Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 22 no. 10 (2024)

Effectiveness of Summative Assessment as Perceived by the Secondary School Teachers

Marivic Han Awon | Michael Velez | Lyneth M Carbonero | Jean Irene Galdo | Gessabel Matugas | Namerod Bual

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study investigated the perceptions of secondary school teachers regarding the effectiveness of summative assessments, such as first quarter exams, in a particular secondary school in the division of Misamis Oriental, Region X. The study examined teachers' demographic profiles, their perceptions of the effectiveness of teaching assessments, and their self-perceived knowledge and skills in designing and implementing teacher-made first quarter assessments. A quantitative descriptive research design was employed, and a structured questionnaire was used to collect data from the respondents. The findings revealed that teachers generally held positive perceptions of the effectiveness of summative assessments, with high scores in areas like clear grading criteria, fair and equitable assessments, and effective communication of results. Teachers also demonstrated a strong commitment to continuous improvement, collaboration with colleagues, and exploration of diverse assessment strategies. However, some areas for potential improvement were identified, such as receptiveness to student feedback and heightened awareness of potential biases in assessment design. The study provides valuable insights for educators, policymakers, and stakeholders to enhance summative assessment practices and support teachers in developing effective assessment literacy and skills.



References:

  1. Alexander, R. (2004). Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education. Cambridge Journal of Education,  34(1), 7-33
  2. Alexander, R. (2008) Essays on Pedagogy. London: Routledge.
  3. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and  Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
  4. Bob Uttl et al. (2017). Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are  not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation, Volume 54, Pages 22-42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007.
  5. Brookhart, Susan M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Alexandria, Virginia USA: ASCD Centra, J.A. Will Teachers Receive Higher Student Evaluations by Giving Higher Grades and Less Course Work?. Research in 
  6. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy  Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/122.311.
  7. Downing, S. M. (2006). Twelve Steps for Effective Test Development. In S. M. Downing & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test  development (pp. 3–25). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  8. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. Bergman, Trans.). New York, NY: Continuum.
  9. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.  https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  10. Higher Education 44, 495–518 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025492407752
  11. Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and  job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019237
  12. Klenowski, Val. (2009). Assessment for Learning revisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy  & Practice. 16. 10.1080/09695940903319646.
  13. Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K.-T. (2003). Big-Fish—Little-Pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the  negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58(5), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003- 066X.58.5.364
  14. McMillan, J. (2007). Formative classroom assessment: Theory into practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  15. Seipp, B. (1991). Anxiety and academic performance: A meta-analysis of findings. Anxiety Research, 4(1), 27–41.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08917779108248762
  16. Simon, B. (1981). Why no pedagogy in England? In B. Simon & W. Taylor (Eds.), Educationin the eighties: The central issues (pp.  124-145). London, UK: Batsford.
  17. Stenhouse, L. (1985). Research as a basis for teaching. London, UK: Heinemann.
  18. Stiggins, Rick. (2008). Assessment FOR Learning, the Achievement Gap, and Truly Effective Schools. VanTassel-Baska, Joyce & Brown, Elissa. (2021). An Analysis of Gifted Education Curriculum Models. 10.4324/9781003236603-7.
  19. W. James Popham (2009) Assessment Literacy for Teachers: Faddish or Fundamental?, Theory Into Practice, 48:1, 4-11, DOI:  10.1080/00405840802577536
  20. Watkins, P. & Mortimore, P. (1999) Pedagogy: What do we know? Ch.1, pps. 1-19 in Mortimore, P. (ed.) (1999) Understanding  pedagogy and its impact on learning. London: Paul Chapman.
  21. Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating Assessment with Learning. What Will It Take to Make It Work? In C. A. Dwyer  (Ed.), The Future of Assessment (pp. 53-82).New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315086545-3
  22. Wiliam, Dylan. (2010). The role of formative assessment in effective learning environments. 10.1787/9789264086487-8-en.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic