Curriculum Development: A Guide for Educators

Books

Bill Boyle & Marie Charles

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Copyright

    About the Authors

    Professor Bill Boyle was Professor of Education, the Chair of Educational Assessment and Director of the Centre for Formative Assessment Studies (CFAS) in the School of Education, University of Manchester (UK) from 1989 until January 2014. During his time at the University of Manchester, Professor Boyle was director of many assessment reform projects nationally and internationally including the ten year longitudinal assessment project for the UK government’s Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA, 1997–2008), which collected, analysed and reported on a nationally representative sample of primary and secondary schools’ curriculum and assessment data. He also contributed to the UK government’s parliamentary Select Committee Report on the National Curriculum and its Assessment (2008–9). Professor Boyle publishes extensively on teaching, learning and assessment and works with schools, pre- and in-service organisations, ministries of education throughout the world on curriculum, teaching and assessment research and development, and policy and practice consultancies. These include leading World Bank projects in Russia, Armenia, Vietnam and Jamaica on teacher development and the development of national education assessment systems in Russia and Pakistan from conceptual design through to item development and analysis and reporting phases. He has worked with the Gulf Arab States Education Research Council in developing a curriculum manual for benchmarking standards and presents workshops on Quality Assessment in Higher Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Since 2001, he has supported developments in teaching, learning and assessment in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Bahrain. He is currently a member of the Expert Council of the World Bank on an innovative Russian Educational Aid and Development project which supplies teaching, learning and assessment educational technical support to a number of countries in Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia. Most recent publications with Marie Charles include: Formative Assessment for Teaching and Learning (London: Sage, 2013) and Using Multiliteracies and Multimodalities to Support Young Children’s Learning (London: Sage, 2014).

    Marie Charles is a formative assessment researcher, consultant and author whose work demonstrates that she believes passionately in the learner (rather than measurement or grading) being at the centre of the education process – a belief that she carries into her classroom practice. Marie Charles and her co-author, Professor Bill Boyle, publish their research work in academic and practitioner journals, present at international conferences and workshops, and design and support developments in formative teaching, learning and assessment. Currently, they are working with colleagues in Pakistan, Russia, Armenia, Oman, Saudi Arabia and the USA on understanding and using formative strategies for more effective teaching and learning.

    Acknowledgements

    The most terrifying question of all: What sort of human being will you be from the womb to the tomb? We begin with courage to cut against the grain, to be committed to something bigger than ourselves. To stir up Socratic energies – which unnerve, unsettle and unhouse. (Cornel West, 2012)

    Thanks also to Paulo Freire, Alexander Jones, Bob Dylan, Lana Guinier, James Joyce, Tom Christie, Philippe Perrenoud and Mark Rothko for steering me through a 35 year research journey.

    Bill Boyle

    Marie Charles

  • Appendix: Allocating subject time within the curriculum

    B Allocating time for your school’s curriculum

    There are no statutory time allocations for National Curriculum subjects. It is up to each school to determine the amount of time needed for its children to cover the programmes of study successfully in all subjects.

    B1 In your school, what is the teaching time for the following subjects over one year? Please give the approximate percentage of the time spent on each subject.

    Please note: Where subjects are taught together in a topic, please estimate the percentage of time spent on individual subjects.

    Glossary

    Key technical terminology (with specific literature references)

    Adjustment:

    retroactive adjustment: takes place after a shorter or longer learning sequence, on the basis of micro-evaluation; interactive adjustment: takes place through the learning process; proactive adjustment: takes place when the pupil is set an activity or enters a teaching situation. Allal, L. (1988) ‘Vers un elargissement de la pedagogie de Maitrise: processus de regulation interactive, retroactive et proactive’, in M. Huberman (ed.), Assurer la reussite des apprentissages scolaires? Les propostions de la pedagogie de maitrise. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle. Heritage, M. (2011) ‘Knowing what to do next: the hard part of formative assessment?’ Special issue of CADMO: An International Journal of Education Research, 19 (1): 67–84. Popham, W.J. (2008) Transformative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Affective domain:

    the area of the social development of the learner (self-esteem, self-motivation, self-worth) which secures progress in learner cognition. Bandura, A. (1977) ‘Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioural change’, Psychology Review, 84: 191–215. Huitt, W.G. and Cain, S.C. (2005) ‘An overview of the conative domain’, Educational Psychology Interactive. Available at: www.edpsycinteractive.org/brilstar/chapters/conative.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015). Schunk, D.H. and Zimmerman, B.J. (2007) ‘Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modelling’, Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23: 7–25.

    Analysis and feedback:

    analysing pupil outcomes against task criteria and supplying specific feedback to the pupil related to those criteria, indicating positive achievement as well as what and how to improve. Coffey, J., Hammer, D., Levin, D.M. and Grant, T. (2011) ‘The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10): 1109–36. Perrenoud, P. (1998) ‘From a formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes towards a wider conceptual field’, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1): 85–102. Strike, K.A. and Posner, G.J. (1992) ‘A revisionist theory of conceptual change’, in R. Duschl and R. Hamilton (eds), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Assessment:

    a continuous iterative process taking place day by day and enabling the teacher and pupil to adjust their respective actions to the teaching/learning situations. The word ‘assessment’ derives from the Latin word assidere meaning to ‘sit beside’ – this can be taken to mean a close proximity between the assessor and the learner in the assessment process (Good, 2011). Audibert, S. (1980) ‘En d’autres mots ... l’evaluation des apprentissages!’, Mesure et evaluation en education, 3: 59–64. Good, R. (2011) ‘Formative use of assessment: it’s a process, so let’s say what we mean’, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 16(3): 1–6. Morrissette, J. (2011) ‘Formative assessment: revisiting the territory from the point of view of teachers’, McGill Journal of Education, 46(2): 247–64.

    Autonomy of learner:

    pupils develop the process of self-regulation through instrumental support from teachers and peers through the forms of modelling and ‘scaffolding’ (supporting the development of) attitudes and actions. Meyer, D.K. and Turner, J.C. (2002) ‘Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research’, Educational Psychologist, 37(2): 107–14. Paris, S.G. and Paris, A.H. (2001) ‘Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning’, Educational Psychologist, 36(2): 89–101. Perry, N.E, Hutchinson, L. and Thauberger, C. (2007) ‘Mentoring student teachers to design and implement literacy tasks that support self-regulated reading and writing’, Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23: 27–50.

    Child-centred teaching and learning:

    the child’s learning needs are at the centre of planning for teaching and learning; rather than a ‘one size fits all’ syllabus being ‘covered’ and worked through and children ‘moved through’ it at the same pace. Hayes, N. (2008) ‘Teaching matters in early educational practice: the case for a nurturing pedagogy’, Early Education and Development, 19(3): 430–40. Makin, L. and Whiteman, P. (2006) ‘Young children as active participants in the investigation of teaching and learning’, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14(1): 33–41. Matthews, J. (1999) The Art of Childhood and Adolescence: The Construction of Meaning. London: The Falmer Press.

    Closed questions:

    usually require only short responses, demand only recall of facts, decision between a number of choices or no choice at all; they restrict pupils’ time, opportunities to reflect and internalise a new concept. Myhill, D. (2006) ‘Talk, talk, talk: teaching and learning in whole class discourse’, Research Papers in Education, 21(1): 19–41. Scardemalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1992) ‘Text-based and knowledge based questioning by children’, Cognition and Instruction, 9(3): 177–99. Siraj-Blatchford, I. and Manni, L. (2008) ‘Would you like to tidy up now? An analysis of adult questioning in the English Foundation Stage’, Early Years Journal, 28(1): 5–22.

    Co-construction:

    the active involvement of pupils in sharing the development of learning alongside the teacher; the individualisation of the learning trajectory. Alexander, R.J. (2008) Essays on Pedagogy. London: Routledge. Allal, L. and Lopez, M. (2005) Formative Assessment of Learning: A Review of Publications in French. Paris: OECD. Yarrow, F. and Topping, K.J (2001) ‘Collaborative writing: the effect of meta-cognitive prompting and structured peer interaction’, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(2): 261–82.

    Code:

    (elaborated/restricted codes: Bernstein, 1973) in the range of limiting or widening expectations of pupil learning capability; teacher in traditional role of ‘power’ in learning situation. Alexander, R.J. (2004) ‘Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(1): 7–33. Bernstein, B. (1973) Class, Codes and Control. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Haberman, M. (1991) ‘The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching’, Phi Delta Kappan, 73 (4): 290–4.

    Collaborative learning:

    collaborative tasks are deliberately presented to groups of pupils so that the contributions of more than one pupil are necessary for an achieved outcome; social mediation of learning (Vygotsky, 1978). Blatchford, P., Kutnick, P. and Baines, E. (2007) ‘Pupil grouping for learning in classrooms: results from the UK SPRinG study’, paper presented at Symposium ‘International Perspectives on Effective Groupwork: Theory, Evidence and Implications’, AERA Annual Meeting, Chicago. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1986) Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Williams. P. (2008) Independent Review of Mathematics Teaching in Early Years Settings and Primary Schools. Final Report. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families.

    Correlation:

    a measure of the strength and direction of the relationship between the scores of the same people on two tests. Owen, D. and Doerr, M. (1999) None of the Above: The Truth Behind the SATs. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. Rummel, R.J. (1976) Understanding Correlation. Department of Political Science, University of Hawaii.

    Criterion referenced:

    a pupil is assessed in relation to a criterion for a task and not in relation to how other pupils perform a task. Dunn, L., Parry, S. and Morgan, C. (2002) ‘Seeking quality in criterion referenced assessment’, paper presented at the Learning Communities and Assessment Cultures Conference by EARLI Special Interest Group on Assessment and Evaluation, University of Northumbria, 28–30 August. Swaminathan, H., Hambleton, R.K and Algina, J. (1974) ‘Reliability of criterion-referenced tests: a decision-theoretic formulation’, Journal of Educational Measurement, 11: 263–7.

    Demythologising:

    the search for theoretical frameworks for assessment could lead to an increasingly abstract vision of formative assessment cut off from the realities of classroom practice. That is why it is essential to articulate theoretical work with the study of how assessment is actually practised in the classroom. Allal, L. and Lopez, M. (2005) Formative Assessment of Learning: A Review of Publications in French. Paris: OECD. Boyle, B. and Charles, M. (2010) ‘Leading learning through assessment for learning?’, School Leadership and Management, 30(3): 285–300. Boyle, B. and Charles, M. (2013) Formative Assessment for Teaching and Learning. London: Sage.

    Depth of learning:

    this equates with the immersion of the teacher and the pupil within the teaching and learning process. Teachers bring skills in devising and constructing tasks to involve pupils in the learning process and to elicit revealing and pertinent researched responses from those pupils. Alexander, R.J. (2008) ‘Education for all: the quality imperative and the problem of pedagogy’, Consortium of Research on Educational Access, Transitions and Equity. April. Dadds, M. (2001) ‘The politics of pedagogy’, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 71(1): 43–58. Graziano, K.G. (2008) ‘Walk the talk: connecting critical pedagogy and practice in teacher education’, Teaching Education, 19(2): 153–63.

