While assessment for learning (AfL) has gained increasing international prominence, and has been strongly promulgated by an increasing number of education systems, current instruments designed to measure students’ assessment for learning experience show a number of methodological shortcomings, such as lacking construct validity and low internal consistency of scales, or structural confirmations of the dimensionality of AfL constructs captured in the questionnaires have not been tested. This paper presents the development and validation of a psychometrically robust measure of assessment for learning experience in the Chinese higher education—the Assessment for Learning Experience Inventory (AFLEI). Two independent samples of 201 and 163 higher education students responded to the AFLEI. The data were then subjected to Exploratory Factor Analyses (EFAs) and Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFAs), respectively. Results from both EFAs and CFAs provided support for a five–factor AfL experience inventory with a strong psychometric basis. The five clusters of AfL experience perceived by the Chinese university students are Teacher formal feedback and support, Interactive dialog and peer collaboration, Learning-oriented assessment, Active engagement with subject matter, and Students taking responsibility for their learning. The correlations between the five clusters of AfL experience and the ‘deep learning approach’ of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) supported the concurrent validity of the AFLEI. The AFLEI can be used both as an evaluation tool to evaluate the extent to which university students experience AfL practices in university curriculum, and as a research tool to explore more deeply the relationships between AfL experience and student learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
All fit indices were robust indices based on MLR estimator.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.
Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for learning.. https://arrts.gtcni.org.uk/gtcni/handle/2428/4617
Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewer's guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 93-114). New York: Routledge.
Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: principles, policy & practice, 18(1), 5–25.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British journal of educational psychology, 71(1), 133–149.
Birenbaum, M. (2007). Assessment and instruction preferences and their relationship with test anxiety and learning strategies. Higher Education, 53(6), 749–768.
Black, P. (2015). Formative assessment–an optimistic but incomplete vision. Assessment in Education: principles, policy & practice, 22(1), 161–177.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: principles, policy & practice, 5(1), 7–74.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2002). Working insidet he black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. London: King’s College London School of Education.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 8–21.
Brown, G. T., & Wang, Z. (2013). Illustrating assessment: How Hong Kong university students conceive of the purposes of assessment. Studies in higher education, 38(7), 1037–1057.
Brown, G. T., & Wang, Z. (2016). Understanding Chinese university student conceptions of assessment: cultural similarities and jurisdictional differences between Hong Kong and China. Social Psychology of Education, 19(1), 151–173.
Brown, G. T. L., Kennedy, K. J., Fok, P. K., Chan, J. K. S., & Yu, W. M. (2009). Assessment for student improvement: understanding Hong Kong teachers’ conceptions and practices of assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(3), 347–363.
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 1(3), 185–216.
Buhagiar, M. A. (2007). Classroom assessment within the alternative assessment paradigm: revisiting the territory. The Curriculum Journal, 18(1), 39–56.
Carless, D. (2007). Learning-oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 57–66.
Carless, D. (2017). Scaling Up Assessment for Learning: Progress and Prospects. In D. Carless, S.M. Bridges, C.K.Y. Chan., R. Glofcheski. (Eds.), Scaling Up Assessment for Learning in Higher Education (pp.3–17). Singapore: Springer.
Chen, J., & Brown, G. T. (2013). High-stakes examination preparation that controls teaching: Chinese prospective teachers’ conceptions of excellent teaching and assessment. Journal of Education for Teaching, 39(5), 541–556.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: L. Erlbaum.
Davison, C., & Leung, C. (2009). Current issues in English language teacher-based assessment. Tesol Quarterly, 43, 393–415.
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Entwistle, N., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education, 19(2), 169–194.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2011). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Measuring the response of students to assessment: the Assessment Experience Questionnaire. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning: Theory, research and scholarship (pp. 171–185). Oxford: OCSLD.
Gijbels, D., & Dochy, F. (2006). Students’ assessment preferences and approaches to learning: can formative assessment make a difference? Educational studies, 32(4), 399–409.
Gipps, C. (2002). Sociocultural perspectives on assessment. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st Century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 73–83). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Hargreaves, E. (2013). Inquiring into children’s experiences of teacher feedback: Reconceptualising assessment for learning. Oxford Review of Education, 39(2), 229–246.
Harrell, Frank E. (2001). Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer.
Hernández, R. (2012). Does continuous assessment in higher education support student learning? Higher Education, 64(4), 489–502.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
James, M., Black, P., Carmichael, P., Drummond, M. J., Fox, A.,…& McCormick, R. 2007 Improving learning how to learn: Classrooms, schools and networks London: Routledge
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151.
Klenowski, V. (2009). Assessment for learning revisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(3), 263–268.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford publications.
Krishnan, V. (2011). A comparison of principal components analysis and factor analysis for uncovering the early development instrument (EDI) domains. Unpublished manuscript, Early Child Development Mapping (ECMap) Project, Alberta, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Li, H. (2016). How is formative assessment related to students’ reading achievement? Findings from PISA 2009. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(4), 473–494.
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
McDowell, L., Wakelin, D., Montgomery, C., & King, S. (2011). Does assessment for learning make a difference? The development of a questionnaire to explore the student response. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(7), 749–765.
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2010). Mplus User's Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B.(2015). Mplus statistical modeling software: Release 7.4. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
OECD. (2011). Strong performers and successful reformers in education: Lessons from PISA for the United States: OECD. Paris: France.
Osborne, J. W., & Costello, A. B. (2009). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pan-Pacific Management Review, 12(2), 131–146.
Pat-El, R. J., 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.
Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Raubenheimer, J. (2004). An item selection procedure to maximize scale reliability and validity. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 30(4), 59–64.
Revelle, W. (2017). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research (p. 165). Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University.
Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 5(1), 77–84.
Segers, M., Gijbels, D., & Thurlings, M. (2008). The relationship between students’ perceptions of portfolio assessment practice and their approaches to learning. Educational Studies, 34(1), 35–44.
Stiggins, R. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328.
Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about new modes of assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 331–247.
Swaffield, S. (2011). Getting to the heart of authentic assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 433–449.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Torrance, H. (1995). Evaluating authentic assessment: Issues, problems and future possibilities. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Xie, Q. (2014). Validating the revised two-factor study process questionnaire among Chinese Uuniversity students. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 16(2), 4–21.
Zhang, Z., & Burry-Stock, J. A. (2003). Classroom assessment practices and teachers' self-perceived assessment skills. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(4), 323–342.
This work was supported by the University of Macau under Grant MYRG 2016–00141-FED. The authors would like to thank all the research assistants for their help in coordinating the collection of data and administering the questionnaire.
Conflict of interest
The authors have stated no potential conflict of interest.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix 1: Chinese Translation of the Questionnaire Items
Appendix 2: Scree Plot and Parallel Analysis
See Fig. 3.
About this article
Cite this article
Gan, Z., He, J. & Mu, K. Development and Validation of the Assessment for Learning Experience Inventory (AFLEI) in Chinese Higher Education. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 28, 371–385 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00435-7
- Scale development
- Scale validation
- Assessment for learning
- Higher education