Abstract
Given issues related to differences in learner characteristics, effective sampling across the content domain, and recent emphases on assessing meaningfully contextualised abilities and higher-order cognitive processes, the ‘traditional’ mathematics test arguably does not provide a valid measure of student ability. Consequently, there is a need to incorporate alternative methods of assessment that are able to effectively assess the range of students’ mathematical abilities. The present study investigated methods of assessment used by 60 mathematics teachers from 11 secondary schools in metropolitan Sydney, as well as their attitudes to a range of alternative assessment methods, together with reasons why they would or would not implement these. Results showed that teachers were satisfied with traditional tests as valid measures of student ability, particularly for senior school years. Teachers generally did not favour implementing alternative assessment methods, although those with the least years’ teaching experience reported more positive attitudes. A major concern raised by teachers about the use of alternative assessment methods related to their perceived subjectivity. Explanations for these findings are advanced for teachers who have varying lengths of teaching experience.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Australian Education Council [AEC]: 1994, Mathematics – A Curriculum Profile for Australian Schools, Curriculum Corporation, Carlton, Victoria.
Broadfoot, P.: 1996, Education, Assessment and Society, Buckingham, Open University Press.
Clarke, D.: 1998, Mathematics Curriculum and Teaching Program: Professional Development Package: Assessment Alternatives in Mathematics, Curriculum Development Centre, Canberra.
Clarke, D.: 1987, ‘A rationale for assessment alternatives in mathematics’, Australian Mathematics Teacher 43(3), 8–10.
Clarke, D.: 1996, ‘Assessment’, in A.J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick and C. Laborde (eds.), International Handbook of Mathematics Education, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 327–370.
Clarke, D. and Lovitt, C.: 1987, ‘MCTP assessment alternatives in mathematics’, Australian Mathematics Teacher 43(3), 11–12.
Cockroft, W.H.: 1982, Mathematics Counts, HMSO, London.
Corbett, H.D. and Wilson, B.L.: 1991, Testing, Reform, and Rebellion, Ablex, Norwood NJ.
Dawkins, J.S.: 1988, Strengthening Australia’s Schools: A Consideration of the Focus on Content of Schooling, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, ACT.
Delandshere, G. and Petrosky, A.R.: 1998, ‘Assessment of complex performances: Limitations of key measurement assumptions’, Educational Researcher 27(2), 14–24.
Findlay, J.: 1987, ‘Criteria-based assessment in Queensland’, Australian Mathematics Teacher 43(3), 4–6.
Firestone, W.A., Winter, J. and Fitz, J.: 2000, ‘Different assessments, common practice? Mathematics testing and teaching in the USA and England and Wales’, Assessment in Education 7(1), 13–37.
Galbraith, P.: 1995a, ‘Assessment in mathematics: Purposes and traditions’, in L. Grimison and J. Pegg (eds.), Teaching Secondary School Mathematics: Theory into Practice, Harcourt Brace, Sydney, pp. 271–288.
Galbraith, P.: 1995b, ‘Assessment in mathematics: Developments, innovations and challenges’, in L. Grimison and J. Pegg (eds.), Teaching Secondary School Mathematics: Theory into Practice, Harcourt Brace, Sydney, pp. 289–314.
Galbraith, P.L. and Clatworthy, N.J.: 1990, ‘Beyond standard models: Meeting the challenge of modelling’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 21(2), 137–163.
Geertz, C.: 1993, The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, Fontana, London.
Goodlad, J.A.: 1984, A Place Called School, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Griffin, P.E.: 1990, ‘Profiling literacy development: Monitoring the accumulation of reading skills’, Australian Journal of Education 34, 290–311.
Grimison, L.: 1992, Assessment in Mathematics – Some Alternatives, Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia 15th Annual Conference, University of Western Sydney.
Hill, P.W.: 1994, ‘Putting the national profiles to use’, Unicorn 20, 36–42.
Hoge, R.D. and Coladarci, T.: 1989, ‘Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature’, Review of Educational Research 59(3), 297–313.
Karmelita, W.: 1987, ‘The assessment tail should not be wagging the pedagogical dog’, Australian Mathematics Teacher 43(3), 25–26.
Krippendorff, K.: 1980, Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
Kulm, G.: 1994, Mathematics Assessment: What Works in the Classroom, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
Lacey, C. and Lawton, D.: 1981, Issues in Evaluation and Accountability, Metheun, London.
Leder, G.C., Brew, C. and Rowley, G.: 1999, ‘Gender differences in mathematics achievement – Here today and gone tomorrow?’, in G. Kaiser, E. Luna and I Huntley (eds.), International Comparisons in Mathematics Education, Falmer Press, London, pp. 213–224.
Leung, F.: 1995, Mathematics Assessment in Hong Kong, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Levinson, C.Y.: 2000, ‘Student assessment in eight countries’, Educational Leadership 57(5), 58–61.
Mathematical Sciences Education Board: 1993, Measuring Counts: A Conceptual Guide for Mathematics Assessment, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M.: 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed., Sage, London.
NCTM: 1989, Curriculum and Evaluation Standards in School Mathematics, NCTM, Reston VA.
New South Wales Board Of Studies: 1996, Assessing and Reporting Using Stage Outcomes. Part 1: Assessing, Author, Sydney.
Niss, M.: 1993a, ‘Assessment in mathematics education and its effects: An introduction’, in M. Niss (ed.), Investigations into Assessment in Mathematics Education: An ICMI Study, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 1–30.
Niss, M.: 1993b, ‘Introduction’, in M. Niss (ed.), Icases of Assessment in Mathematics Education: An ICMI Study, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 1–8.
Niss, M.: 1999, Aspects of the nature and state of research in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics 40, 1–24.
Popham, J.: 1987, ‘The merits of measurement driven instruction’, Phi Delta Kappan 68, 679–682.
Powell, A.G., Farrar, E. and Cohen, D.K.: 1985, The Shopping Mall High School, Houghton Mifflin, Boston MA.
Queensland Board of Senior Secondary School Studies [QBSSS]: 1992, Syllabus in Senior Mathematics, QBSSS, Brisbane.
Rothman, R.: 1995, Measuring Up: Standards, Assessment and School Reform, Jossey Bass, San Francisco CA.
Rowe, K.J. and Hill, P.W.: 1996, ‘Assessing, recording and reporting students’ educational progress: The case for ‘subject profiles’’, Assessment in Education 3(3), 309–352.
Sadler, D.R.: 1987, ‘Specifying and promulgating achievement standards’, Oxford Review of Education 13(2), 191–209.
Schoen, H.L.: 1989, ‘Implementing the Standards: Beginning to Implement the ‘Standards’ in Grades 7–12’, Mathematics Teacher 82(6), 427–430.
Simon, M. and Forgette-Giroux, R.: 2000, ‘Impact of a content selection framework on portfolio assessment at the classroom level’, Assessment in Education 7(1), 83–101.
Smith, M. and O’Day, J.: 1991, ‘Put to the test: The effects of external testing on students’, Educational Researcher 20(5), 8–12.
Stephens, M.: 1987, ‘Towards an AAMT policy on assessment and reporting in school mathematics’, Australian Mathematics Teacher 43(3), 2–3.
Stephens, M.: 1988, ‘AAMT discussion paper on assessment and reporting in school mathematics’, The Australian Mathematics Teacher 44(1), 16a–16c.
Stephens, M. and Money, R.: 1993, ‘New developments in senior secondary assessment in Australia’, in M. Niss (ed.), Investigations into Assessment in Mathematics Education: An ICMI Study, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 155–172.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J.: 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J.: 1998, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Thompson, A. and Briars, D.: 1989, ‘Assessing students’ learning to inform teaching: The message in NCTM’S evaluation standards’, Arithmetic Teacher 37(4), 22–26.
Watson, A.: 2000, ‘Mathematics teachers acting as informal assessors: Practices, problems and recommendations’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 41, 69–91.
Webb, N.: 1993, ‘Visualising a theory of the assessment of students’ knowledge of mathematics’, in National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], Investigations into Assessment in Mathematics Education: An ICME Study, NCTM, Reston, Virginia.
Weber, R.P.: 1990, Basic Content Analysis, 2nd ed., Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
West Sussex Institute of Higher Education [WSIHE].: 1989, Practical Suggestions for Developing and Assessing Mathematics Coursework, WSIHE, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Watt, H.M.G. Attitudes to the Use of Alternative Assessment Methods in Mathematics: A Study with Secondary Mathematics Teachers in Sydney, Australia. Educ Stud Math 58, 21–44 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-3228-z
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-3228-z