    Deregulation:

    changes in classroom practice are central to the effectiveness of formative assessment. One of the focal points of pre-service teacher training must be an awareness of this changing of roles for teacher and pupil in the learning context with teaching situations being interactive and with spontaneous feedback to support and enrich learning. David, M. (2007) ‘Deregulation in the classroom: parents have more “choice” over schools: how have they reacted?’, New Economy, 1(2): 79–82. Perrenoud, P. (1991) ‘Towards a pragmatic approach to formative evaluation’, in P. Weston (ed.), Assessment of Pupils’ Achievement: Motivation and School Success. Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger. Pryor, J. and Crossouard, B. (2008) ‘A socio-cultural theorisation of FA’, Oxford Review of Education, 34(10): 1–20.

    Dialogic:

    the avoidance of the initiation-response (IR) rote model of two-part classroom exchange between teacher and pupils; replacing it by encouraging pupils’ active verbal contributions and reducing teacher intervention. Eke, R. and Lee, J. (2004) ‘Pace and differentiation in the literacy hour: some outcomes of an analysis of transcripts’, The Curriculum Journal, 15(3): 219–31. Myhill, D. (2006) ‘Talk, talk, talk: teaching and learning in whole class discourse’, Research Papers in Education, 21(1): 19–41. Well, G. (1999) Dialogic Enquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Dialogue:

    explicitly seeking to make attention and engagement mandatory and to chain exchanges of talk into meaningful sequences. Radford, J., Blatchford, P. and Webster, R. (2011) ‘Opening up and closing down: how teachers and TAs manage turn-taking, topic and repair in mathematics lessons’, Learning and Instruction, 21(5): 625–35. Tharp, R.G. and Gallimore, R. (1991) Rousing Minds to Life: Teaching, Learning and Schooling in a Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wells, G. (1995) ‘Language and the inquiry-oriented curriculum’, Curriculum and Inquiry, 25(3): 233–69.

    Differentiation:

    if formative assessment is carried out in classrooms on a regular basis, the result is pressure to differentiate. ‘Diversity in people + appropriate teaching treatment for each = diversity in teaching treatments’ (Perrenoud, 1998: 86). Boaler, J. (2005) ‘The “psychological prison” from which they never escaped: the role of ability grouping in reproducing social class inequalities’, Forum, 47(2/3): 135–44. Bourdieu, P. (1966) ‘Condition de classe et position de classe’, Archives europeennes de sociologie, 7(2): 201–23. Perrenoud, P. (1998) ‘From formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes: towards a wider conceptual field’, Assessment in Education, 5(1): 85–101 Tomlinson, C.A. (2001) How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-ability Classrooms, 2nd edn. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Focused chain:

    assessing narrative development of pupils’ writing skills, teachers need to be aware of the writer developing a sequential series of events through ‘focused and unfocused chains’ (Applebee, 1978). Narratives expand on the focused chain by including additional features – the centre of the story is developed while a new idea or situation evolves from a previous idea. Applebee, A. (1978) The Child’s Concept of Story: Ages Two to Seventeen. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Hudson, J.A. and Shapiro, L.R. (1991) ‘From knowing to telling’, in A. McCabe and C. Peterson (eds), Developing Narrative Structure. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates. Simmons, V. and Gebhardt, A. (2010) Concept of Story (summer 2010). http://red6747.pbworks.com/w/page/8522525/Concept–of–Story (accessed 11 June 2015).

    Formative assessment:

    through its structural philosophy of evidence elicitation, analysis and action supplies the strategy to make teaching effective and learning deep and sustained. Formative assessment requires teachers to pay attention to pupils’ thinking and to adjust their planning accordingly. Boyle, B. and Charles, M. (2012) ‘David, Mr Bear and Bernstein: searching for an equitable pedagogy through guided group work’, The Curriculum Journal, 23(1): 117–33. Coffey, J., Hammer, D., Levin, D.M. and Grant, T. (2011) ‘The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10): 1109–36. Perrenoud, P. (1996) ‘The teaching profession between proletarianism and professionalization: two models of change’, Outlook, 26: 543–62.

    Group composition and group work:

    group work is part of the composition of many classrooms and pupils are often assessed through teacher observation while working in those groups. This can raise classroom management issues such as the organisation of pupils not in the target group and how best to observe and therefore assess what each pupil in the target group is doing. Boyle, B. and Charles, M. (2012) ‘David, Mr Bear and Bernstein: searching for an equitable pedagogy through guided group work’, The Curriculum Journal, 23(1): 117–33. Hallam, J.V., Ireson, J. and Davis, J. (2004) ‘Primary pupils’ experiences of different types of grouping in school’, British Journal of Educational Research, 30: 515–33. Harris, E.L. (1995) ‘Toward a grid and group interpretation of school culture’, Journal of School Leadership, 56(6): 617–46.

    Guided group work:

    a form of guided, co-operative learning. It requires expert ‘scaffolding’ by the teacher and direct instruction, modelling and practice in the use of the four simple strategies (questioning, clarifying, summarising, predicting) that underpin all teaching. It offers four things: (1) a strategic organisational device; (2) an optimal opportunity for specific and focused teaching; (3) the small group situation enables learning to be planned tightly to learning needs and offers accessibility for the pupil to the teacher; (4) optimal opportunity for the teacher to focus their observations of learning behaviours within a small group situation. Allal, L. and Ducrey, G.P. (2000) ‘Assessment of – or in – the zone of proximal development’, Learning and Instruction, 10(2): 137–52. Mercer, N. and Dawes, L. (2008) ‘The value of exploratory talk’, in N. Mercer and S. Hodgkinson (eds), Exploring Talk in School. London: Sage. Ruthven, K., Hofmann, R. and Mercer, N. (2011) ‘A dialogic approach to plenary problem synthesis’, Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 4: 81–8.

    Initiation, Response, Feedback (IRF):

    research by Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) originated the notion of the three-part exchange of teacher recitation demonstrated as ‘directive forms of teaching’ and which consisted of a series of teacher questions which require convergent answers and pupil display of known information. The opposite to a teacher’s pedagogy being learner-centred. Atkins, A. (2001) ‘Sinclair and Coulthard’s IRF model in a one-to-one classroom: an analysis’. Available at: www.birmingham.ac.uk/documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays/csdp/atkins4.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015). Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, M. (1975) Toward an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford University Press. Wells, G. (1993) ‘Re-evaluating the IRF sequence: a proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for the analysis of teaching and learning in the classroom’, Linguistics and Education, 5(1): 1–37.

    Interrogatives:

    probing questioning techniques to elicit evidence of understanding ‘how’ and ‘why’. Ball, D.L. and Forzani, F.M. (2011) ‘Teaching skilful teaching’, The Effective Educator, 68(4): 40–6. Galton, M., Hargreaves, L., Comber, C., Wall, D. and Pell, T. (1999) ‘Changes in patterns of teacher interaction in primary classrooms: 1976–1996’, British Educational Research Journal, 25(1): 23–37. Kirkby, P. (1996) ‘Teacher questions during story-book reading: who’s building whose building?’, Literacy, 30(1): 8–15.

    Intrinsic motivation:

    the self-directed need to be involved in the learning process through the pupil’s understanding of the meaningfulness and relevance of what and why they are doing classroom tasks. Makin, L. and Whiteman, P. (2006) ‘Young children as active participants in the investigation of teaching and learning’, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14(1): 33–41. McCombs, B.L. and Marzano, R.J. (1990) ‘Putting the self in self-regulated learning: the self as agent in integrating skill and will’, Educational Psychologist, 25(6): 51–69. Paris, S.G. and Cunningham, A. (1996) ‘Children become students’, in D. Berliner and R. Calfee (eds), Handbook of Educational Psychology. New York: Macmillan.

    Involvement in own learning (co-construction):

    the pupil’s learning needs should dictate the planning for teaching and learning, not the reverse, where the teacher writes a plan based on the curriculum but without involving the children in developing that planning, and therefore having ‘ownership’ of the learning. Monteil, J.M. and Huguet, P. (2001) ‘The social regulation of classroom performances: a theoretical outline’, Social Psychology of Education, 4: 359–72. Rogoff, B. (1990) Apprenticeship in Thinking. New York: Oxford University Press. Rogoff, B., Baker-Sennett, J., Lacasa, P. and Goldsmith, D. (1995) ‘Development through participation in socio-cultural activity’, in J.J. Goddnow, P.J. Miller and F. Kessel (eds), Cultural Practices as Contexts for Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Learner behavioural analysis:

    the teacher formatively assesses the pupil’s thinking by paying close attention to the demonstrations through behaviours and outcomes of that thinking. The teacher wants to understand what the pupil is thinking and why they are thinking that way – the evidence that the teacher gains in this way, forms their next teaching steps. Coffey, J., Hammer, D. and Grant, D.M. (2011) ‘The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10): 1109–36. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2004) Lifelong Learning. Policy Brief, February, Paris: OECD. Pollard, A. with Anderson, J., Maddock, M., Swaffield, S., Warin, J. and Warwick, P. (2008) Reflective Teaching: Evidence-informed Professional Practice, 3rd edn. London: Continuum.

    Learner-centredness:

    teaching interventions that are suited to the taught group of pupils’ potential levels of learning. This ‘learner-centred’ pedagogy is serviced by adult–pupil verbal interactions, differentiation and formative assessment. Shepard, L.A. (2000) ‘The role of assessment in a learning culture’, Educational Researcher, 29(7): 4–14. Shepard, L.A. (2005) ‘Linking formative assessment to scaffolding’, Educational Leadership, 63(3): 66–70. Shor, I. and Freire, P. (1987) A Pedagogy for Liberation: Dialogues on Transforming Education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey Publishers.

    Learning objectives (sharing):

    in most classrooms, there is a single objective for a lesson, the objective is selected and ‘planned’ by the teacher. However, the teacher always has to be responsive to the learner’s goals as these emerge in the course of a classroom activity and by collaborating with the pupils as they work towards and achieve their individual goals (learning objectives) to enable them to extend their mastery and their potential for further development. From the teacher’s perspective ‘learning objectives’ are always a ‘moving target’. Bower, J. and Thomas, P.L. (2013) De-Testing and De-grading Schools: Authentic Alternatives to Accountability and Standardization. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Dweck, C.S. (1999) Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development. Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.

    Lesson planning:

    the teacher is trying to identify and support learning strengths and misconceptions and to do that they have to facilitate opportunities for all the pupils in the group to demonstrate their learning. The teacher needs to understand that they need to be flexible enough to deviate from the planned lesson (during the course of the lesson) if they notice that learning is not taking place with some pupils. Moss, G. (2007) ‘Lessons from the National Literacy Strategy’, paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, September. Mottier Lopez, L. and Allal, L. (2007) ‘Socio-mathematical norms and the regulation of problem solving in the classroom’, International Journal of Educational Research, 46: 252–65. Raveaud, M. (2005) ‘Hares, tortoises and the social construction of the pupil: differentiated learning in French and English primary schools’, British Educational Research Journal, 31(4): 459–79.

    Mean score:

    the average score, computed by summing the scores of all test-takers and dividing by the number of test-takers. Page, M., Davis, U.C. and Jackson, E. (2013) ‘Smaller classes yield higher test scores among young children’, Policy Brief Center for Poverty Research, 1(9). Wenglisky, H. (2001) ‘Teacher classroom practices and student performance: how schools can make a difference’, Research Report, RR-01-19, Educational Testing Service. Statistics and Research Division.

    Misconceptions (analysis of):

    there is a view that misconceptions are inaccurate or incorrect conceptions which pupils hold that are contrary to the learning objectives. Research challenges the idea that it is sufficient to ‘explain the correct concepts’ and supports the rationality of the pupils’ initial conceptions. Strike and Posner (1992) argued that if conceptual change theory suggests anything about instruction it is that the handles to effective instruction are to be found in persistent attention to the argument and less in the attention to right answers. Research (Taber, 2000; Nobes et al., 2003) has raised empirical and theoretical reasons to doubt the view of prior conceptions as obstacles to learning. Newman, D., Griffin, P. and Cole, M. (1989) The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School. New York: Cambridge University Press. Nobes, G., Moore, D., Martin, A., Clifford, B., Butterworth, G., Panayiotaki, G. and Siegal, M. (2003) ‘Children’s understanding of the earth in a multicultural community: mental modes of fragments of knowledge?’, Developmental Science, 6(1): 72–85. Strike, K.A. and Posner, G.J. (1992) ‘A revisionist theory of conceptual change’, in R. Duschl and R. Hamilton (eds), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Taber, K.S. (2000) ‘Exploring conceptual integration in student thinking: Evidence from a case study’, International Journal of Science Education, 30(14): 1915–43.

    Modelling of desirable (learning) behaviours:

    developing social-educative norms. It is important that teachers model, for example, active listening by focusing on non-verbal communication, such as good eye contact, interest by facial expression, gesture, posture, nodding, emotions and feelings and other aspects of paralanguage elements, all known as kinesics (Birdwhistell, 1970). Teachers should be aware of and understand the power and effects of paralanguage within their teaching, learning and assessment contexts. All of these desirable social-educative norms being modelled by the teacher are for the purpose of demonstrating and handing over desirable behaviours for good teaching and learning models. Ambady, N. and Rosenthal, R. (1993) ‘Half a minute: predicting evaluation from thin slices of non-verbal behaviour and physical attractiveness’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64: 431–44. Birdwhistell, R.L. (1970) Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Tizard, B., Hughes, M., Carmichael, H. and Pinkerton, G. (1983) ‘Language and social class: is verbal deprivation a myth?’, Journal of Child Psychology, 24(4): 533–42.

    Nurturing pedagogy:

    pedagogy has to capture the multi-layered and dynamic practice necessary to support a pupil’s holistic development. The importance of nurturing pedagogy is that if we take quality of teaching and learning seriously then the teacher has to get closer to our learners, their needs, their motivations and their learning styles. It is crucial that the teacher realises that they are working with 30–35 discrete individuals all with learning and learning needs, not just delivering an atomised centrally devolved ‘one-size-fits-all’ curriculum. Dadds, M. (2001) ‘The politics of pedagogy’, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 7(1): 43–58. Hayes, N. (2008) ‘Teaching matters in early educational practice: the case for a nurturing pedagogy’, Early Education and Development, 19(3): 430–40. Noddings, N. (1992) The Challenge of Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Education Advances in Contemporary Educational Thought, New York: Teachers College Press.

    Observation and evidence elicitation:

    teachers who use formative assessment strategies are constantly observing and responding through flexible adjustment in the planning of their teaching strategies to match the learning and support needs of pupils. Observation must be planned for the information gained to usefully support the learning process. The link between interpretation of the evidence from these observations and the formative assessment process is integral. If the teacher does not form an appropriate picture of what is going on in the pupil’s thinking then there is minimal likelihood of that teacher’s actions having a decisive effect in adjusting positively the pupil’s learning process. Cardinet, J. (1986) Evaluation scolaire et pratique. Brussels: De Boeck. Perrenoud, P. (1991) ‘Towards a pragmatic approach to formative evaluation’, in P. Weston (ed.), Assessment of Pupils’ Achievement: Motivation and School Success. Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger. Rijlaarsdam, G. and Van Den Bergh, H. (2008) ‘Observation of peers in learning to write: practise and research’, Journal of Writing Research, 1(1): 53–63.

    ‘One size fits all’:

    a pedagogy which usually focuses on teaching in a very prescriptive and formulaic way only the elements of the curriculum which are going to be tested; the pupil is usually a passive respondent to the process rather than being an involved learner. Boyle, B. and Charles, M. (2011) ‘Re-defining assessment: the struggle to ensure a balance between accountability and comparability based on a “testocracy” and the development of humanistic individuals through assessment’, Special issue of CADMO: An International Journal of Educational Research, 19(1): 55–65. Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. Guinier, L. and Torres, G. (2003) The Miner’s Canary: Enlisting Race, Resisting Power, Transforming Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Pace of teaching:

    often a teacher’s pedagogical style will dominate a teaching and assessment session. The teacher should not set a ‘fast pace’ which the pupils must all keep to, rather they should model taking time for reflection, for collaborating, for investigating, for discussion. This maintains the pupils’ level of interest and motivation and demonstrates that the teacher understands the importance of linking the pupil’s affective domain to the development of cognition. Brown, M., Askew, M., Baker, D., Denvir, H. and Millet, A. (1998) ‘Is the National Numeracy Strategy research-based?’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 46(4): 362–85. Dadds, M. (2001) ‘The politics of pedagogy’, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 7(1): 43–58. Smith, F., Hardman, F., Wall, K. and Mroz, M. (2004) ‘Interactive whole class teaching in the national literacy and numeracy strategies’, British Educational Research Journal, 30(3): 295–411.

    Pedagogy:

    has to be informed by learning theory and to be focused on the learning needs of the individual pupil. Teachers should have high pedagogical content knowledge and strong levels of pedagogical skills. Each teacher should have a strong, informed theoretical construct underpinning their teaching, learning and assessment practice. Alexander, R.J (2001) Culture and Pedagogy: International Comparisons in Primary Education. Oxford: Blackwell. Simon, B. (1985) ‘Why no pedagogy in England?’, in B. Simon and W. Taylor (eds), Education in the Eighties: The Central Issues. London: Batsford. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P. and Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2004) ‘The effective provision of the pre-school education (EPPE) project: findings from the Pre-school to the end of Key Stage 1’. Available at: www.ioe.ac.uk/RB_Final_Report_3-7.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015).

    Percentile of a distribution:

    the score having a given percentile rank. The 80th percentile of a score distribution is the score having a percentile rank of 80. (The 50th percentile is also called the median; the 25th and 75th percentiles are also called the 1st and 3rd quartiles.) Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. (2006) ‘A curriculum without foundation’, British Educational Research Journal, 32(4): 569–82. Reeves, D., Boyle, B. and Christie, T. (2001) ‘The relationship between teacher assessments and pupil attainments in standard tests/tasks at key stage 2, 1996–98’, British Educational Research Journal, 27(2): 141–60. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999) Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Percentile rank of a score:

    the percentage of test-takers with lower scores, plus half the percentage with exactly that score. (Sometimes it is defined simply as the percentage with lower scores.) Ehrenberg, R.C., Brewer, D.J., Gamoran, A. and Willms, J.D. (2001) ‘Class size and student achievement’, American Psychological Society, 2(1): 1–30. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (2012) 2012: National Report for England (revised April 2014). London: Department for Education. Rees, D.L., Argus, L.M. and Brewer, D.J. (1996) ‘Tracking in the United States: descriptive statistics from NELS’, Economics of Education Review, 15: 83–9.

    Positive (and negative) feedback:

    Research has found that both positive and negative feedback can have beneficial effects on pupil learning (Kluger and DeNisi, 1996). However, Hattie and Timperley (2007) found that negative feedback is more positive at the ‘self’ level while both negative and positive feedback can be effective at the ‘task’ level. While there are differential effects relating to commitment, mastery or performance orientation and self-efficacy at the self-regulatory level. Feedback on a task will be ignored by pupils if it is poorly presented or if their knowledge (of the concept being taught or assessed) is insufficient to accommodate additional feedback information. Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007) ‘The power of feedback’, Review of Educational Research, 77(1): 81–112. Kluger, A.N. and DeNisi, A. (1996) ‘The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary feedback intervention theory’, Psychological Bulletin, 119(2): 254–84. Kulvaney, R.W., White, M.T., Topp, B.W., Chan, A.L. and Adams, J. (1985) ‘Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency’, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10: 285–91.

    Proactive adjustment:

    takes place in the classroom context when a pupil is set an activity or takes part in a teaching situation. Allal, L. (1988) ‘Vers un elargissement de la pedagogie de maitrise: processus de regulation interactive, retroactive et proactive’, in M. Huberman (ed.), Assurer la reussite des apprentissages scolaires? Les propositions de la pedagogie de maitrise. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle. Heritage, M. (2007) ‘Formative assessment: what teachers need to know and do?’, Phi Delta Kappan, 89: 140–5. Popham, J. (2008) ‘Formative assessment: seven stepping stones to success’, Principal Leadership, 9: 16–20.

    Process (observation of):

    such observation (for assessment purposes) has to be analytical, moving beyond a general impression to seeing what the pupil is actually doing – even thinking. Popham (2008) stated that ‘formative assessment is not a test but a process’ which produces a qualitative insight into pupil understanding. Burenbaum, M., Kimron, H., Shilton, H. and Shahaf-Barzilay, R. (2010) ‘Cycles of inquiry: formative assessment in service of learning in classrooms and in school-based professional communities’, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35: 135–49. Gallimore, R., Ermeling, B.A., Saunders, W.M. and Goldenberg, C. (2009) ‘Moving the learning of teaching closer to practice: teacher education implications of school-based inquiry teams’, The Elementary School Journal, 109: 537–53. Gattulo, F. (2000) ‘Formative assessment in ELT primary (elementary) classrooms: an Italian case study’, Language Testing, 17: 278–88. Popham, W.J. (2008) Transformative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Questioning:

    poor quality ‘closed’ questions do not contribute to learning. Some teachers, despite being aware that learning is not taking place, continue to ask or paraphrase their questions, cueing or even ‘mouthing’ the required answers until these emerge. This is not learning. The pupils’ responses become monosyllabic and never develop into ‘chained responses’ linking dialogue with their peers or the teacher. Communication, in this style of questioning, is not viewed by the teacher as a valuable tool both in cognition and its social mediating effects. ‘Language not only manifests thinking but also structures it and speech shapes the higher mental processes necessary for so much learning’ (Alexander, 2005). Alexander, R.J. (2005) ‘Culture, dialogue and learning: notes on an emerging pedagogy’, paper presented at International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology Conference, Durham, UK, July. Hunter, J. (2009) ‘Developing a productive discourse community in the mathematics classroom’, in R. Hunter, B. Bicknell and T. Burgess (eds), Crossing Divides: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1). Palmerston, North NZ: MEDGA. Minstrell, J. and Van Zee, E.H. (2003) ‘Using questioning to assess and foster student thinking’, in J.M. Atkin and J.E. Coffey (eds), Everyday Assessment in the Science Classroom. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association. Siraj-Blatchford, I. and Manni, L. (2008) ‘Would you like to tidy up now? An analysis of adult questioning in the English Foundation Stage’, Early Years Journal, 28(1): 5–22.

    Reflection:

    reflective teaching is applied in a cyclical or spiralling process, in which teachers monitor, evaluate and then revise their own practice continuously (Pollard et al., 2008). The most distinctive feature of very good teachers is that their practice (pedagogy) is the result of careful reflection. They themselves learn lessons each time they teach, evaluating what they do and, using these self-critical evaluations, adjust what they do next time (Ofsted, 2004). Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education) (2004) Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools. Ofsted: London. Pollard, A. with Anderson, J., Maddock, M., Swaffield, S., Warin, J. and Warwick, P. (2008) Reflective Teaching: Evidence-informed Professional Practice, 3rd edn. London: Continuum. Schon, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.

    Regulation of learning:

    individual pupil learning achievement targets are not imposed but negotiated with the learner; feedback comments are clear and specific to the learning objective of the task being undertaken by the pupil. This is the ‘regulation of learning’ (Cardinet, 1986). Allal (1988) clarifies this as ‘interactive regulation contributes to the progression of pupil learning by providing feedback and guidance that stimulate pupil involvement at each step of instruction’. Allal, L. (1988) ‘Vers un elargissement de la pedagogie de Maitrise: processus de regulation interactive, retroactive et proactive’, in M. Huberman (ed,.), Assurer la reussite des apprentissages scolaires? Les propostions de la pedagogie de maitrise. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle. Cardinet, J. (1986) Evaluation scolaire et pratique. Bruxelles: De Boeck. Schunk, D.H. and Zimmerman, B.J. (1997) ‘Social origins of self-regulatory competence’, Educationalist Psychologist, 32(4): 195–208. Yackel, E. and Cobb, P. (1996) ‘Socio-mathematical norms, argumentation and autonomy in mathematics’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Educational, 27(4): 458–77. Zimmerman, B.J. (2000) ‘Attaining self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective’, in M. Boekarts, P.R. Pintrich and M. Zeidner (eds), Handbook of Self-regulation. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Restricted code:

    exemplified through the teacher controlling language transactions with pupils at the monologic level – denying the pupils access to real, meaningful dialogue and then the autonomy (necessary for learner development) of dialogic interactions. Restricted code is produced when the teacher assumes the traditional role of ‘power’ (Bernstein, 1973) in which they ask (the majority of) the questions and therefore structure the pupils’ thinking. The teacher takes the position of control and models for the pupils that the teacher’s role is as architect (of learning) and problem-solver and the pupils’ role is recipient of instructions which they then carry out to produce quite firmly controlled outcomes. Bernstein, B. (1973) Class, Codes and Control. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Blote, A.W. (1995) ‘Students’ self-concept in relation to perceived differential teacher treatment’, Learning and Instruction, 5(3): 221–36. Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.C. (1970) Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage.

    Retroactive regulation:

    in traditional classes, teaching is giving a class or taking a lesson; assessment is a specific event, a written test or assignment or oral questions. Traditional teaching inevitably reduces regulation to its simplest expression and confines assessment to tests, which are quite distinct from lessons, even if those tests are sequenced post-lesson. ‘The ensuing retroactive regulation is often restricted to re-working notions which have not been understood by a significant proportion of pupils’ (Perrenoud, 1998). Bennett, R.E. (20011) ‘Formative assessment: a critical review’, Assessment in Education, 18(1): 5–25. Katzman, J., Lutz, A. and Olson, E. (2004) ‘Would Shakespeare get into Swarthmore?’, The Atlantic.com. Perrenoud, P. (1998) ‘From a formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes towards a wider conceptual field’, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1): 85–102.

    ‘Scaffolding’:

    teachers need to understand the learning capability and pace of working of the pupils in the group being taught. With this information, the teacher can ‘scaffold’ (structure) the learning experience accordingly through differentiating the questions or prompts being used to support pupil learning to achieve the concept being taught. Ash, D. and Levitt, K. (2003) ‘Working within the zone of proximal development: Formative assessment as a professional development’, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14(1): 23–48. Englert, C.S., Berry, R. and Dunsmore, K.L. (2001) ‘A case study of the apprenticeship process: another perspective on the apprentice and the scaffolding metaphor’, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(2): 152–71. Shepard, L.A. (2005) ‘Linking formative assessment to scaffolding’, Educational Leadership, 63(3): 66–70.

    Score distribution:

    the number (or the percentage) of test-takers at each score level. Brookhart, S.M. (2003) ‘Developing measurement theory for classroom assessment purposes and uses’, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22: 5–12. Moss, P.A. (2003) ‘Re-conceptualizing validity for classroom assessment’, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22: 13–25. Willms, J.D. and Raudenbush, S.W. (1992) ‘A longitudinal hierarchical linear model for estimating school effects and their stability’, Journal of Educational Measurement, 26: 209–32.

    Self-regulated learning (learner autonomy):

    involves the interplay between pupil commitment, control and confidence. It addresses the ways in which pupils monitor, direct and regulate actions towards the learning goal. It implies the development by the pupil (supported by the teacher and the active learning strategies used by the teacher) of autonomy, self-control, self-direction and self-discipline. Schunk, D.H. and Zimmerman, B.J. (1997) ‘Social origins of self-regulatory competence’, Educationalist Psychologist, 32(4): 195–208. Yackel, E. and Cobb, P. (1996) ‘Socio-mathematical norms, argumentation and autonomy in mathematics’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Educational, 27(4): 458–77. Zimmerman, B.J. (2000) ‘Attaining self-regulation: a social-cognitive perspective’, in M. Boekarts, P.R. Pintrich and M. Zeidner (eds), Handbook of Self-regulation. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Setting:

    has to be understood as the opposite to ‘differentiation’. Setting is the locking of pupils into ability groups which (rarely) change. Differentiated teaching is a diversified approach – one that is required because of the diverse and complex nature of all pupils. Avoiding all pupils doing the same learning at the same time is not an end in itself; it is only a consequence of differentiated teaching which attempts to locate each pupil in a learning situation which is optimal for them. ‘To the extent that all pupils do not have the same abilities nor the same needs nor the same way of working, an optimal situation for one pupil will not be optimal for another’ (Perrenoud, 1998). Boaler, J. (2005) ‘The “psychological prison” from which they never escaped: the role of ability grouping in reproducing social class inequalities’, Forum, 47(2/3): 135–44. McAdamis, S. (2001) ‘Teachers tailor their instruction to meet a variety of student needs’, Journal of Staff Development, 22(2): 1–5. Perrenoud, P. (1998) ‘From a formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes towards a wider conceptual field’, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1): 85–102. Rosenthal, R. and Jacobson, L. (1968) Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectations and Student Intellectual Development. New York: Holt.

    Social mediation of learning:

    knowledge is socially constructed and not perceived as a fixed entity but rather in terms of an incremental view of learning, experiences and information gathering. For example, the social genesis of language and its development: ‘any utterance is a link in a very complexly organised chain of other utterances’, in learning to speak we do not take words from a dictionary but from the utterances of other speakers (Bakhtin, 1986: 69–70). Bakhtin, M.N. (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press. Brockner, J. (1979) ‘The effects of self-esteem, success-failure, and self-consciousness on task performance’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10): 1732–41. Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Socio-cognitive apprenticeships:

    establishment of communities of practice in which ‘pupils participate in inquiry-based conversations about text, learning to treat written words as thinking devices’ (Englert et al., 2006: 211). When pupils interact on a frequent basis they have a greater opportunity to internalise and understand – talk is an important component of learning whether that learning is in the domain of creativity or numeracy. Alexander, R.J. (2010) ‘Speaking but not listening? Accountable talk in an unaccountable context’, Literacy, 44(3): 103–11, Boyle, B. and Charles, M. (2012) ‘David, Mr Bear and Bernstein: searching for an equitable pedagogy through guided group work’, The Curriculum Journal, 23(1): 117–33. Cowie, J. and Ruddock, H. (1988) Co-operative Group Work: An Overview (Vol. 1). UK: BP Educational Service. Englert, C.S., Mariage, T.B. and Dunsmore, K. (2006) ‘Tenets of sociological theory in writing instruction research’, in C.A. MacArthur, S. Graham and J. Fitzgerald (eds), Handbook of Writing Research. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Socio-constructivist learning theory:

    individuals assimilate knowledge and concepts after restructuring and reorganising it through negotiation with their surroundings, including with their fellow learners. Each pupil has their own unique socially constructed context – ideas, concepts and meanings are not fixed nor standardised across a class or group of pupils. Therefore the individual outcomes of learning situations will be diverse. Bandura, A. (1989) ‘Social cognitive theory’, in R. Vasta (ed.), Annals of Child Development, 6. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Cobb, P., Yackel, E. and Wood, T. (1992) ‘A constructivist alternative to the representational view of mind in mathematics education’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23: 2–33. Hickey, D. (1997) ‘Motivation and contemporary socio-constructivist instructional perspectives’, Educational Psychologist, 32(3): 175–93.

    Standard deviation:

    a measure of the dispersion (spread, amount of variation) in a score distribution. It can be interpreted as the average distance of scores from the mean, where the average is a special kind of average called a ‘root mean square’, computed by squaring the distance of each score from the mean, then averaging the squared distances, and then taking the square root. Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, J.A and Kulik, C.L.C. (1991) ‘Effects of frequent classroom testing’, Journal of Educational Research, 85(2): 89–99. Livingston, S. (2004) Equating Test Scores (without IRT). Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service. Moss, P.A. (2003) ‘Re-conceptualizing validity for classroom assessment’, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22: 13–25.

    Summative assessment:

    ‘a way to identify students’ skills at key transition points such as entry into the world of work or for further education’ (OECD, 2005). Bennett, R. (2007) ‘Assessment of, for and as learning: can we have all three?’, paper presented at the National Assessment Agency and the Institute of Educational Assessors’ National Assessment Conference, London, UK. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2005) Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms. Policy Brief, November, Paris: OECD. Stiggins, R. (2006) Balanced Assessment Systems: Redefining Excellence in Assessment. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service.

    Transmission model:

    the teacher is the controller and originator of discourse (communication) patterns in the classroom with monologic uses of language as a high priority. Too often the transmission model of communication is chosen which inevitably leads to the pupil being cast in the role of ‘passive recipient of knowledge’ (Freire, 1970 – ‘banking’ analogy). Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. Gerson, H. and Bateman, E. (2010) ‘Authority in an agency-centred, inquiry-based university calculus classroom’, Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 29(4): 195–206. Nystand, M. (1997) ‘Dialogic instruction: when recitation becomes conversation’, in A. Nystand, R. Gamoran, R. Kachur and C. Prendergast (eds), Opening Dialogue: Understanding the Dynamics of Language and Learning in the English Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Zone of proximal development:

    for Vygotsky, pupils learn by working on and solving problems with peers (and adults) more capable than themselves, who take them through their zone of proximal (or potential) development (Vygotsky, 1986). Vygotsky saw social interaction as the essential factor in pupil learning development. Allal, L. and Ducrey, G.P. (2000) ‘Assessment of – or in – the zone of proximal development’, Learning and Instruction, 10(2): 137–52. Ash, D. and Levitt, K. (2003) ‘Working within the zone of proximal development: formative assessment as a professional development’, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14(1): 23–48. Vygotsky, L. (1986) Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    References

    Aldrich, R. ( 1988 ) ‘The national curriculum: an historical perspective’, in D. Lawton and C. Chitty (eds), The National Curriculum, Bedford Way, Paper 3. London: Institute of Education, University of London.
    Alexander R.J. ( 1997 ) Policy and Practice in Primary Education: Local Initiative, National Agenda. London: Routledge.
    Alexander, R.J. ( 2004 ) ‘Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 34 (1): 733.
    Alexander, R.J. ( 2005 ) ‘Culture, dialogue and learning: notes on an emerging pedagogy’, paper presented at International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology Conference, Durham, UK, July.
    Alexander, R.J. ( 2008 ) ‘Education for all: the quality imperative and the problem of pedagogy’, Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transactions and Equity, April .
    Allal, L. and Ducrey, G.P. ( 2000 ) ‘Assessment of – or in – the zone of proximal development’, Learning and Instruction, 10: 13752.
    Allal, L. and Lopez, M. ( 2005 ) Formative Assessment of Learning: A Review of Publications in French. Paris: OECD.
    Anning, A. ( 1995 ) A National Curriculum for the Early Years. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Anning, A. ( 1997 ) ‘Developing the school curriculum’, School Curriculum and Assessment Authority Conference, The Primary Curriculum: The Next Steps. London: SCAA.
    Appk, M.W. ( 1975 ) ‘The hidden curriculum and the nature of conflict’, in W. Pinar (ed.), Curriculum Theorizing: The Reconceptualists. Berkeley: McCutchan, pp. 95119.
    Apple, M.W. ( 1996 ) Cultural Politics & Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
    ARG (Assessment Reform Group) ( 1999 ) Beyond the ‘Black Box’. Cambridge: Assessment Reform Group.
    ARG (Assessment Reform Group) ( 2002 ) Assessment for Learning: 10 Principles. Cambridge: Assessment Reform Group.
    ARG (Assessment Reform Group) ( 2007 ) The Role of Teachers in the Assessment of Learning. Cambridge: Assessment Reform Group.
    Bain, B. ( 1975 ) ‘Toward an integration of Piaget and Vygotsky: Bilingual considerations’, Linguistics, 16: 520.
    Balkan, L. ( 1970 ) Les Effets du bilingualism Francais-Anglais sur les aptitudes intellectuelles. Brussels: AIMAV.
    Ball, S.J. ( 1994 ) Education Reform: A Critical and Post-structural Approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Barger, R.N. ( 2000 ) A Summary of Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development. Robert, N. Barger , Ph.D. University of Notre Dame 2000.
    Baroudi, Z.M. ( 2007 ) Formative assessment: Definition, elements and role in instructional practice’, Postgraduate Journal of Education Research, 8(1): 378.
    BBC News Education ( 2004 ) ‘Ofsted “two-speed lessons” alarm’, 4 February [online]. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/3458037.stm (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    BBC News Education ( 2006a ) ‘Testing should be intensified’, 19 July [online]. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/5196188.stm (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    BBC News Education ( 2006b ) ‘Primary school test target missed’, 24 August [online]. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/5281132.stm (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    BBC News Education ( 2007 ) ‘Testing “deprives primary pupils”’ [online]. Available at: http://news,bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7080794.stm (accessed 6 November 2007 ).
    Bell, B. and Cowie, B. ( 2001 ) Formative Assessment and Science Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
    Bennett, R. ( 2011 ) ‘Formative assessment: a critical review’, Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 18(1): 525.
    Berninger, V. , Abbott, R. and Jones, J. ( 2006 ) ‘Early development of language by hand: composing, reading, listening and speaking connections; three letter writing modes and fast mapping in spelling’, Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(1): 612.
    Black, P. ( 1998 ) Testing: Friend or Foe? Theory and Practice of Assessment and Testing. Falmer Press: London.
    Black, P. and Wiliam, D. ( 1998 ) Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. London: King’s College London School of Education.
    Black, P. and Wiliam, D. ( 2003 ) ‘In praise of educational research: formative assessment’, British Educational Research Journal, 29(5): 62337.
    Blair, A. ( 2004 ) ‘Universal education and care for under fives’ [speech]. The National Association of Headteachers Conference, Cardiff.
    Blair, A. ( 2005 ) ‘Education speech’, 25 October , BBC News. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4372216.stm (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Bloom, B.S. , Engelhart, M.D. , Furst, E.J. , Hill, W.H. and Krathwohl, D.R. ( 1956 ) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company.
    Boaler, J. ( 2005 ) ‘The “psychological prison” from which they never escaped: the role of ability grouping in reproducing social class inequities’, FORUM, 47(2–3): 13544.
    Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S.K. ( 1982 ) Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Bourdieu, P. ( 1990 ) The Logic of Practice, translated by Richard Nice . California: Stanford University Press.
    Boyle, B. ( 2000 ) The Aims and Priorities of the School Curriculum in (1999): A Self-report by Schools. Report to QCA based on the author’s national consultation prior to Curriculum 2000 revisions.
    Boyle, B. ( 2005–6 ) Integrated Curriculum Manual. Gulf Arab States Educational Research Council.
    Boyle, B. ( 2006 ) Assessment for Learning (Primary): A Teacher’s Guide to Formative Assessment [DVD]. Manchester: 186 Media/University of Manchester.
    Boyle, B. ( 2007a ) ‘Learning through assessment’, School Leadership Today, 2(2): 505.
    Boyle, B. ( 2007b ) ‘A curriculum without breadth and balance: teaching to the targets’, School Leadership Today, 2(7): 225.
    Boyle, B. ( 2008 ) ‘Testing to the limits – a very “accountable” 20-year period in primary education in England’, Managing Schools Today, 17(4): 203.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2002 ) Curriculum Trends 1997–2002. Manchester: CFAS/QCA.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2003 ) Curriculum Trends 1997–2003. Manchester: CFAS/QCA.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2004 ) Survey of Foundation Stage Education in England. Manchester: CFAS/QCA.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2005 ) ‘No science today: the demise of primary science teaching’, The Curriculum Journal, 16(4): 42337.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2006 ) ‘A curriculum without foundation’, British Educational Research Journal, 32(4): 56982.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2008a ) ‘Making primary connections: the cross-curriculum story’, The Curriculum Journal, 19(1): 521.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2008b ) ‘What is the relationship between disadvantage and primary school performance standards?’, School Leadership Today, 2(9): 258.
    Boyle, B. and Bragg, J. ( 2009 ) ‘What a waste of money’, The Education Journal, 114: 447.
    Boyle, B. , Bragg, J. and Pearson, D. ( 2007 ) Testing and Assessment: Report to the Children, Schools and Families Committee. London: Houses of Parliament, 17 December .
    Boyle, B. and Charles, M. ( 2008 ) ‘Excellence and enjoyment 2003–8: a five year review of its Assessment for Learning Strategy: has it encouraged formative teaching and learning in primary schools?’, CFAS, School of Education, University of Manchester.
    Boyle, B. and Charles, M. ( 2010a ) ‘Assessment for future generations: the struggle to ensure a balance between accountability and comparability based on a “testocracy” and the development of humanistic individuals through assessment’, keynote lecture presented at the Annual Conference of the International Association of Educational Assessment (IAEA), Bangkok, Thailand, August.
    Boyle, B. and Charles, M. ( 2010b ) ‘Leading learning through assessment for learning’, School Leadership & Management, 30(3): 285300.
    Boyle, B. and Charles, M. ( 2011 ) ‘Re-defining assessment: the struggle to ensure a balance between accountability and comparability based on a “testocracy” and the development of humanistic individuals through assessment’, Special issue of CADMO: An International Journal of Educational Research, 19(1): 5565.
    Boyle, B. and Charles, M. ( 2013 ) Formative Assessment for Teaching and Learning. London: Sage.
    Boyle, B. and Christie, T. (eds) ( 1996 ) Issues in Setting Standards: Establishing comparabilities. London: Falmer Press.
    Boyle, B. , Lamprianou, I. and Boyle, T. ( 2005 ) ‘A longitudinal study of teacher change: what makes professional development effective? Report of the second year of the study’, International Journal of School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(1): 127.
    Boyle, P. J. , Norman, P. and Popham, F. ( 2009 ) ‘Social mobility: evidence that it can widen health inequalities’, Social Science and Medicine, 68(10): 18351842.
    Bradbury, A. ( 2013 ) ‘Education Policy and the “ideal learner”: producing recognisable learner-subjects through early years assessment’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(1): 119.
    Brehony, K.J. ( 2005 ) ‘Primary schooling under New Labour: the irresolvable contradiction of excellence and enjoyment’, Oxford Review of Education, 31(1): 2946.
    Broadfoot, P. ( 1996 ) Education, Assessment and Society. Open University Press.
    Broadfoot, P. , Osborn, M. , Planel, P. and Pollard, A. ( 1996 ) ‘Assessment in French Primary Schools’, The Curriculum Journal, 7(2): 227246.
    Brown, M. , Askew, M. , Baker, D.H.D. and Millett, A. ( 1998 ) ‘Is the national numeracy strategy research based?’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 46(4): 362385.
    Bruce, T. ( 1997 ) ‘Adults and children developing play together’, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 5(1): 8999.
    Bruce, T. ( 2001 ) Learning Through Play: Babies, toddlers and the foundation years. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
    Buck, M. and Inman, S. ( 1993 ) Curriculum Guidance no. 2, Reaffirming Values. Centre for Cross-Curricular Initiatives. London: Goldsmiths.
    Burgess, S. and Greaves, E. ( 2009 ) ‘Test scores, subjective assessment and stereotyping of ethnic minorities’, Working Paper No. 09/221, Centre for Market and Public Organisation Bristol Institute of Public Affairs University of Bristol.
    Campbell, J. ( 1997 ) ‘Towards curricular subsidiarity?’ Paper presented at the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority Conference, Developing the Primary Curriculum, the next steps. June.
    Campbell, T. ( 2013 ) ‘Stereotyped at 7? Biases in teacher judgements of pupils’ ability and attainment’, Institute of Education, London, Centre for Longitudinal Studies.
    Carr, W. ( 1997 ) ‘Philosophy and method in educational research’, Cambridge Journal of Education, Special issue: Philosophy and Educational Research.
    Carr, W. ( 1997 ) ‘Professing education in a postmodern age’, Journal of Philosophy of Education, 31(2): 309327.
    Casti, J.L. ( 1989 ). Alternate Realities. Mathematical Models of Nature and Man. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
    CFAS (Centre for Formative Assessment Studies) ( 2003 ) School Sampling Project Curriculum Survey: Summary of Primary School Findings 2001–2. Available at: www.education.man.ac.uk/cfas/mca/summaries.htm.
    Chitty, C. ( 1988 ) ‘Central control of the school curriculum, 1944–87’, History of Education, 17(4): 321334.
    Clark, P. and Christie, T. ( 1995 ) ‘Assessment led curriculum development in action: a study of seven primary schools responses to statutory requirements’, International Journal of Education Management, 9(4): 1927.
    Clarke, A. ( 1999 ) Evaluation Research. London: Sage.
    Clycq, N. , Ward Nouwen, M.A. and Vandenbroucke, A. ( 2014 ) ‘Meritocracy, deficit thinking and the invisibility of the system: discourses on educational success and failure’, British Educational Research Journal, 40(5): 796819.
    Cohen, L. and Manion, L. ( 1994 ) Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.
    Covey, S.R. ( 1990 ). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon & Schuster.
    Crawford, K. ( 2000 ) ‘The political construction of the whole curriculum’, British Educational Research Journal, 26 (5): 61530.
    Cummins, J. and Gulutsan, M. ( 1974 ) ‘Bilingual education and cognition’, The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 20: 25969.
    DCSF (Department for Children, Schools and Families) ( 2007 ) Improving Writing with a Focus on Guided Writing. DCSF: London.
    Depree, H. and Iversen, S. ( 1994 ) Early Literacy in the Classroom. Desoto, TX: Wright Group Publishing.
    DES (Department of Education and Science) ( 1967 ) Children and their Primary Schools (The Plowden Report). London: HMSO.
    DES (Department of Education and Science) ( 1985 ) Better Schools. London: DES.
    DES (Department of Education and Science) ( 1987 ) The National Curriculum 5–16: A Consultation Document. London: HMSO.
    DES (Department of Education and Science) ( 1988 ) The Education Reform Act. London: HMSO.
    DeVries, R. and Kohlberg, L. ( 1990 ) Constructivist Early Education: Comparison with other programs. Washington D.C. National Association for the Education of Young Children.
    Di Angelo, R. ( 2011 ) ‘White fragility’, International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3(3): 5470.
    de Waal, A. ( 2006 ) ‘Do targets work?’, Times Educational Supplement, 20 August : 19.
    DfEE (Department for Education and Employment) ( 1999a ) All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education. London, DfEE.
    DfEE (Department for Education and Employment) ( 1999b ) The National Curriculum Handbook for Primary Teachers in England. London: DfEE.
    DfES (Department for Education and Skills) ( 2003 ) Excellence and Enjoyment: A Strategy for Primary Schools. London: DfES.
    DfES (Department for Education and Skills) ( 2004 ) Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners. London: DfES.
    Donovan, M.S. , Bransford, J.D. and Pellegrino, J.W. (eds) ( 1999 ) How People Learn. Bridging Research & Practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    Dunphy, L. ( 2008 ) ‘Developing pedagogy in infant classes in primary schools in Ireland’, Learning from Research, 27 (1): 5570.
    Dyson, L. ( 2004 ) ‘The effect of neighbourhood poverty and low-income on the school context: teachers’ expectations for achievement and rating of achievement motivation of elementary school children’, paper presented to the Canadian Society for the Study of Education, Winnipeg, Canada.
    Early Years Foundation Stage ( 2008 ) Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage: Setting the Standards for Learning, Development and Care for children from birth to five. Department for Children, Schools and Families.
    Education Institute ( 2004 ) Curriculum Standards for the State of Qatar. Science: Grades K–12. Doha, Qatar: The Education Institute of the Supreme Education Council. Available at: www.ibe.unesco.org/curricula/qatar/qa_al_sc_2004_eng.pdf (accessed 10 June 2015 ).
    Education Institute ( 2005 ) Science Scheme of Work for the State of Qatar. Science: Grades K–12. Doha, Qatar: The Education Institute of the Supreme Education Council. Available at: https://csomathscience.wordpress.com (accessed 10 June 2015 ).
    Edwards, A. ( 2001 ) ‘Researching pedagogy: a sociocultural agenda’, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 9: 16186.
    Elliott, J. ( 1994 ) ‘Clarifying values in schools’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 24(3): 41322.
    Ericsson, K.S. and Charness, N. ( 1994 ) ‘Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition’, American Psychologist, 49, 72574.
    Fletcher, C.L. and Barufaldi, J.P. ( 2002 ) ‘Evaluating professional development with student data: challenges and successes for project ESTT’, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
    Flower, L. , Hayes, J.R. , Carey, L. , Schriver, K. and Stratman, J. ( 1986 ) ‘Detection, diagnosis and the strategies of revision’, College Composition and Communication, 37(1): 1653.
    Fogelman, K. ( 1991 ) Citizenship in Schools. London: David Fulton.
    Frankenberg, R. ( 2001 ) ‘The mirage of an unmarked whiteness’, in Brander, R.K. , Klinenberg, M. , Nexica, I.J and Wray, M. (Eds.), The Making and Unmaking of Whiteness. Durham: NC, pp. 7296.
    Freire, P. ( 1970 ) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
    Fullan, M. ( 2003 ) Change Forces with a Vengeance. London: Routledge Falmer.
    Galton, M. and McBeath, J. ( 2002 ) A Life in Teaching? The Impact of Change on Teachers’ Working Lives. London: National Union of Teachers.
    GAO (Government Accountability Office) ( 2003 ) ‘Characteristics of tests with influence expenses: information sharing may help states realize efficiencies’. Available online at: www.gao.gov/new.items/d03389.pdf
    Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. ( 1983 ) Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Giere, R.N. ( 1992 ) Cognitive Models of Science. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XV. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
    Giere, R.N. ( 1994 ). ‘The cognitive structure of scientific theories’, Philosophy of Science, 61: 27696.
    Glas, E. ( 2002 ) ‘Klein’s Model of Mathematical Creativity’, Science and Education, 11(1): 95104.
    Glaser B.C. and Strauss A.L. ( 1976 ) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
    Glaser, B.G. ( 1978 ) Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
    Goodson, I. ( 1989 ) ‘Curriculum reform and curriculum theory: a case of historical amnesia’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 19(2): 13141.
    Goouch, K. ( 2008 ) ‘Understanding playful pedagogies, play narratives and play spaces’, Journal of Early Years Education, 28(1): 93102.
    Gorard, S. ( 2010 ) ‘Serious doubts about school effectiveness’, British Educational Research Journal, 36(5): 74566.
    Gorard, S. and Smith, E. ( 2004 ) ‘What is “underachievement” at school?’, School Leadership & Management, 24(2): 20525.
    Gordon H. Bower and Daniel G. Morrow ( 1990 ) ‘Mental Models in Narrative Comprehension’, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 24(4938): 4448.
    Gray, J. ( 2001 ) Success Against the Odds: Five Years On. London: Routledge
    Gray, J. ( 2004 ) ‘Frames of reference and traditions of interpretation: some issues in the identification of “under-achieving” schools’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 52(3): 293309.
    Graziano, K.G. ( 2008 ) ‘Walk the talk: connecting critical pedagogy and practice in teacher education’, Teaching Education, 19(2): 15363.
    Guinier, L. ( 2003 ) ‘The Supreme Court, 2002 Term: Comment: admissions rituals as political acts: guardians at the gates of our democratic ideals’, Harvard Law Review, November .
    Guinier, L. and Torres, G. ( 2003 ) The Miner’s Canary: Enlisting Race, Resisting Power, Transforming Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Hall, K. , Collins, J. , Benjamin, S. , Nind, M. and Sheehy, K. ( 2004 ) ‘Assessment and inclusion/exclusion: SATurated models of pupildom’, British Educational Research Journal, 30(6): 80117.
    Halloun, I. ( 2001 ) Apprentissage par modélisation: la physique intelligible. Beyrouth: Librairie du Liban Publishers.
    Halloun, I. ( 2004/2006 ) Modelling Theory in Science Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers/Boston: Springer.
    Halloun, I. ( 2007 ) ‘Mediated modelling in science education’, Science and Education. 16(7): 65397.
    Halloun, I. ( 2011a ) ‘Profile shaping education: a paradigm shift in education to empower students for success in modern life’, Proceedings of the 11th International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Group Biennial Conference. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece.
    Halloun, I. ( 2011b ) ‘From modelling schemata to the profiling schema: modelling across the curricula for profile shaping education’, in M.S. Khine and I.M. Saleh (eds), Models and Modelling in Science Education. Boston: Springer.
    Hansard ( 1987 ) 1 December , Vol. 123, Col. 771.
    Hansen, K. and Jones, E.M. ( 2011 ) ‘Ethnicity and gender gaps in early childhood’, British Educational Research Journal, 37 (6): 97391.
    Harlen, W. ( 2004 ) ‘Re-thinking the teacher’s role in assessment’, Paper presented at the British Educational Research Assessment Annual Conference, University of Manchester, 16–18 September.
    Harlen, W. ( 2007 ) The Quality of Learning: Assessment Alternatives for Primary Education, Primary Review Research Survey 3/4. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
    Harlen, W. and Deakin-Crick, R. ( 2003 ) ‘Testing and motivation for learning’, Assessment in Education, 10(2): 169208.
    Hayes, N. ( 2008 ) ‘Teaching matters in early education practice: the case for a nurturing pedagogy’, Early Education and Development, 19(3): 43040.
    Helm, H. and Novak, J.D. ( 1983 ) Proceedings of the International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
    Holt, D. (ed.) ( 1997 ) Primary arts education: Contemporary Issues. London: The Falmer Press.
    House of Commons ( 2009 ) National Curriculum: Fourth Report of Session 2008–09 (Children, Schools and Families Committee). London: Stationery Office.
    Huitt, W. ( 1999 ) ‘Conation as an important factor of mind’, Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Available at: www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/conation/conation.html (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Humphreys, A. , Post, T. and Ellis, A. ( 1981 ) Interdisciplinary Methods: A Thematic Approach. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing Company.
    Hutt, C. ( 1979 ) ‘Play in the under 5s: form, development and function’, in J.G. Howells (Ed.) Modern Perspectives in the Psychiatry of Infancy. New York: Brunner/Marcel.
    IEA (International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement) ( 2008 ) TIMSS 2007 Technical Report. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IEA.
    Isaacs, S. ( 1971 ) The Nursery Years: The Mind of the Child from Birth to Six Years. Routledge: London.
    Jackson, P.W. ( 1968 ) Life in Classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
    Jeff, S. and Julie, N. ( 1991 ) Accuracy of Self-reported Course Work and Grade Information of High School Sophomores. American College Testing Research Report Series, REPORT_NO: ACT-RR-91-6.
    Johnson-Laird, P.N. ( 1983 ) Mental Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Karsten, S. , Visscher, A. and De Jong, T. ( 2001 ) ‘Another side to the coin: the unintended effects of the publication of school performance data in England and France’, Comparative Education, 37(2): 23142.
    Kirschner, P.A. , Sweller, J. and Clark, R.E. ( 2006 ) ‘Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching’, Educational Psychologist, 41(2): 7586.
    Lakoff, G. ( 1987 ) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Lambert, R.G. ( 2003 ) ‘Considering purpose and intended use when making evaluations of assessments: a response to Dickinson’, Educational Researcher, 32(4): 236.
    Lawton, D. ( 1987 ) ‘Fundamentally flawed’, Times Educational Supplement, 18 September .
    Lee, P. ( 1996 ) ‘Cognitive development in bilingual children: a case for bilingual instruction in early childhood education’, Journal of Bilingual Research, 20(3): 499522.
    LeCompte, M.D. and Goetz, J.P. ( 1982 ) ‘Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research’, Review of Educational Research, 52(1): 31.
    Le Métais, J. and Tabberer, R. ( 1997 ) International Review of Curriculum Assessments and Frameworks: Comparative Tables. Slough: NFER.
    Lerner, M.J. ( 1980 ) The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion. New York: Plenum Press.
    Liebeck, P. ( 1984 ) How Children Learn Mathematics. London: Penguin.
    Linn, M.C. ( 1992 ) Gender Differences in Educational Achievement: Sex Equity in Educational Opportunity, Achievement and Testing. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.
    Lupton, R. ( 2004 ) Schools in Disadvantaged Areas: Recognising Context and Raising Quality, CASE paper 76, January, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics and Political Science.
    Maden, M. ( 1997 ) ‘Curriculum planning: some OECD lessons’, in P. Mortimore and V. Little (eds), Living Education. London: Paul Chapman.
    Makin, L. and Whiteman, P. ( 2006 ) ‘Young children as active participants in the investigation of teaching and learning’, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14(1): 3341.
    Marenbon, J. ( 1996 ) A Moral Maze: government values in education. London: Politeia.
    Margolis, E. ( 2001 ) The Hidden Curriculum in Higher Education. New York: Routledge.
    Martin, E.L. , Segraves, R. , Thacher, S. and Young, L. ( 2003 ) ‘The writing process: three first grade teachers and their students reflect on what was learned’, Reading Psychology, 26(3): 200.
    Maxey, E.J. and Ormsby, V.J. ( 1971 ) The Accuracy of Self-report Information Collected on the ACT Test Battery: High School Grades and Items of Non-academic Achievement. Research and Development Division, The American College Testing Programme, REPORT _NO: ACT-RR-45.
    Maykut, P. and Morehouse, R. ( 1994 ) Beginning Qualitative Research. London: Falmer Press.
    McLaughlin, T.H. ( 1992 ) ‘Citizenship, diversity and education, a philosophical perspective’, Journal of Moral Education, 21(3): 235250.
    Meyer, D.K. and Turner, J.C. ( 2002 ) ‘Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research’, Educational Psychologist, 37(2): 10714.
    Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. ( 1984 ) Quantative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Berkeley, CA: Sage
    Morris, J.A. and Gardner, M.J. ( 1988 ) ‘Calculating confidence intervals for relative risks (odds ratios) and standardised ratios and rates’, British Medical Journal, 296: 131316.
    Mourshed, M. , Chijioke, C. and Barber, M. ( 2010 ) How the World’s Most Improved School Systems Keep Getting Better. London: McKinsey & Company. Available at: www.mckinsey.com/client_service/social_sector/latest_thinking/worlds_most_improved_schools (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Mullis, I.V.S. , Kennedy, A.M. , Martin, M.O. and Sainsbury, M. ( 2006 ) PIRLS 2006 Assessment Framework and Specifications,
    2nd
    Edition. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
    Mullis, I.V.S. , Martin, M.O. , Smith, T.A. , Garden, R.A. , Gregory, K.D. , Gonzalez, E.J. , Chrostowski, S.J. and O’Connor, K.M. ( 2003 ) TIMSS Assessment Frameworks and Specific Actions,
    2nd
    Edition. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
    Myhill, D. ( 2006 ) ‘Talk, talk, talk: teaching and learning in whole class discourse’, Research Papers in Education, 21(1): 1941.
    NAGB (National Assessment Governing Board) ( 2011a ) Mathematics Framework for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
    NAGB (National Assessment Governing Board) ( 2011b ) Science Framework for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
    NCC (National Curriculum Council) ( 1990 ) Curriculum Guidance 3: The Whole Curriculum. York: NCC.
    NCC (National Curriculum Council) ( 1993 ) Planning the National Curriculum at Key Stage 2. York: NCC.
    NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) ( 1989 ) Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
    NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) ( 1991 ) Professional Teaching Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
    NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) ( 1995 ) Assessment Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
    NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) ( 2000 ) Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
    Nezhnov, P. and Kardanova, E. ( 2011 ) SAM Framework. Moscow, Russia: Center for International Cooperation in Education Development.
    Nichols, S.L. and Berliner, D.C. ( 2007 ) Collateral Damage: How High-stakes Testing Corrupts America’s Schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
    Nilsson, M. ( 2010 ) ‘Developing voice in digital storytelling through creativity narrative and multimodality’, International Journal of Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning, 6(2): 111.
    Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research ( 1990 ) Curriculum Guidelines for Compulsory Education in Norway. Oslo: Aschehoug.
    Novak, J. (ed.) ( 1993 ) Proceedings of the Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Cornell University, Ithaca.
    Novak, J.D. ( 1987 ) Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
    NRC (National Research Council) ( 1996 ) National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    NRC (National Research Council) ( 2011 ) A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
    NUT (National Union of Teachers) ( 2006 ) NUT Briefing: The Impact of National Curriculum Testing on Pupils, September .
    OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) ( 2005 ) Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms. Policy Brief November . Paris: OECD.
    OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) ( 2009 ) PISA 2009 Assessment Framework: Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Paris: OECD.
    OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) ( 2011 ) PISA in Focus, 9 ( October ). Paris: OECD.
    Ofsted ( 2001 ) Standards and Quality in Education: The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    Ofsted ( 2002a ) Standards and Quality in Education: The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    Ofsted ( 2002b ) The Curriculum in Successful Primary Schools. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    Ofsted ( 2003 ) Good Assessment Practice in Mathematics. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    Ofsted ( 2005 ) The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools 2003/04. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    Ofsted ( 2006 ) The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools 2005/06. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    Ofsted ( 2007 ) Standards and Quality in Education: The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools. London: Office for Standards in Education.
    O’Hear, P. and White, J. ( 1991 ) A National Curriculum for All: Laying the foundation for success. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
    O’Hear, P. and White, J. (ed.) ( 1993 ) Assessing the National Curriculum. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
    Osborn, M. , with Croll, P. , Broadfoot, P. , Pollard, A. , McNecs, E. and Triggs, P. ( 1997 ) ‘Policy into practice – creative meditation in the primary classroom’, in Helsby, G. and McCulloch, G. (eds.) Teachers and the National Curriculum. London: Falmer Press, p. 15.
    Osborne, J. and Dillon, J. ( 2008 ) Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections. London: The Nuffield Foundation.
    Palmer, J. ( 1991 ) ‘Planning wheels turn curriculum around’, Educational Leadership, 49 (2): 5760.
    Paris, S.G. and Paris, A.H. ( 2001 ) ‘Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning’, Educational Psychologist, 36(2): 89101.
    Patrick, F. , Forde, C. and McPhee, A. ( 2003 ) ‘Challenging the “new professionalism”: from managerialism to pedagogy?’, Journal of In- Service Education, 28(2): 23753.
    Patton, M.Q. ( 1990 ) Qualitative evaluation and research methods,
    2nd
    edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Perrenoud, P. ( 1991 ) ‘Towards a pragmatic approach to formative evaluation’, in P. Weston (ed.), Assessment of Pupils’ Achievement: Motivation and School Success. Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger.
    Perrenoud, P. ( 1996 ) ‘The teaching profession between proletarianism and professionalization: two models of change’, Outlook, 26: 54362.
    Perrenoud, P. ( 1998 ) ‘From formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes: towards a wider conceptual field’, Assessment in Education, 5(1): 85101.
    Perrenond, P. ( 2001 ) ‘The key to social fields: Competencies of an autonomous actor’, in D.S. Rychen and L.H. Salganik (Eds.) Defining and selecting key competencies. Göttingen: Hogrefe and Huber.
    Perry, N.E , Hutchinson, L. and Thauberger, C. ( 2007 ) ‘Mentoring student teachers to design and implement literacy tasks that support self-regulated reading and writing’, Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23: 2750.
    Piazza, C.L. ( 2003 ) Journeys: The Teaching of Writing in Elementary Classrooms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
    Popham, J. ( 2008 ) ‘Classroom assessment: staying instructionally afloat in an ocean of accountability’, in C.A. Dwyer (ed.), The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning. Lawrence Eribaum Associates.
    Popham, W.J. ( 2001 ) The Truth About Testing: An educator’s call to action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
    Porter, A.C. ( 2001 ) The Condition of Education. National Centre for Education Statistics [online]. Available at: nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001072.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Pryor, J. and Crossouard, B. ( 2008 ) ‘A socio-cultural theorisation of FA’, Oxford Review of Education, 34(10): 120.
    QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) Assessment for Learning. London: QCA.
    QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) Aims for the School Curriculum: What Does Your School Think? London: QCA.
    QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) ( 1999 ) Key Stage 2 Assessment and Reporting Arrangements. London: QCA.
    QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) ( 2002 ) Designing and Timetabling the Primary Curriculum: A Practical Guide for Key Stages 1 and 2. London: QCA.
    QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) ( 2006 ) Primary Framework for Literacy and Mathematics. Available at: http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-primary-national-strategy.pdf
    QCA Seminar ( 2007 ) Assessment for Learning Seminar. Downing College, University of Cambridge, Friday 16th November, 2007.
    Radnor, H. and Shaw, K. ( 1994 ) ‘Developing a collaborative approach to moderation: the moderation and assessment project – southwest’, in H. Torrance (ed.), Evaluating Authentic Assessment. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Ramprasad, A. ( 1983 ) ‘On the definition of feedback’, Behavioural Science, 28(1): 413.
    Reeves, D. , Boyle, B. and Christie, T. ( 2001 ) ‘The relationship between teacher assessments and pupil attainments in standard tests/tasks at key stage 2, 1996–98’, British Educational Research Journal, 27(2): 14160.
    Resnicow, K. , Davis, M. , Smith, M. , Lazarus-Yaroch, A. , Baranowski, T. , Baranowski, J. , Doyle, C. and Wang, D.T. ( 1998 ) ‘How best to measure implementation of school health curricula: a comparison of three measures’, Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 13(2): 23950.
    Ribbins, P. and Sherratt, B. ( 1997 ) Radical Educational Policies and Conservative Secretaries of State. London: Cassell.
    Riggs, E.G. ( 2004 ) ‘Conation: cultivating the will to succeed among middle and high school students’, Forum on Public Policy. Available at: forumonpublicpolicy.com/archivesum07/riggs.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Roe, E. ( 1994 ) Narrative Policy Analysis. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
    Rothman, R. ( 2001 ) ‘One hundred and fifty years of testing’, in The Jossey Bass Reader on School Reform. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
    Rowsell, J. , Kosnik, C. and Beck, C. ( 2008 ) Fostering multiliteracies pedagogy through pre-service teacher education’, Teaching Education, 19(2): 10922.
    RSA ( 2005 ) Opening Minds: Giving Young People a Better Chance. London: RSA.
    Ruttle, K. ( 2004 ) ‘What goes on inside my head when I’m writing? A case study of 8–9 year-old boys’, Literacy, July : 717.
    Sadler, D.R. ( 1989 ) ‘Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems’, International Science, 18: 11944.
    Sadler, D.R. ( 2007 ) ‘Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment criteria’, Assessment in Education, 14(3): 38792.
    SCAA (School Curriculum and Assessment Authority) ( 1993 ) The National Curriculum and its Assessment (The Dearing Review). London: SCAA.
    SCAA (School Curriculum and Assessment Authority) ( 1996 ) ‘Nursery education: Desirable outcomes for children’s learning on entering compulsory education’, one-day conference. London: SCAA and Department for Education and Employment.
    SCAA (School Curriculum and Assessment Authority) ( 1997 ) ‘Developing the primary school curriculum: the next steps’, proceedings from invited conference, June. SCAA: London.
    Schunk, D.H. and Zimmerman, B.J. ( 1997 ) ‘Social origins of self-regulatory competence’, Educational Psychologist, 32(4): 195208.
    Schunk D.H. and Zimmerman, B.J. ( 2007 ) ‘Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modelling’, Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23: 725.
    SEAC (Schools Examinations and Assessment Council) ( 1989 ) A Guide to Teacher Assessment, Packs A, B, C. London: Heinemann.
    SEAC (Schools Examinations and Assessment Council) ( 1990 ) A Guide to Teacher Assessment, Pack C. London: Heinemann.
    SEC (Supreme Education Council) ( 2010 ) The Early Years Foundation Curriculum for Qatar 2010. Doha, Qatar: Supreme Education Council/Early Years Specialist Team.
    Shepard, L.A. ( 2000 ) ‘The role of assessment in a learning culture’, Educational Researcher, 29(7): 414.
    Shepard, L.A. ( 2005 ) ‘Linking formative assessment to scaffolding, Educational Leadership, 63(3): 6670.
    Shoemaker, B. ( 1989 ) ‘Integrative education: a curriculum for the twenty-first century’, Oregon School Study Council, 33: 2.
    Shor, I. ( 1992 ) Empowering Education: Critical Teaching for Social Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Siraj-Blatchford, I. ( 2009 ) ‘Quality teaching in the Early Years’, in Anning, A. , Cullen, J. and Fleer, M. Early Childhood Education and Culture, p. 147.
    Smith, E. ( 2003 ) ‘Understanding underachievement: an investigation into the differential attainment of secondary school pupils’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24 (5): 57686.
    Smith, E. and Gorard, S. ( 2005 ) ‘They don’t give us our marks: the impact of formative assessment techniques in the classroom’, Assessment in Education, 12(1): 2138.
    Smith, F. , Hardman, F. , Wall, K. and Mroz, M. ( 2004 ) ‘Interactive whole class teaching in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies’, British Educational Research Journal, 30(3): 395441.
    Smith, K. and McCann, C.W. ( 1998 ) ‘The validity of students’ self-reported family incomes’, paper presented at the 38th Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Minneapolis, MN.
    STAIR Consortium ( 1990 ) Evaluation Report of the Standard Assessment Task Pilot Study. CFAS/SEAC, University of Manchester.
    Stiggins, R.J. , Arter, J.A. , Chappuis, S. and Chappuis, J. ( 2004 ) Classroom Assessment for Student Learning. Portland, OR: Assessment Training Institute.
    Taylor, P.J. , Lamers, A. , Vincent, M.P. and O’Driscoll, M.P. ( 1998 ) ‘The validity of immediate and delayed self-reports in training evaluation: an exploratory field study’, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47(4): 45979.
    TDA ( 2008 ) Professional Standards for Qualified Teacher Status and Requirements for Initial Teacher Training. London: Training and Development Agency for Schools.
    TES ( 1987 ) ‘1904 and all that’, Times Educational Supplement, 31 July .
    TES ( 2008 ) ‘What the markers told us’. Available at: https://www.tes.com/article.aspx?storycode=2644175 (accessed 4 July 2008 ).
    Te Whāriki ( 1996 ) He Whāriki Màtauranga mò ngà Mokopuna o Aotearoa Early Childhood Curriculum, Ministry of Education, Learning Media Limited, Wellington, New Zealand.
    TGAT (Task Group on Assessment and Testing) ( 1988a ) National Curriculum Task Group on Assessment and Testing: A Report. London: Department for Education and Science.
    TGAT (Task Group on Assessment and Testing) ( 1988b ) National Curriculum Task Group on Assessment and Testing: Three Supplementary Reports. London: Department for Education and Science.
    Tharp, R.G. and Gallimore, R. ( 1991 ) Rousing Minds to Life: Teaching, Learning and Schooling in a Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Tharp, R.G. and Gallimore, R. ( 1988 ) ‘A theory of teaching as assisted performance’, in Rousing Minds to life: teaching, learning and schooling in social context. New York: Cambridge University.
    Thatcher, M. ( 1993 ) The Downing Street Years. London: Harper Collins.
    Thrupp, M. and Tomlinson, S. ( 2005 ) ‘Introduction: education policy, social justice and “complex hope”’, British Educational Research Journal, 31: 549556.
    Tobias, M. and Howden-Chapman, P. ( 2000 ) Social Inequalities in Health, New Zealand, 1999: A Summary. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
    Tooley, J. ( 1997 ) ‘Choice and diversity in education: A defence’, Oxford Review of Education, 23(1): 10316.
    Torrance, H. ( 1993 ) ‘Formative assessment: some theoretical problems and empirical questions’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 23(3): 33343.
    Torrance, H. ( 2007 ) ‘Assessment as learning?Assessment in Education, 14(3): 281294.
    Traub, R.E. and Weiss, J. ( 1982 ) ‘The accuracy of teachers’ self-reports: evidence from an observational study of open education’, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
    Twing, J. , Boyle, B. and Charles, M. ( 2010 ) ‘Integrated assessment systems for improved learning’, paper presented at the 36th Annual Conference of the International Association of Educational Assessment, Bangkok, Thailand, August.
    Tyler, K. ( 1992 ) ‘Differentiation and integration of the primary curriculum’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24(6): 5637.
    Tymms, P. ( 1996 ) The Value Added National Project: Second Primary Technical Report: An Analysis of the (1991) Key Stage 1 Assessment Data Linked to the 1995 KS2 Data Provided by Avon LEA. London: School Curriculum and Assessment Authority.
    Tymms, P. ( 2004 ) ‘Are standards rising in English primary schools?’, British Educational Research Journal, 30(4): 47794.
    Tymms, P. and Merrell, C. ( 2007 ) Standards and Quality in English Primary Schools Over Time: National Evidence. Primary Review Research Survey 4/1. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
    Tytler, R. ( 2011 ) ‘Socio-scientific issues, sustainability and science education’, Research in Science Education, 41.
    UNESCO ( 1990 ) World Declaration on Education for All. Paris: UNESCO. Available at: unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000975/097552e.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    UNESCO ( 2000 ) The Dakar Framework for Action. Available at: www.unesco.at/bildung/basisdokumente/dakar_aktionsplan.pdf (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Viau, E.A. ( 1994 ) ‘The mind as a channel: a paradigm for the information age’, Educational Technology Review, Autumn/Winter: 510.
    Vulliamy, G. and Nikki, M.L. ( 1997 ) ‘The comparative context for educational reform in England and Finland’, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association symposium on ‘A Comparative Analysis of Curriculum Change in English and Finnish Primary Schools: The York-Finnish Project’.
    Vygotsky, L. ( 1978 ). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Vygotsky, L. ( 1986 ) Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Vygotsky, L. ( 1987 ) The Collected Works of L.S. Vygotsky. New York: Plenum Press.
    West, C. ( 2008 ) Hope on a Tightrope. Carlsbad, CA: Smiley Press.
    White, J. ( 1997 ) Education and the End of Work. London: Cassell.
    White, J. ( 2004 ) Rethinking the School Curriculum: Values, Aims and Purposes. London: Routledge Falmer.
    Whitty, G. ( 2001 ) ‘Education, social class and social exclusion’, Journal of Education Policy, 16(4): 28795.
    Wiggins, A. and Tymms, P. ( 2002 ) ‘Dysfunctional effects of league tables: a comparison between English and Scottish primary schools’, Public Money and Management, January–March : 438.
    Willis, S. and Mann, L. ( 2000 ) ‘Differentiating instruction finding manageable ways to meet individual needs’, Curriculum Update, Winter. Available at: http://www.ascd.org/publications/curriculum-update/winter2000/Differentiating-Instruction.aspx (accessed 11 June 2015 ).
    Wragg, T. ( 1990 ) ‘Who put the ass in assessment?The Times Educational Supplement, 16 February .
    Wragg, E.C. ( 1997 ) The Cubic Curriculum. London: Routledge.
    Wyse, D. , McCreery, E. and Torrance, H. ( 2007 ) The Trajectory and Impact of National Reform: Curriculum and Assessment in English Primary Schools. Primary Review Interim Report. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
    Young, M. ( 1999 ) ‘The curriculum of the future’, British Education Research Journal, 25(4): 46377.
    Zimmerman, B.J. ( 2000 ) ‘Attaining self-regulation: a social-cognitive perspective’, in M. Boekarts , P.R. Pintich and M. Zeidner (eds), Handbook of Self-regulation. San Diego: Academic Press.

    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website