative nature of teachers’ assessment of students’ mathematics: Issues for equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(2), 78–110.

  • Mulder, R., Baik, C., Naylor, R., & Pearce, J. (2014). How does student peer review influence perceptions, engagement and academic outcomes? A case study. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(6), 57–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

  • Ng, J. D. C. H., & Yeo, S. M. (2005). Using journal writing to understand primary three students’ perception of multiplication and division: Case studies. Paper presented at the International Conference on Education, Redesigning Pedagogy: Research, Policy, Practice, National Institute of Education, Singapore. Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice, National Institute of Education.

  • Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge society, 6(3), 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogan-Bekiroglue, F. (2009). Assessing assessment: Examination of pre-service physics teachers’ attitudes towards assessment and factors affecting their attitudes. International Journal of Science Education, 31(1), 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, M., & Leinhardt, G. (1995). Percent: A privileged proportion. Review of Educational Research, 65(4), 421–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Pino-Fan, L., Godino, J. D., & Font, V. (2016). Assessing key epistemic features of didactic-mathematical knowledge of prospective teachers: The case of the derivative. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. doi:10.1007/s10857-016-9349-8.

  • Powell, A. B., & Ramnauth, M. (1992). Beyond questions and answers: Prompting reflections and deepening understandings of mathematics using multiple-entry logs. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(2), 12–18.‏

  • Pugalee, D. (2001). Writing, mathematics, and metacognition: Looking for connections through students’ work in mathematical problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5), 236–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, A. M. (1997). Inconsistency between a beginning elementary school teacher’s mathematics beliefs and teaching practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 550–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). New York, NY: Macmillan.

  • Seaman, C. J., Szydilk, J. S., Szydlik, S. D., & Beam, J. (2005). A comparison of pre-service elementary teachers’ beliefs about mathematics and teaching mathematics: 1968 and 1998. School Science and Mathematics, 105(4), 197–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serin, G. (2015). Alternative assessment practices of a classroom teacher: Alignment with reform-based science curriculum. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(2), 277–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, D. J. (1993). Assessing integrated language and content instruction. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL), 27(4), 627–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., & Kim, G. (2008). The role of mathematics curriculum materials in large-scale urban reform: An analysis of demands and opportunities for teacher learning. In J. Remillard (Ed.), Teachers’ use of mathematics curriculum materials: Research perspectives on relationships between teachers and curriculum (pp. 37–55). New York, NY: Routledge.

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(4), 324–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 213–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, C., & Thurlow, D. (2000). Making it their own: Pre-service teachers’ experiences, beliefs, and classroom practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(2), 113–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (1994). Improvement of (didactical) assessment by improvement of problems: An attempt with respect to percentage. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27, 341–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watt, H. M. G. (2005). Attitude to the use of alternative assessment methods in mathematics: A study with secondary mathematics teachers in Sydney, Australia. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58, 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen, L. M., & Tsai, C. C. (2006). University students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward (online) peer assessment. Higher Education, 51, 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen, L. M., Tsai, C. C., & Chang, C. Y. (2006). Attitudes towards peer assessment: A comparison of the perspectives of pre-service and in-service teachers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 83–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2007). Keeping learning on track: Classroom assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1053–1098). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Yu-Ching, C. (2008). Elementary school EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices of multiple assessments. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 7(1), 37–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zan, R., & Di Martino, P. (2008). Attitude toward mathematics. In B. Sriraman (Ed.), Beliefs and mathematics: Festschrift in honor of Guenter Toerner’s 60 th birthday (pp. 197–214). Missoula, MT: Information Age Publishing.

  • Zollman, A., & Mason, E. (1992). The standards’ beliefs instrument (SBI): Teachers’ beliefs about the NCTM standards. School Science and Mathematics, 92(7), 359–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Juhaina Awawdeh Shahbari

  2. The College of Sakhnin, Sakhnin, Israel

    Juhaina Awawdeh Shahbari & Fadia Nasser Abu-Alhija

  3. Al-Qasemi Academy- Academic College of Education, Baqa al-Gharbiyye, Israel

    Juhaina Awawdeh Shahbari

  4. Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel

    Fadia Nasser Abu-Alhija

Authors
  1. Juhaina Awawdeh Shahbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fadia Nasser Abu-Alhija
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juhaina Awawdeh Shahbari.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(DOCX 18 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 18 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shahbari, J.A., Abu-Alhija, F.N. Does Training in Alternative Assessment Matter? The Case of Prospective and Practicing Mathematics Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Alternative Assessment and Their Beliefs About the Nature of Mathematics. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 16, 1315–1335 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9830-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9830-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation