Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a learning-oriented assessment to improve students’ learning—a critical review of literature

  • Published:
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Learning-oriented assessment (LOA), a concept coined by Carless, has emerged in Europe, Canada, the USA, and the Asia-Pacific Region as an alternative assessment methodology. LOA evolved from both summative assessment and formative assessment, and its framework comprises three integrated components, assessment for learning, assessment as learning, and assessment of learning. While a few studies have provided information about the connections among assessment for, of, and as learning, the purpose of this review is to summarize what is state of the art of LOA, and we aim to examine the history and the nature as well as the strategy of developing LOA. We conducted a transformed critical review of LOA to address these questions. To be specific, the related studies were searched between January 1971 and December 2016, using specific inclusion criteria to remove irrelevant documents. Results provide the publication types of the selected studies and the reported approaches to LOA, trace the evolution of classroom assessment from summative and formative assessment to LOA in order to clarify the historical foundations of LOA, and indicate its nature from the dimensions of components, functions, conceptual frameworks, and principles, as well as to illustrate strategies for using it in the classroom. The findings of a deep analysis of 48 publications were then used to define a holistic framework for LOA and a dynamic framework for its development and also yield important recommendations for practice and future research. Finally, we propose the conclusion.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Items marked with an * in this reference list are selected articles of this study.

  • Abdul Aziz, M. N., & Yusoff, N. (2016). Improving process writing with the use authentic assessment. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 5(3), 200–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers and Education, 52, 154–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Antoniou, P., & James, M. (2014). Exploring formative assessment in primary school classrooms: developing a framework of actions and strategies. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(2), 153–176.

  • *Baas, D., Castelijns, J., Vermeulen, M., Martens, R., & Segers, M. (2015). The relation between assessment for learning and elementary students’ cognitive and metacognitive strategy use. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 33–46.

  • Bandiera, M., & Bruno, C. (2006). Active/cooperative learning in schools. Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 130–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayat, A., Jamshidipour, A., & Hashemi, M. (2017). The beneficial impacts of applying formative assessment on Iranian University students’ anxiety reduction and listening efficacy. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 5(2), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, B., & Kozlowski, S. (2008). Active learning: effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 296–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bennett, R. (2010). Cognitively based assessment of, for, and as learning (CBAL): a preliminary theory of action for summative and formative assessment. Measurement, 8(2), 70–91.

  • Bennett, R. (2011). Formative assessment: a critical review. Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice, 18(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R., & Gitomer, D. (2009). Transforming k–12 assessment: integrating accountability testing, formative assessment and professional support. In C. Wyatt-Smith, & J. J. Cumming (Eds.), Educational assessment in the 21st century (pp. 43–61). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bernauer, J., & Fuller, R. (2017). Beyond measurement-driven instruction: achieving deep learning based on constructivist learning theory, integrated assessment, and a flipped classroom approach. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 28(2), 111–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevitt, S. (2015). Assessment innovation and student experience: a new assessment challenge and call for a multi-perspective approach to assessment research. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(1), 103–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, B., Herrmann, D., Meek, G., & Rapley, E. (2010). What it means to be an accounting professor: a concise career guide for doctoral students in accounting. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(2), 227–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.

  • *Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & William, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 9–21.

  • Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernández-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers and Education, 62, 102–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bloom, B., Hastings, J., & Madaus, G. (1971). Handbook on the formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  • Bowers, P., & Ryan, S. (2013). Models of faculty assessment and review: an exploration of forty peer and aspirational institutions. International Journal of University Teaching and Faculty Development, 4(2), 91–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullough Jr., R. (2001). Pedagogical content knowledge circa 1907 and 1987: a study in the history of an idea. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(6), 655–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219–233.

  • *Carless, D. (2007). Learning-oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 57–66.

  • *Carless, D. (2015). Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes. Higher Education, 69(6), 963–976.

  • *Carless, D., Joughin, G., & Liu, N. (2006a). How assessment supports learning: Learning-oriented assessment in action. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

  • *Carless, D., Joughin, G., & Mok, M. M.C. (2006b). Learning-oriented assessment: principles and practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 395–398.

  • CCSSO. (2010). Common core state standards. http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards. Accessed 20 March 2013.

  • Chen, S. Y., Huang, F. Q., & Zeng, W. J. (2017). Comments on systematic methodologies of action research in the New Millennium: a review of publications 2000-2014. Action Research, 147675031769110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750317691103.

  • *Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 205–249.

  • Colantonio, J. (2005). Assessment for a learning society. Principal Leadership, 6(2), 22–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Australian Governments. (2008). National Education Agreement. http://www.acara.edu.au/default.asp. Accessed 21 March 2013.

  • Cox, S., & Robinson-Pant, A. (2008). Power, participation and decision making in the primary classroom: children as action researchers. Educational Action Research, 16(4), 457–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Curry, K., Mwavita, M., Holter, A., & Harris, E. (2016). Getting assessment right at the classroom level: using formative assessment for decision making. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(1), 89–104.

  • Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments in education—a systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLuca, C., & Klinger, D. (2010). Assessment literacy development: identifying gaps in teacher candidates’ learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 17(4), 419–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLuca, C., Chavez, T., Bellara, A., & Cao, C. (2013). Pedagogies for preservice assessment education: supporting teacher candidates’ assessment literacy development. The Teacher Educator, 48(2), 128–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Depaepe, F., Verschaffel, L., & Kelchtermans, G. (2013). Pedagogical content knowledge: a systematic review of the way in which the concept has pervaded mathematics educational research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34(1), 12–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, S. (2010). Book review: how assessment supports learning. Learning-oriented assessment in action. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 17(1), 105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckor, B., Holmberg, C., & Becker, J. (2017). Making moves: formative assessment in mathematics. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 22(6), 334–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

  • Elden, M., & Chisholm, R. (1993). Emerging varieties of action research: introduction to the special issue. Human Relations, 46(2), 121–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, J. (2003). Dynamic assessment in educational settings: realizing potential. Educational Review, 55, 15–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Embretson, S. (2010). Cognitively based assessment and the integration of summative and formative assessments. Measurement, 8(4), 180–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, Y.-C., Wang, T.-H., & Wang, K.-H. (2011). A web-based model for developing assessment literacy of secondary in-service teachers. Computers and Education, 57(2), 1727–1740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Balboa, J.-M., & Stiehl, J. (1995). The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 293–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. (1985). Cognitive development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, B., Kakibara, S., Schroeder, R., Bates, K., & Flynn, E. (1990). Empirical research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 9(2), 250–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fourie, M., Stein, D., Solms, M., Gobodo-Madikizela, P., & Decety, J. (2017). Empathy and moral emotions in post-apartheid South Africa: an fMRI investigation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(6), 881–892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. (1981). Learning environment in curriculum evaluation: a review. Evaluation in Education, 5(1), 1–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Friesen, S. (2016). Assessment for learning in a math classroom. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • *Gibbons, S., & Kankkonen, B. (2011). Assessment as learning in physical education: making assessment meaningful for secondary school students. Physical and Health Education Journal, 76(4), 6–12.

  • *Gikandi, J., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: a review of the literature. Computers and Education, 57(4), 2333–2351.

  • Gotch, C., & French, B. (2014). A systematic review of assessment literacy measures. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(2), 14–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, M., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guiffrida, D., Douthit, K., Lynch, M., & Mackie, K. (2011). Publishing action research in counseling journals. Journal of Counseling and Development, 89(3), 282–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heap, N., Kear, K., & Bissell, C. (2004). An overview of ICT-based assessment for engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 29(2), 241–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Heitink, M., Kleij, F., Veldkamp, B., Schildkamp, K., & Kippers, W. (2016). A systematic review of prerequisites for implementing assessment for learning in classroom practice. Educational Research Review, 17, 50–62.

  • *Hounsell, D., Xu, R., & Tai, C. M. (2007). Integrative assessment: Balancing assessment of and assessment for learning—guide no. 2. Gloucester: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.

  • Hsu, C.-L., Zhao, Y., & Wang, W.-C. (2013). Exploiting computerized adaptive testing for self-directed learning. In M. M. C. Mok (Ed.), Self-directed learning oriented assessments in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 257–280). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, F. Q. (2003). On curriculum for learning: review from perspective of cultural philosophy. Peking University Education Review, 4(90–94), 99.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hume, A., & Coll, R. (2009). Assessment of learning, for learning, and as learning: New Zealand case studies. Assessment in Education, 16(3), 269–290.

  • InPraxis Group Inc. (2006). Effective professional development: What the research says. Edmonton: Alberta Education.

  • Istance, D., & Kools, M. (2013). OECD Work on technology and education: innovative learning environments as an integrating framework. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., & Järvenojä, H. (2011). Socially constructed self-regulated learning and motivation regulation in collaborative learning groups. Teachers College Record, 113(2), 350–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Jones, N., & Saville, N. (2016). Learning oriented assessment—a systemic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joughin, G. (2004) Learning oriented assessment: A conceptual framework. http://www.ied.edu.hk/loap/ETL_Joughin_LOAP.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2013.

  • *Keppell, M., & Carless, D. (2006). Learning-oriented assessment: a technology-based case study. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 13(2), 179–191.

  • Kim, A., & Kim, H. (2017). The effectiveness of instructor feedback for learning-oriented language assessment: using an integrated reading-to-write task for English for academic purposes. Assessing Writing, 32, 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. (2005). Learning in innovative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 547–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Klenowski, V. (2006). Learning oriented assessment in the Asia Pacific region. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 13(2), 131–134.

  • Klute, M., Apthorp, H., Harlacher, J., & Reale, M. (2017). Formative assessment and elementary school student academic achievement: A review of the evidence. REL 2017-259. Washington, DC: Regional Educational Laboratory Central.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: a guild for learners and teachers. New York: Association Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, K. (2011). Improving teacher’ assessment literacy through professional development. Teaching Education, 22(3), 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Krogstrup, H. (1997). User participation in quality assessment: a dialogue and learning oriented evaluation method. Evaluation, 2(3), 205–224.

  • Li, Y., Dong, M., & Huang, R. (2009). Toward a semantic forum for active collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 71–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H., Wang, Y., Cai, J., & Li, C. (2014). Design and development of education cloud platform. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, 6(3), 383–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. (2015). Student teacher as researcher. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. L. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 1231–1258). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth (MECY). (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/ks4/assess/index.html. Accessed 26 March 2013.

  • *Martinez, M., Lipson, J. (1989). Assessment for learning. Educational Leadership, 46(7), 73–75.

  • *Mclaren, S. (2012). Assessment is for learning: supporting feedback. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(2), 227–245.

  • *Miedijensky, S., & Tal, T. (2016). Reflection and assessment for learning in science enrichment courses for the gifted. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 50, 1–13.

  • Miller, M. (2008). Problem-based conversations: using preservice teachers’ problems as a mechanism for their professional development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(4), 77–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education of P. R. China. (2011). Notice of the ministry of education on the issuance of the compulsory education curriculum standards of subjects such as the Chinese language, etc. (Version 2011). http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_711/201201/xxgk_129268.html. Accessed 21 March 2013.

  • *Mok, M. M. C. (2010). Self-directed learning oriented assessment: assessment that informs learning and empowers the learner. Hong Kong: Pace Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Mok, M. M. C. (2013). Self-directed learning oriented assessments in the Asia-Pacific. London: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mysen, T. (2013). Towards a framework for controls as determinants of export performance. European Business Review, 25(3), 224–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, E., & Bishop, P. (2013). Students as action research partners: a New Zealand example. Middle School Journal, 45, 19–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niess, M. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *O’Reilly, T., & Sheehan, K. (2009). Cognitively based assessment of, for, and as learning: A framework for assessing reading competency. ETS, Princeton. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED507810.pdf. Accessed 3 March 2012.

  • OECD. (2010). The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, A., & Choi, N. (2014). The current state of library open source software research: a descriptive literature review and classification. Library Hi Tech, 32(1), 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pat-El, R., Tillema, H., Segers, M., & Vedder, P. (2013). Validation of assessment for learning questionnaires for teachers and students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 98–113.

  • *Plake, B., & Impara, J. (1996). Teacher assessment literacy: what do teachers know about assessment? In Phye G. D. (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: learning, achievement, and adjustment (pp. 53–68). Cambridge: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Punch, S. (2002). Research with children: the same or different from research with adults? Childhood, 9(3), 321–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redecker, C., & Johannessen, Ø. (2013). Changing assessment—towards a new assessment paradigm using ICT. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regalla, M., & Peker, H. (2017). Prompting all students to learn: examining dynamic assessment of special needs and typical students in a Prekindergarten Inclusive French Program. Foreign Language Annals, 50(2), 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovegno, I. (1992). Learning to teach in a field-based methods course: the development of pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(1), 69–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rushmer, R., Kelly, D., Lough, M., Wilkinson, J., & Davies, H. (2004a). Introducing the learning practice—I. The characteristics of learning organizations in primary care. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 10(3), 375–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rushmer, R., Kelly, D., Lough, M., Wilkinson, J., & Davies, H. (2004b). Introducing the learning practice—II. Becoming a learning practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 10(3), 387–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuitema, J., Peetsma, T., & van der Veen, I. (2012). Self-regulated learning and students' perceptions of innovative and traditional learning environments: a longitudinal study in secondary education. Educational Studies, 38(4), 397–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler et al. (Eds.), Perspectives in evaluation, American Educational Research Association Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation (pp. 39–83). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, R. H., & Huang, F. Q. (2004). A preliminary study of cooperative-activity-based learning. Educational Research, 297, 60–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, Y., Frederiksen, C., & Muis, K. (2013). A cross-cultural study of self-regulated learning in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 23, 52–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simms, M., & George, B. (2014). Approaching assessment from a learning perspective: elevating assessment beyond technique. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26, 95–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, C. K. S., Lebar, O., & Kepol, N. (2017). An observation of classroom assessment practices among lecturers in selected Malaysian higher learning institutions. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 23–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C., Worsfold, K., Davies, L., Fisher, R., & McPhail, R. (2013). Assessment literacy and student learning: the case for explicitly developing students ‘assessment literacy’. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 44–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soni, G., & Kodali, R. (2012). A critical review of empirical research methodology in supply chain management. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(6), 753–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. (1991). Assessment literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 534–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stiggins, R. (2005a). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: a path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328.

