Skip to main content

Conceptualising teachers’ assessment literacies in an era of curriculum and assessment reform

Abstract

Teacher assessment literacy is a phrase that is often used but rarely defined. Yet understanding teacher assessment literacy is important in an international curriculum and assessment reform context that continues to challenge teachers’ assessment practices. In this article situated examples of classroom assessment literacies are analysed using Bernstein’s (Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and critique, Taylor and Francis, London, 1996; Br J Sociol Educ 20(2):157–173, 1999) theoretical tools of vertical and horizontal discourses, classification and framing. Drawing on a sociocultural view of learning, the authors define teacher assessment literacies as dynamic social practices which are context dependent and which involve teachers in articulating and negotiating classroom and cultural knowledges with one another and with learners, in the initiation, development and practice of assessment to achieve the learning goals of students. This conceptualisation of assessment literacy aims to make explicit some underpinning theoretical constructs of assessment literacy to inform dialogue and decision making for policy and practice to benefit student learning and achievement.

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

References

  • Adie, L. (2010). Developing shared understandings of standards-based assessment: Online moderation practices across geographically diverse contexts. PhD thesis. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.

  • Ainscow, M. (2009). Local solutions for local contexts: The development of more inclusive education systems. In (Ed.), Den inkluderende skole I et ledelsesperspektiv (Leadership perspectives on the inclusive school) Copenhagen: Rasmus Alenkaer, Frydenlund.

  • Assessment Reform Group. (1999). Assessment for learning: Beyond the black box. Cambridge: University of Cambridge School of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2010a). The Shape of the Australian Curriculum. http://www.acara.edu.au/curriculum/curriculum.html-3 Accessed 21 Feb 2012.

  • Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2010b.) My School™. http://www.myschool.edu.au/SchoolSearch.aspx Accessed 15 Jan 2013.

  • Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2011). The Australian Curriculum version 1.2. http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/Home Accessed 19 Nov 2011.

  • Berlack, H. (2001). Race and the achievement gap. Rethinking Schools Online 15, no. 4. http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive/15_04/Race154.shtml. Accessed 31 Oct 2008.

  • Berliner, D. (2008). Why Rising Test Scores May Not Equal Increased Student Learning. Dissent http://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/why-rising-test-scores-may-not-equal-increased-student-learning. Accessed 12 Jan 2012.

  • Bernstein, B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education (pp. 47–69). London: Collier Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and critique. London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2006). Developing a theory of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and Learning. (pp. 81–100). London: SAGE publications.

  • Bourne, J. (2004). Framing talk: Towards a ‘radical visible pedagogy’. In Muller, J. Davies, B. & Morais, A (Eds.), Reading Bernstein, Researching Bernstein (pp. 61–74). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

  • Bredo, E. (1994). Reconstructing educational psychology: Situated cognition and Deweyian pragmatism. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 23–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D. (2011). From testing to productive student learning. Implementing formative assessment in confucian-heritage settings. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, M., Madaus, G., Horn, C., & Ramos, M. (2000). Retrospective on educational testing and assessment in the 20th century. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., Souberman, E., & Vygotsky, L. S. (Eds.). (1978). Mind in Society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comber, B. (2012). Mandated literacy assessment and the reorganisation of teachers’ work: Federal policy, local effects. Critical Studies in Education, 53(2), 119–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, B. (2005). Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 137–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Criswell, J. (2006). Developing assessment literacy: A guide for elementary and middle school teachers. Norwood: Christopher Gordon publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2011). Teacher knowledge and student learning: Making the connection. Paper presented at the 2011 Vision to Reality: Queensland’s new education landscape. http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/downloads/events/linda_darling_hammond.pdf Accessed 18 Dec 2011.

  • De Bortoli, L., & Thomson, S. (2009). The achievement of Australia’s Indigenous students in PISA 2000–2006. Melbourne: ACER Press.

    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 

  • Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). (2007). What Works. The Work Program: Core Issues 4: Numeracy. http://www.whatworks.edu.au Accessed 30 Jan 2011.

  • Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood, J. (2006). Formative assessment: Possibilities, boundaries and limitations. Assessment in Education, 2, 215–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood, J. (2008). Gender issues in testing and assessment. In P. Murphy & K. Hall (Eds.), Learning and practice: Agency and identities. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood, J., & Lundy, L. (2010). Revisioning assessment through a children’s rights approach: Implications for policy, process and practice. Research Papers in Education, 25(3), 335–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, J. & Hoadley, U. (2004). Positioning the regulative order. In J. Muller, B. Davies & A. Morais (Eds.), Reading Bernstein, Researching Bernstein (pp. 61–74). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

  • Gardner, J. (2009). AfL a practical guide. Belfast: Council for Curriculum Examinations and Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2003). Opportunity to learn: A language-based perspective on assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 10(1), 27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2004). Situated language and learning. A critique of traditional schooling. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2008). A sociocultural perspective on opportunity to learn. In P. Moss, D. Pullin, J. Gee, E. Haertel & L. Jones Young (Eds.), Assessment, equity and opportunity to learn (pp. 76–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gilborn, D., & Youdell, D. (2000). Rationing education: Policy, practice, reform and equity. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gipps, C. (2008). Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. In H. Wynne (Ed.), Student assessment and testing (Vol. 1, pp. 252–291). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, N., Moll, L., Floyd Tenery, M.,Rivera, A., Rendón, P., Gonzales, R., & Amanti. C. (2008). Funds of Knowledge for Teaching Latino Households. In K. Hall, P. Murphy & J. Soler (Eds.), Pedagogy and Practice Culture and Identities. Milton Keynes: Open University.

  • Griffin, P., Woods, K., & Nguyen, C. (2005). An environmental scan of tools and strategies that measure progress in school reform. Melbourne: Department of Education and Training.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hipwell, P., & Klenowski, V. (2011). A case for addressing the literacy demands of assessment. Journal of Language and Literacy, 34(2), 127–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, M. (2006). Assessment, teaching and theories of learning. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and Learning (pp. 47–60). London: SAGE publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, P., & Costello, P. (2005). Principles for literacy assessment. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), 256–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klenowski, V. (2009). Australian Indigenous students: Addressing equity issues in assessment. Teaching Education, 20(1), 77–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klenowski, V., & Adie, L. (2009). Moderation as judgment practice: Reconciling system level accountability and local level practice. Curriculum Perspectives, 29(1), 10–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klenowski, V., Connolly, S. & Funnell, R. (in press, accepted December 2012) Examining the assessment opportunities for cultural connectedness for student learning: A sociocultural analysis. In C. Boyle (Ed.), Student Learning: Improving practice, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.

  • Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2011). The impact of high stakes testing: The Australian story. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 19(1), 65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Learning and Teaching Scotland. (2010). Assessment for Curriculum for Excellence. http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/Images/AssessmentforCfE_tcm4-565505.pdf Accessed 30 July 2011.

  • Lingard, B. (2007). Pedagogies of indifference. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(3), 245–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, B. (2011). Policy as numbers: Accounting for educational research. Australian Educational Research, 38, 355–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke, A., Woods, A., Bahrand, M. & McFarland, M. (2004). Accountability: Inclusive Assessment, Monitoring and Reporting. Brisbane: Research Report prepared for the Queensland Indigenous Education Consultative Body.

  • Marshall, B., & Drummond, M. (2006). How teachers engage with assessment for learning: Lessons from the classroom. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maton, K. (2000). Recovering pedagogic discourse: A Bernsteinian approach to the sociology of educational knowledge. Linguistics and Education, 11(1), 79–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, W., & Wyatt-Smith, C. M. (2000). Im/proper accountability: Towards a theory of critical literacy and assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policies and Practice, 7, 123–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, G. (2000). Informal literacies and pedagogic discourse. Linguistics and Education., 11(1), 47–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. (2008). Gender and subject cultures in practice. In P. Murphy & K. Hall (Eds.), Learning and practice: Agency and identities (pp. 161–172). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P., & Whitelegg, E. (2006). Girls in the physics classroom: A review of the research on the participation of girls in physics. London: Institute of Physics.

    Google Scholar 

  • New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. (2007). Collateral damage: How high stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge: Harvard Educational Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popham, J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory into Practice, 48(1), 4–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pryor, J., & Crossouard, P. (2008). A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Studies Authority. (2009). P-12 Assessment policy. http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/downloads/approach/qsa_assessment_policy.pdf Accessed 20 Sept 2011.

  • Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (1987). Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education, 13(2), 191–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, P. (2002). Pedagogising knowledge: Bernstein’s theory of the pedagogic device. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(4), 571–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. (1995). Assessment literacy for the 21st century. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 238–246.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, P., Tobias, S., & McDonough, A. (2006). Perhaps the decision of some students not to engage in learning mathematics in school is deliberate. Education Studies in Mathematics, 62(1), 81–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tognolini, J., & Stanley, G. (2007). Standards-basedassessment: A tool and means to the development of human capital and capacity building in education. Australian Journal of Education, 51(2), 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, J. (2010). Assessment for learning as a participative pedagogy. Assessment Matters, 2, 65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, J. (2011). Affiliation, autonomy and assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 18(4), 399–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt-Smith, C., & Gunn, S. (2009). Towards theorising assessment as critical inquiry. In C. Wyatt-Smith & J. Cumming (Eds.), Educational Assessment in the 21st Century (pp. 83–102). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yates, L., Collins, C., & O’Connor, K. (Eds.). (2011). Australia’s curriculum dilemmas. State cultures and the big issues. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, V.M. & Kim, D. H. (2010). Using assessments for instructional improvement: A literature review. Education Policy Analysis Archive. 18(19), 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zammit, K. (2011). Connecting multiliteracies and engagement of students from low socio-economic backgrounds: Using Bernstein’s pedagogic discourse as a bridge. Language and Education, 25(3), 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zepke, N., Leach, L., Brandon, J., Chapman, J., Neutze, G., Rawlins, P., et al. (2005). Standards-based assessment in the senior secondary school: A research synthesis. Wellington: New Zealand Qualifications Authority.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jill Willis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Willis, J., Adie, L. & Klenowski, V. Conceptualising teachers’ assessment literacies in an era of curriculum and assessment reform. Aust. Educ. Res. 40, 241–256 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0089-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0089-9

Keywords

  • Assessment literacies
  • Assessment reform
  • Sociocultural theory