Navigating dilemmas in transforming assessment practices: experiences of mathematics teachers in Ontario, Canada

Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability volume 26, pages263–287(2014)Cite this article

Abstract

Current thinking encourages teachers to incorporate a range of assessment practices that are responsive to student thinking and promote student learning. At the same time, teachers are situated in a landscape of accountability, where they are often seen as technicians who implement prescribed curriculum, policies, and procedures with success measured by externally created assessments. This paper considers how teachers navigate this difficult terrain as they incorporate new assessment practices in their classrooms. We report on a two-year project undertaken with 42 teachers of mathematics (Grades 4–12) in Ontario, Canada. Using an analytic framework adapted from Windschitl (Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175.2002), we explore the dilemmas these teachers identified as they met in communities of practice. Our findings highlight the need for coherence in the assessment messages communicated to teachers and provide evidence of the critical role of ongoing collaboration and dialogue to support the development of teachers’ professional judgement and enable change in their assessment practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Notes

  1. 1.

    In Canada, education is a provincial responsibility.

  2. 2.

    Though this distinction is clearly made in the Growing Success document, many Ontario teachers either use assessment and evaluation interchangeably or use the term assessment to encompass both activities.

  3. 3.

    The final version of Growing Success was released toward the end of our 2-year study, but an earlier draft of this document had been released, and many Ontario teachers had become familiar with the contents through the earlier drafts and through other policy documents.

References

  1. Adler, J. (1998). A language of teaching dilemmas: unlocking the complex multilingual secondary mathematics classroom. For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(1), 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ball, D. L. (Ed.). (2003). Mathematical proficiency for all students: toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Institute

  3. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brookhart, S. M. (2003). Developing measurement theory for classroom assessment purposes and uses. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: education, knowledge, and action research. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Delandshere, G., & Petrosky, A. R. (1998). Assessment of complex performances: limitations of key measurement assumptions. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 14–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning: using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Earl, L. M., Volante, L., & Katz, S. (2011). Unleashing the promise of assessment for learning. Education Canada, 51.

  10. Forman, E. A. (2003). A sociocultural approach to mathematics reform: speaking, inscribing, and doing mathematics within communities of practice. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 333–352). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gardner, J. (Ed.) (2006). Assessment and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  13. Gearhart, M., & Saxe, G. B. (2004). When teachers know what students know: integrating mathematics assessment. Theory into Practice, 43(4), 304–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gipps, C. V. (1999). Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24, 355–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Graue, M. E., & Smith, S. Z. (1996). Shaping assessment through instructional innovation. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(2), 113–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: teachers work and culture in a postmodern age. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hargreaves, A. (2009). A decade of educational change and a defining moment of opportunity—an introduction. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. J. (2012). Professional capital: transforming teaching in every school. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kincheloe, J. L. (2003). Teachers as researchers: qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. London: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lachance, A., & Confrey, J. (2003). Interconnecting content and community: a qualitative study of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(2), 107–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lee, D. H. L., & Shaari, I. (2012). Professional identity or best practices? An exploration of the synergies between professional learning communities and communities of practices. Creative Education, 3(4), 457–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lipman, P. (2009). Paradoxes of teaching in neo-liberal times: education 'reform' in Chicago. In S. Gewirtz, P. Mahony, I. Hextall, & A. Cribb (Eds.), Changing teacher professionalism: international trends, challenges and ways forward (pp. 67–80). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Luke, A. (2011). Generalizing across borders: policy and the limits of educational science. Educational Researcher, 40(8), 367–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lund, A. (2008). Assessment made visible: individual and collective practices. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15, 32–51.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2009). Advancing formative assessment in every classroom. Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  28. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2001). Mathematics assessment: cases and discussion questions (grades K-5). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  31. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Mathematics assessment: cases and discussion questions (grades 6–12). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ontario Ministry of Education (OME). (2005a). The Ontario curriculum grades 1–8 mathematics revised. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ontario Ministry of Education (OME). (2005b). The Ontario curriculum grades 9 and 10 mathematics revised. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ontario Ministry of Education (OME). (2007). The Ontario curriculum grades 11 and 12 mathematics revised. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ontario Ministry of Education (OME). (2010). Growing success: assessment, evaluation, and reporting in Ontario schools. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Romagnano, L. (2001). The myth of objectivity in mathematics assessment. Mathematics Teacher, 94(1), 31–37.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sfard, A. (2003). Balancing the unbalanceable: the NCTM Standards in the light of theories of learning mathematics. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion for NCTM Standards (pp. 353–392). Reston, VA: National Council for Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Shepard, L. A. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 1066–1101). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Stobart, G. (2008). Testing times: the uses and abuses of assessment. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Suurtamm, C. (2004). Developing authentic assessment: case studies of secondary school mathematics teachers’ experiences. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 4, 497–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Suurtamm, C., & Graves, B. (2007), Curriculum implementation in intermediate mathematics (CIIM): Research Report. www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/studentsuccess/lms/files/CIIMResearchReport2007.pdf

  43. Suurtamm, C., Koch, M., & Arden, A. (2010). Teachers’ emerging assessment practices in mathematics: classrooms in the context of reform. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 17(4), 399–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Volante, L., & Beckett, D. (2011). Formative assessment and the contemporary classroom: synergies and tensions between research and practice. Canadian Journal of Education, 34(2), 239–255.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Webb, M., & Jones, J. (2009). Exploring tensions in developing assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(2), 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Wiliam, D. (2007). Keeping learning on track: classroom assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. II, pp. 1053–1098). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: an analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) who provided an infrastructure grant for the research facilities (Pi Lab) used in this project. The second author would also like to acknowledge the financial support she received from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Most importantly, we wish to acknowledge the dedication and commitment of the research project participants, without whom this work would not have been possible.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa, 145 Jean Jacques Lussier, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada

    Christine Suurtamm

  2. Faculty of Education, University of Manitoba, Rm 236 Education Bldg., 71 Curry Place, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada

    Martha J. Koch

Authors
  1. Christine Suurtamm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martha J. Koch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine Suurtamm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Suurtamm, C., Koch, M.J. Navigating dilemmas in transforming assessment practices: experiences of mathematics teachers in Ontario, Canada. Educ Asse Eval Acc 26, 263–287 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-014-9195-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Classroom assessment
  • Dilemmas in practice
  • Assessment reform
  • Teacher practice
  • Mathematics education