  • *Stiggins, R. (2005b). Student-involved assessment for learning. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stiggins, R. (2009). Assessment for learning in upper elementary grades. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(6), 419–421.

  • Stödberg, U. (2012). A research review of e-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(5), 591–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Tang, S., & Chow, A. (2007). Communicating feedback in teaching practice supervision in a learning-oriented field experience assessment framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1066–1085.

  • Tanner, D. (2001). Authentic assessment: a solution, or part of the problem? The High School Journal, 85(1), 24–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Taras, M. (2005). Assessment—summative and formative: some theoretical reflections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 466–478.

  • *Taras, M. (2008). Assessment for learning: sectarian divisions of terminology and concepts. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 32(4), 389–397.

  • Taylor, E. (2007). An update of transformative learning theory: a critical review of the empirical research (1999–2005). International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26(2), 173–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teasdale, R., Viskupic, K., Bartley, J., McConnell, D., Manduca, C., Bruckner, M., Farthing, D., & Iverson, E. (2017). A multidimensional assessment of reformed teaching practice in geoscience classrooms. Geosphere, 13(2), 608–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terpstra, D., & Rozell, E. (1997). Why some potentially effective staffing practices are seldom used. Public Personnel Management, 26(4), 483–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Tillema, H., Leenknecht, M., & Segers, M. (2011). Assessing assessment quality: criteria for quality assurance in design of (peer) assessment for learning: a review of research studies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 25–34.

  • Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing formative assessment in the classroom: using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 26(5), 615–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tough, A. (1967). Learning without a teacher: a study of tasks and assistance during adult self-teaching projects. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (1990). The world declaration on education for all and framework for action to meet basic learning needs. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/resources/online-materials/publications/unesdoc-database/. Accessed 20 March 2013.

  • Vallberg Roth, A.-C. (2014). Bedömning i förskolans dokumentationspraktiker: Fenomen, begrepp och reglering. Göteborgs universitet, Institutionen för pedagogik och didaktik, 19(4–5), 403–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J., Veal, W., & Janssen, F. (2001). Pedagogical content knowledge: an integrative component within the knowledge base for teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(8), 979–986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Volante, L. (2010). Assessment of, for, and as learning within schools: implications for transforming classroom practice. Action in Teacher Education, 31(4), 66–75.

  • *Volante, L., & Fazio, X. (2007). Exploring teacher candidates’ assessment literacy: implications for teacher education reform and professional development. Canadian Journal of Education, 30(3), 749–770.

  • Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, T.-H., Wang, K.-H., & Huang, S.-C. (2008). Designing a web-based assessment environment for improving pre-service teacher assessment literacy. Computers and Education, 51(1), 448–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

  • Westbury, I., Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, K. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice: The German didaktik tradition. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3–14.

  • Wilmott, D., & Knox, I. (2012). A review of cloud application assessment practices. Education for Information, 29, 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Winter, J. (2003). The changing prepositions of assessment practice: assessment of, for and as learning. British Educational Research Journal, 29(5), 767–772.

  • Yang, H., & Tate, M. (2012). A descriptive literature review and classification of cloud computing research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 31, 35–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youssefa, A., El-Telbanya, M., & Zekry, A. (2017). The role of artificial intelligence in photo-voltaic systems design and control: a review. Sustainable Energy Reviews, 78, 72–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

First, the authors would like to thank the editors for their hard work. Second, they also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments to improve the quality of the paper. Third, revising this article has been a collaborative process, so the authors would like to express their appreciation to all those who have helped to revise the paper. They are Huifang Jiang, Na Dong, Tingting Ruan, Rui Liu, Yufen Zeng, Jing Lai, Yanfang Shi, Yuxi Tang, and Lingli Li. Fourth, we want to thank Dr. Margaret Taplin for her advice on copyediting this article. Fifth, this research was supported by the National Social Science Fund of China (NSSFC, Grant No. BHA180125) entitled “Research on the construction of learning-centred assessment theory”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Centre for Research and Development of Values Learning, South China Normal University, Office 203, School of Education, No. 55 Western Zhongshan Road, Tian He District, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province, People’s Republic of China

    Wenjie Zeng, Fuquan Huang & Siyu Chen

  2. Faculty of Education, Southwest University, No. 2 Tiansheng Road, Beibei District, Chongqing City, People’s Republic of China

    Lu Yu

Authors
  1. Wenjie Zeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fuquan Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lu Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Siyu Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fuquan Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zeng, W., Huang, F., Yu, L. et al. Towards a learning-oriented assessment to improve students’ learning—a critical review of literature. Educ Asse Eval Acc 30, 211–250 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9281-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9281-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation