Conceptions of assessment and learning in primary school mathematics teachers

Journal title CADMO
Author/s Elisa Truffelli, Giorgio Asquini
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/1 Language Italian
Pages 16 P. 21-36 File size 206 KB
DOI 10.3280/CAD2022-001003
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The paper presents an in-depth analysis of the data of a questionnaire administered to 526 primary school mathematics teachers. The questionnaire investigates the beliefs and statements in relation to the INVALSI Tests, in order to identify possible effects on teaching-learning in mathematics. The in-depth study verifies the correlations between two validated scales (DOTIDID, Talent Ideology, and VALFOR, Formative Assessment) and some variables of the questionnaire related to personal data, teachers’ beliefs regarding the knowledge and skills investigated by the INVALSI Test and mathematics teaching and learning practices in the classroom that include the use of INVALSI items. The significance of the correlations with the two scales is noted for differ- ent aspects, with a clear difference between teachers who believe in forma- tive assessment (oriented to didactic planning) and those who consider math- ematics as an innate talent (oriented to simple training to pass the tests). The possible impacts for in-service teacher training courses on assessment issues and the correct use of INVALSI Tests are discussed.

Keywords: INVALSI Test, Primary School, Formative Assessment, Math- ematics, Teacher Training.

  1. Allal, L. (1999), Impliquer l’apprenant dans les processus d’évaluation: promesses et pièges de l’autoévaluation. In C. Depover, B. Noël (eds), L’évaluation des compétences et des processus cognitifs: modèles, pratiques et contextes. Brus- sels: De Boeck, pp. 35-56.
  2. Arzarello, F., Ferretti, F. (2021), The connection between the mathematics INVALSI test and the teaching practices: an explorative study, in P. Falzetti (ed), INVALSI data to investigate the characteristics of students, school, and society. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  3. Black, P., Wiliam, D. (1998), “Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment”, Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 2, pp. 139-148.
  4. Black, P., Wiliam, D. (2009), “Developing the theory of formative assessment”, Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5, pp. 5-31.
  5. Ciani, A., Vannini, I. (2017), “Equità e didattica. Validazione di scale sulle convin- zioni di insegnamento democratico”, CADMO, 2, pp. 5-32.
  6. Consiglio Europeo (2021), Risoluzione del Consiglio Europeo su un quadro strate- gico per la cooperazione europea nel settore dell’istruzione e della formazione verso uno spazio europeo dell’istruzione e oltre (2021-2030), Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione Europea, C 066, 26 febbraio 2021, -- tion-detail/-/publication/ba41c83c-77d3-11eb-9ac9-01aa75ed71a1/language-it.
  7. Girelli, C. (2022), Valutare nella scuola primaria. Roma: Carocci.
  8. Hopfenbeck, T.N., Flórez, M.T., Tolo, A. (2015), “Balancing tensions in educatio- nal policy reforms: large-scale implementation of Assessment for Learning in Norway”. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22, 1, pp. 44-60.
  9. Hume, A., Coll, R.K. (2009), “Assessment of learning, for learning, and as lear- ning: New Zealand case studies”, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16, 3, pp. 269-290.
  10. INVALSI (2018), Quadro di riferimento delle prove di INVALSI Matematica. Roma.
  11. Kingston, N.M., Nash, B. (2011), “Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research”, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30, 4, pp. 28-37.
  12. Kingston, N.M., Nash, B. (2015), “Erratum”, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 34, 1, p. 55.
  13. Losito, B. (2018), Contesti e risorse per la Ricerca-Formazione. In G. Asquini (a cura di), La Ricerca-Formazione. Temi, esperienze, prospettive. Milano: Fran- coAngeli, pp. 52-60.
  14. Nigris, E., Agrusti, G. (a cura di) (2021), Valutare per apprendere. Milano-Torino. Pearson.
  15. OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Staff (2021), Education at a glance: OECD indicators 2002. Paris: OECD.
  16. Scriven, M. (1967), The Methodology of evaluation. In R.W. Tyler (ed), Perspectives of Curriculum evaluation. Chicago, Illinois: Rand McNally, pp. 39-83.
  17. Truffelli, E., Vannini, I. (2021), Convinzioni e atteggiamenti degli insegnanti di scuola primaria italiani e orientamento all’uso formativo delle prove INVALSI di matematica. In L. Lucisano (a cura di), Ricerca e Didattica per promuovere intel- ligenza comprensione e partecipazione. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia, pp. 376-395. Vaccaro, V., Faggiano, E., Ferretti, F. (2021), Consapevolezza degli insegnanti delle ragioni degli errori degli student. In L. Lucisano (a cura di), Ricerca e Didattica per promuovere intelligenza comprensione e partecipazione. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia, pp. 411-430.
  18. Van der Kleij, F.M., Feskens, R.C., Eggen, T.J. (2015), “Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta- analysis”, Review of Educational Research, 85, 4, pp. 475-511.
  19. Vannini, I. (2019), Valutare per apprendere e progettare. In E. Nigris, B. Balconi, L. Zecca, Dalla progettazione alla valutazione didattica. Milano-Torino: Pearson, pp. 250-276.
  20. Vertecchi, B. (2003), Manuale della valutazione. Analisi degli apprendimenti e dei contesti. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  21. Wiliam, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., Black, P.J. (2004), “Teachers developing asses- sment for learning: Impact on student achievement”, Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 1, 1, pp. 49-65.
  22. Wu, Q., Jessop, T. (2018), “Formative assessment: missing in action in both rese- arch-intensive and teaching focused universities?”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 7, pp. 1019-1031.
  23. Zimmerman, B.J. (2008), “Investigating Self-regulation and Motivation: Historical Background, Methodological Developments and Future Perspectives”, Ameri- can Educational Research Journal, 45, 1, pp. 166-183.

Elisa Truffelli, Giorgio Asquini, Concezioni della valutazione e dell’apprendimento in insegnanti di matematica nella scuola primaria in "CADMO" 1/2022, pp 21-36, DOI: 10.3280/CAD2022-001003