Janneke van der Steen - PhD Project data for study 3

This multiple case study focused on bringing the invisible processes that are involved in formative decision-making to the surface. Through journal-writing and interviews with teachers from secondary education, who implemented formative assessment in their classrooms, different pathways were found in which formative decision-making occurs. Furthermore, the outcomes of the current study reveal that formative assessment is not an isolated strategy.

The decisions teachers make based on formative assessment are always also embedded in and supported by knowledge and beliefs teachers already have about the context, content, learning and learners. Description of the data included This study focused on five teachers and their formative assessment plans, which were designed and would be implemented during the project. Each formative assessment plan consisted of multiple checkpoints and follow-ups.

Checkpoints are the planned moments where teachers want to collect and analyze data on all student learning with regards to the learning objectives. Each checkpoint is the starting point for making a formative decision and informed follow-up. A case in this study is the process, line of events as described by the teachers, that starts with a checkpoint in the formative assessment plan and ends with the chosen follow-up.

In this study eighteen cases from five formative assessment plans were included. Table 1 presents where the eighteen cases originated from: Table 1: Overview of the cases included in this study Formative assessment plan - teacher 1: 3 cases - teacher 2: 2 cases - teacher 3: 5 cases - teacher 4: 6 cases - teacher 5: 2 cases - total: 18 cases Interview transcipts - teacher 1: 3 cases - teacher 2: 1 case - teacher 3: 5 cases - teacher 4: 4 cases - teacher 5: 1 case - total: 14 cases Journal form - teacher 1: 3 cases - teacher 2: 2 cases - teacher 3: 5 cases - teacher 4: 6 cases - teacher 5: 1 case - total: 17 cases The teachers filled in journal forms for each case and were interviewed about each case.

Sometimes journal forms or interview included multiple cases. The data therefore consist of: 1. 17 anonymized journal forms Parallel with the implementation of their formative assessment plan, the five teachers filled in a journal form after each checkpoint. Questions in this form were: a.

Did the information you collected at this checkpoint lead you to know where the students are in their learning with regards to the intended learning goal(s)? b. What do you know now thanks to this checkpoint? c. Wat are possible explanations for the outcomes of this checkpoint? d.

What are possible follow-ups that match the outcomes of the checkpoint? e. Which follow-up do you choose? f. Why is this a good/the best follow-up? 2.

Anonymized Transcripts of 14 interviews with five teachers The interviews were planned after a checkpoint took place. Starting point for the interviews were the completed journal forms for each checkpoint. Based on the journal forms, the interviewer asked the teacher clarification questions about the answers in the form.

For example, questions like how do you know that these are the outcomes or how do you know the reasons for these outcomes, how do you know this is the best follow-up? After clarification, three additional questions followed for all teachers: a. What other information did you use to choose a follow-up? b.

How do you look back at the chosen follow-up? c. Do you feel that the components in the formative assessment plan (checkpoints and follow-up are both a part of this plan) have led to better founded/informed decisions? 1. If so, how do you know and what contributed to it? 2.

If not, what is required for this?