B.ed Study Report

To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative
Assessment on Learning of Students at

Secondary Level
Tehmina Aziz
BJ654020
ALLAMA IQBAL OPEN UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD

May 15th, 2018
s)
To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning
of Students at Secondary Level
By
Tehmina Aziz
BJ654020
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for B.Ed (1.5 Years) Program in
Teacher Education at Department of Education
Faculty of Education
Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad
May 2018
Tehmina Aziz, 2018
Faculty of Education
Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad
APPROVAL FORM
The research project attached here to, titled To Determined Effectiveness of Formative
Assessment on Learning of Students at Secondary Level proposed and submitted by Tehmina Aziz
Roll No. BJ654020 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for degree of B.Ed. (1.5 Years) in Teacher
Education.
Supervisor: Dr. Muhammad Basharat
Evaluator: ------------------------------------
Dated: ----------------------------------------
ii
DECLARATION
I Tehmina Aziz Daughter / Son of Muhammad Aziz Roll No. BJ654020 Registration #
16PRI13327 . A student of B.Ed. (1.5 year) program in teacher education at Allama Iqbal
Open University , Islamabad hereby solemnly declare that the research project entitled
“To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning of Students at Secondary
Level” submitted by me in partial fulfillment of B.Ed. (1.5 years) program, is my original work, and
has not been submitted or published earlier. It also solemnly declares that it shall not in future, be
submitted by me for obtaining any other degree from this or any other university and institution.
I also understand that if any evidence of plagiarism is found in m thesis at any stage, even after the
award of a degree, the work may be cancelled, and the degree revoked.
Date: ---------------------------- ---------------------------------

Tehmina Aziz
iii
Research Project Submission
Approval Form
Research project entitled To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning of

Students at Secondary Level submitted by Tehmina Aziz, Roll no. BJ654020, Registration no.
16PRI13327, program 1.5 years has been read by me and has be found to be satisfactory regarding its quality,
content, language, format, citation, style and consistency and thus, fulfill the qualitative requirements of this
study. It is ready for submission to Allama Iqbal Open University for evaluation.
Dr. Muhammad Basharat

Date: ----------------------
---------------------------------
iv
ABSTRACT
Several research studies have been conducted with the idea of formative evaluation used in teaching.
In this study, I continue to review the idea of formative evaluation and additionally address the
numerous questions linked with the same. Particularly this study is to examine the evaluation and its
relation to academic learning with identification of certain problems. Development of evaluation tasks
to improve many instructional methods for learning is needed. This is a small-scale study, where
quantitative approach was used. Data from students of two different schools were collected through
questionnaires. A structured questionnaire was distributed to 128 secondary class students. Response
rate was 97%. There were ten questions regarding the effectiveness of formative assessment in learning
while four were regarding its impact on self-assessment of students. It was found out that majority of
the students (60%) were satisfied with placement of formative assessments in each module while 76.3%
agreed that assessment was arranged regularly, though 22% disagreed with assessment plan. About 64
% students agreed that it facilitates learning process and motivates students to learn more. On the other
hand, only 10% students disagreed with its role in learning. The findings were analyzed, and the results
indicate that formative assessment plays a significant role in self-assessment and is also effective in
learning of students.
Key words: formative assessment, Instructional methods, Academic learning, Evaluation tasks,
Quantitative approach, Self-assessment
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1
1.1 Statement of Problem .........................................................................................6
1.2 Research Questions .............................................................................................7
1.3 Objectives of the Study .......................................................................................7
1.4 Hypothesis ...........................................................................................................7
1.5 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................7
1.6 Type of Research Study ......................................................................................7
1.7 Population ............................................................................................................8
1.8 Delimitation of the Study ....................................................................................8
1.9 Sample .................................................................................................................8
1.10 Sampling Technique ..........................................................................................8
1.11 Research Instrument ..........................................................................................8
1.12 Validity of the Tool ...........................................................................................8
1.13 Pilot Testing ......................................................................................................8
1.14 Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................9
2. LITERATURE REVIEW .....................................................................................10
2.1 Explaining variables .........................................................................................10
2.1.1 Assessment and Learning ...........................................................................10
2.1.2 Common Standards for Formative Assessment .........................................11
2.1.3 Evaluation ..................................................................................................11
2.2 Theoretical Framework ....................................................................................12
2.2.1 Evaluation structure .......................................................................................12
2.2.2 Summative and Formative evaluation .......................................................13
2.2.3 The Feed Informs Future Students ................................................................14
2.3 Result of Previous Research ..............................................................................14
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .........................................................................16
3.1 Research Design ................................................................................................16
3.2 Population ..........................................................................................................16
3.3 Sample ...............................................................................................................16
vi
3.4 Study Participants ............................................................................................17
3.5 Sampling Technique ........................................................................................17
3.6 Research Instrument.........................................................................................17
3.7 Validity of the Tool ..........................................................................................17
3.8 Design and procedure ......................................................................................18
3.9 Data Analysis ...................................................................................................18
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ..................................................20
4.1 Descriptive Statistics .........................................................................................21
4.1.1 Analysis of student’s response ....................................................................21
4.2 Inferential Statistics....................................................................................50
5. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....61
5.1 Summary ...........................................................................................................61
5.2 Findings .............................................................................................................61
5.2.1 Regularity in Practice .................................................................................61
5.2.2 Role in Learning ........................................................................................62
5.2.3 Role in Scoring and Critical Thinking .......................................................62
5.2.4 Role in self-assessment ..............................................................................62
5.3 Discussion .........................................................................................................63
5.4 Conclusion .........................................................................................................64
5.5 Recommendations .............................................................................................64
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................66
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Name Page No.
Table 4. 1 Students Perception About Role of Formative Assessment to 22
Concentrate them Into The Class
Table 4. 2 Students perspective about role of formative assessment as it 24
is Supportive for Better Learning
Table 4. 3 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in 26
High Grade Scoring
Table 4. 4 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment as It 28
Pushes Them to Think Critically
Table 4. 5 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment as It 30
Fulfills Learning Gaps
Encouraging Them to Learn More
Table 4. 7 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment Is 34
Valid and Helpful in All Subjects
Table 4. 8 Students perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in 36
Making Class Room Environment Conducive for Learning
Table 4. 9 Students Perception About Practice of Formative Assessment 38
on Regular Basis
viii
Making Lesson Interactive
Judging Their Work
Table 4. 12 Students Perceptive About Role of Formative Assessment Is 44
Supportive for Judging How Well They Did Their Work
Table 4. 13 Students Perceptive About Role of Formative Assessment in 46
Diagnosing Where They Are Confused
Table 4. 14 Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in 48
clearing their Concepts
Table 4. 15 Mean difference and t-value for Private school Students on Role of Formative 50
Assessment in concentration in class subscale (N=122)
Assessment in High Grade Scoring subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Learning subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Critical Thinking subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Fulfilling Learning Gaps subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Encouragement for Learning in the class subscale (N=122)
ix
Table 4. 21 Mean difference and t-value for Private school Students on Validity of Formative 56
Assessment in All Subjects on subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Conducive Learning Environment subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Interactive Lesson subscale (N=122)
Assessment in Judgement of Work in class subscale (N=122)
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page No.
4. 1 Students perspective about formative assessment as it helps them to 32
concentrate in the class
4. 2 Students perspective about formative assessment as it is supportive for 34
better learning
4. 3 Students perspective about formative assessment as it helps in high grade scoring 27
4. 4 Students perspection about formative assessment as it pushes them to think 38
critically
4. 5 Students perception about role of formative assessment as it fulfills 40
learning gaps in the students
4. 6 Students perception about role of formative assessment in encouraging them 42
to learn more
4. 7 Students perception about role of formative assessment is valid and helpful 44
in all subjects
4. 8 Students perception about role of formative assessment in making 46
classroom environment conducive for learning
4. 9 Students perception about formative assessment should be practiced on regular basis 39
xi
4. 10 Students Perception About Role of Formative Assessment in Making 50
Lesson Interactive
4. 11 Students perspective about role of formative assessment in judging their work 43
4. 12 Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in helping them to 54
judge how well they did their work
4. 13 Students perspective about formative assessment role in clearing their concepts 47
4. 14 Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in clearing their concepts 49
xii
LIST OF APPEDICES
Appendix Page No.
Appendix A 70
xiii
Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning of Students 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Assessment is described as "an organized process to collect data about student's success," an
integral component of teaching (Dhindsa, Omar, & Waldrip, 2007). As Struyven, Dochy, and Janssens
(2005) say, the impact of evaluation is significantly observable on the performance of students. The
way of learning of students determines that they consider classroom interpretation and test (Struyven
et al., 2005). Recently studies advocate for students for the process of evaluation tools, as Falchikove
(2004), peer evaluation involves more value for the student involved learning process. Examining
student ideas, encourages students to develop an authentic and realistic evaluation perspective that "in
the deeper learning of the reward and fate rather than measuring the fate". In this way, to support this
concept, the study shows that students should be responsible for their study, including the evaluation
of ideas. Style in education is the 20th Century (Dhindsa, Omar, and Waldrip 2007) product.
Along with other authors, Pellegrino and Goldman (2008), and Shepard (2000) suggest ways that
classroom evaluation can increase learning, such as materials and diagnostic features, diagnosis results,
and evaluation integration as a part of course in teacher education programs. Because evaluation affects
the student's point of view for significant learning, parameters of evaluation, "student examination to
assess for learning of students" (Birenbaum & Feidman, 1998) have done. Students need to learn about
the point of view of the current evaluation and they are expected to know after finishing their teachings
(Gulikers et al., 2006). The question is whether students are taught so that they enjoy an experiment or
are taught to produce meaning that will last long.
According to Cavangah, Waldrip, Romanoski, and Dorman (2005), although teachers and
administrators generally choose diagnosis forms and tasks, the purpose of diagnosis is to be included
in different stakeholders, including students, teachers, parents, schools and policy makers. Goodrum,
Hackling, and Rennie (2001) say "An evaluation is an important part of education and learning process
and this means that teachers use a very narrow range of evaluation strategies and practice". However,
there is little evidence that the teacher used formative evaluation in the planning and teaching
(Goodrum et al., 2005).
Goodrum et al. (2005) states that, ideally, evaluation "increase learning, provides student
feedback on student development, self-esteem and promotes expertise in assessment". In addition, they
argue that effective learning is when there is compatibility between reading, evaluation and results.
Therefore, because of its close relationship, instructions and learning results are important in learning
and evaluation. These evaluation features make the foundation of current study included in the
classroom evaluation student's concept. After that, teachers can analyze their evaluation process and
learn as students, as far as their classroom evaluation.
Although there is little evidence that students should be involved in making decisions about the
evaluation work, pre-study encouraged this argument: for example, in Fisher, Waldrip and Dorman
(2005) classroom evaluation recommend to examine student involvement. Student involvement in the
classroom evaluation process has no experienced research that demonstrates its benefits or losses. Due
to such lack of research, it has been suggested that it can be applied instead of two strategies: 1)
Examine research about evaluation of teachers use 2) Evaluation ask students about ideas.
The classroom will help students discover the views of students and teachers about the role of
evaluation and improving the study of the student. One will create a foundation and logic for
integrating the teachers 'interests in their classrooms, through which they can learn more and how
classroom evaluation students' views affect their learning (Cavanagh et al., 2005).
Although diagnostic evaluation interpretations vary widely, according to Wiliam and Thompson
(2008), "formative evaluation is used to provide information on potential performance of students"
and "to describe students’ opinions to give the way that they are right.” According to Wiggins and
McTighe (2007), structural diagnosis, instead of separate activity, as part of the instruction during the
teaching. It also includes informal and informal formats that contain unregistered questions, oral
questions, self-reflections, peer opinions, thinkers, etc.
There is a difference between 9 evaluations that defines the process, importance of evaluation for
learning, which describes the evaluation or product nature (Wiliam & Black 1998; Wiliam &
Thompson, 2008).). Similarly, other researchers agree that the evolution of basic features is that it
affects the quality of teaching and learning, and it covers students in a self-learning environment
(Chappuis & Stiggins, 2004).
Authors have been mentioned in literature that, many students have misunderstood that they are
not quite talented to perform a specific task, such as picture drawings or an analytical memo (Wiggins
& McTighe, 2007). Seeing this scene, a teacher is responsible for finding ways to recognize and face
this wrong assumption. Portfolio development is not a new concept of education history
According to Wiliam and Thompson (2008), students gather the definitive examples of work that
show the level of effort, development and understanding, at that time set the main features of the
portfolio. However, what has changed since this time, the shape and content, the portfolios, and the
meaning is reasonable. Wiggins and McTighe (2007) said that "snapshot" of students at the same time,
according to the traditional evolution of the evaluation, work like a photo album containing various
pictures taken on different goals are there.
Self-diagnosis for learning and measurement is a valuable source. For example, when students are
engaged in reviewing their work, they try to know the features of high quality performance, and they
experience volunteer practices to implement these standards (Herrera et al., 2007).
However, Black and Wiliam (1998) are concerned about the evaluation or assessment of the
student's preparation. They suggest that when a student got a clear picture of the results or goals, “They
become more efficient as learners: their own evaluation should be objectionable to their teachers and
each other.” The question and answer concept is a long history in the classroom evaluation area;
however, the change in open-ended formats is often more than questions, what has changed.
Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, and Wiliam (2003) teachers are encouraged to not only create
more effective questions but also facilitate an environment where students should think analytically
and respond to their questions. Provide you an answer. The introduction has changed in the way,
“Some people explain friction versus slippers. Do you agree or not? 'Was changed rapidly' as some of
the people spread out to explain friction as what do you think?”
In addition, other authors argued that useful questions "Common misconceptions, need to be
challenged," which challenges "to create conflicts" in which students respond to each other from
different angles. They are encouraged to think about an idea. To promote more creative questions, they
have encouraged classroom teachers to manage their questions and time "so that the student thinks,
response; and facilitate "backup" questions or activities to understand students (Black et al., 2003).
Herrera et al. (2007) said that if teachers know many ways that this assessment may be less and
if structural diagnosis can be quantified or measured by information. Some ways to get this
representation is using a robotics, checklist and questionnaire. Wiggins and McTighe (2007) include a
"Quality-based diagnostic tool, a fixed measurement scale (such as four score points) and descriptions
for each score point" explain a vein as ". Is used to include students in their learning details. The books
are used to include students in their own learning details. The subjects based on the student needs can
be presented, the pre-school starts with the picture style and develops in the more advanced formats.
Helpers can reorganize using question names and check lists, and they provide information about the
students' knowledge and what they do in the classroom (Herrera et al., 2007).
As a diagnosis test, the diagnostic assessment is a formal and informal evaluation process that is
done to improve the learning process by teachers. Teaching and learning activities to increase student
acquisition. It includes a classic qualification for both students and teachers focused on the mind of
classical performance and content (Wiggins and McTighe, 2007).
The effect of creative evaluation is the academic success of pre-graduate students (Pena et al.,
2009) and the benefits of medical students (Velan et al., 2008) were estimated and it showed that it
was an effective diagnostic tool. The data published on the effectiveness of formative evaluation is
not enough (Jain et al., 2012). Crosssecondary studies show that formative evaluation impacts on
optional evaluation (Das et al., 2017).
Theoretical diagnosis is considered as a component and one of the factors that have strong impact
on teaching and learning (Hattie, 2009). A study shows that these policies are being emphasized,
trusted by teachers and the hope to build new cultures of educational institutions (Crisp, 2007).
As feedback, the term learning Information is intended to improve thinking or behavior (Shute,
2008). In a recent article, it has been emphasized that the analysis of analytical information about
student diagnostics and analysis of its active use play role in more learning (Sadler, 2010).
The idea is already considered as a necessary condition for evaluation and its active use
(Ramaprasad, 1983). It was claimed that if the students not use the feedback they are unable to produce
better work, if they are not the respondents, they will not know that it has been effective (Boud, 2000).
Practice in a classroom is largely used to make decisions about the student's success that is used
by evidence, interpretation, and teacher, colleagues, to decide about the next step in the instruction,
for better basis, due to the presence of those who identified them. There are many benefits to the
teachers because they can determine how far the lesson objective is achieved and requires minor
modifications or significant changes. Some benefits for students are encouraged to learn and learn
themselves.
These researches inspired the researcher to conduct a research study to evaluate effectiveness of
formative assessment upon students at secondary level.
1.1 Statement of Problem
Formative assessment, in which the assessment is integrated within instruction and aimed at
increasing learning, can replace summative assessment in many situations. As due to pressure of
completion of syllabus, teachers do not mainly focus on formative assessment of students at level.
Formative assessment can be proved as better tool for assessment of learning and better understanding
of students after delivery of lesson. This can be used to improve or modify strategy of lesson delivery.
The primary aim of this study is to explore teacher’s perceptions of classroom assessment and
their expectations about its effect on student’s learning. A secondary purpose is to explore the student’s
perceptions about its effect on self-assessment.

“To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning of Students at Secondary
Level.”
1.2 Research Questions
Following were questions of my research project:
• Does formative assessment effective in student learning?
• How formative assessment play role in self-assessment of students?
• How feedback from students can be way for improvement of teaching?
1.3 Objectives of the Study
• To assess the effectiveness of formative assessment on learning of students.
• To examine the impact of formative assessment on self-assessment of students.
1.4 Hypothesis
• Ho- There is no effect of formative assessment on learning of students.
• Ho-There is no significant impact of formative assessment on self-assessment of students.
1.5 Significance of the Study
The proposed research project will be significant:
• For teachers in planning the effective formative assessment tools.
• Teachers will be able to modify their instructions for formative assessment.
• This will have great impact on society as effectiveness of teaching methodology can be
assessed at the spot rather at the end of academic session through summative assessment.
• As formative assessment plays role in self-assessment of students so students can consult
teacher and can clarify their concept or query at the spot.
1.6 Type of Research Study
It is a descriptive research study. Questionnaire was used as research tool.

1.7 Population
Population of this project was students of secondary schools located in Rawalpindi.
1.8 Delimitation of the Study
Due to limited time study was delimited to private secondary schools located in area Misrial road
Rawalpindi.
1.9 Sample
Two schools were targeted for collecting data.
• Army Public School SCO
• Quality school
1.10 Sampling Technique
Convenient sampling technique was used.
1.11 Research Instrument
Likert scale questionnaire for students was designed to collect data.
1.12 Validity of the Tool
Validity of tool was assessed by the two experts in relevant field.
1.13 Pilot Testing
After developing research tool, pilot study was conducted in one school which is not included in
sample.
1.14 Statistical Analysis
For statistical analysis of data following statistical techniques was used:
a) Percentage
b) Standard deviation
c) Mean
d) t-test
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This section will discuss the issues that have been raised on the methods of evaluation and
the students in literature as well as the classroom assessment point of view. The main topics
involved in this section
• Student Learning Assessment: Development and Request for evaluation questions
• Behavior towards the evaluation form
• Partner Evaluation form (Traditional vs. Alternative Evaluation)
• performance-based evaluation
In addition, student participation in the process of critical concepts, such as the authenticity
of evaluation and formative evaluation will be discussed.
2.1 Explaining variables
2.1.1 Assessment and Learning

Koul, Fisher and Earnest (1998) investigated the relationship between their evaluation work,
classroom learning environment, the influence of self-determination. Historically and

traditionally, diagnostic methods have been used as accountability measures (Stiggins, 2006). In
the 1990s, evaluation was often offered to rebuild schools (Burke, 1999). The movement of using
student performance data is increasing. Decisions on evaluation, especially with high stock
evaluation, political movements or decisions, must be resumed and necessary for change
(Broadfoot & Black, 2004; Reeves, 2007). Quality success and school accountability is being
measured through the use of various types of evaluation (Stiggins, 2002).
2.1.2 Common Standards for Formative Assessment
In 2010, the release of Common-core State Standards made an opportunity to move towards
the National Curriculum (Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2011). Chappuis (2014) suggested
that strict evaluation will be sought in adopting the standard of joint quality and the next
generation quality. The quality is clear that what should students know and what to do. The federal
government has helped both develop and implement financial and material improvements (Porter
et al., 2011).
Combined core standards are not the only purpose to change old standards for this purpose,
but rather a new emphasis, which should be taught by teachers (McTighe &
Wiggins, 2013).
2.1.3 Evaluation
The purpose of diagnosis runs the diagnosis design (Stiggins, 2008). Teachers evaluate for
many purposes, including assessment of sects, curriculum assessments, student learning
surveillance, effective approaches to programs or interventions, determining priority for teaching,
and grade assignment. The power to use diagnosis as an instrument to improve learning is rooted
in the relationship between a diagnostic quality and effective use (Stiggins, 2006).
Evaluation is an essential and incredible component of education and education (Tomlinson,
2014). The purpose of evaluation is to submit information, to make decisions regarding student
learning. Three basic types of evaluation are formative and summative (McTighe & O’Connor,
2005). However, anyone can measure or capture the type of evaluation that students know and
can succeed in doing (Tovani, 2011, 2014b).
2.2 Theoretical Framework

2.2.1 Evaluation structure
Without kind and quality, evaluation methods affect the student's results. Despite the
importance of accountability and evaluation in today's education, all teachers have not received
regular training in the design or analysis of evaluation (DeLuca & Bellera, 2013; Guskey, 2003;
Mertler, 2004). Nervous teachers report that they are not ready to determine the student's learning,
because there is less diagnostic literacy skills (Campbell
& Evans, 2000; Mertler, 2004).
Need to avoid the possible sources of prejudice and distortion. In addition, teachers should
have any evaluation design or capabilities of students who can prevent students from showing
their education. A challenge in need of sound design because teachers need proper training in
evaluation development. The evaluation method needs to be met with the student
needs.Depending on whether the student needs to show knowledge,skills or productivity, the
teacher needs to choose the appropriate evaluation method (for example,Selected Answers,
Broad Writing, Performance Determination, Personal Communication) (Stiggins, Arter,
Chappuis, Chappuis, & the Educational Testing Service, 2006).

2.2.2 Summative and Formative evaluation
There are some consensuses in the literature regarding a purpose, or evaluation (Heritage,
2007; Marzano, 2010a; Popham, 2005; Stiggens, 2002). Popham (2008) has suggested that
evaluation is very difficult. Initially, Black and Wiliam (2003) suggested that not apply to the
type of evaluation, but evaluation function is most important. Evaluation informs teachers and
students about the ability to learn; reviewing the overall educational performance of a student,
providing the final score or grade (Chappuis, 2015; Sadler, 1989). Curriculum determined at the
end of an educational cycle, such as final examination or curriculum assessment (Chappuis, 2015;
Heritage, 2010; Marzano, 2010b).
Formative evaluation is continuing to collect learning evidence for the purpose of directing
instruction to enhance student learning through knowledge and skills (Brookhart, 2004; Chappuis,
2015; Heritage, 2010). Moderate evaluation prevents the natural flow of learning; In other words,
instruction prevents an assessment (Marzano, 2010b). When a teacher announced that there is a
quiz on friday, it is a typical form of a traditional effectiveness. On the contrary, an incredible
evaluation goes with learning flow; sometimes students do not realize that they are being set
(Marzano, 2010b).
Incredible evaluation includes activity such as graphic organizers, exit slides, journals,
autocomplete, vote cards, four corners and learning tracts. This type of assessment occurs when
the teacher testifies to the student who he or she knows (Erkens, 2012; Marzano, 2010a). In 1967,
Scriven introduced conditions for evaluation, curriculum and teaching. He described a process to
assess the quality of course curriculum using both types of evaluation. During the 1960s, Bloom
tried to change the structural and sympathy diagnosis with creative and sympathy evaluation (Dun
and Molivone, 2009; Marzano, 2010a; Popham, 2008).

According to Marzano (2010a), some researchers were interested in implementing formative
/ summative evaluation. An alternative diagnosis can be used for formatting purposes and an
evaluation can be determined by the (Chappuis, 2015; Erkens, 2012).
Early evaluation ultimately evaluates the learning process that is conducted continuously in
the process of learning; it is a source of learning support (Burke, 1999; Nolen, 2011).
2.2.3 The Feed Informs Future Students
Teachers can use evaluation (informal or formal) to modify process and enhance learning.
What are they doing during the feedback step while informing students? This is the reaction of
students to their work and is directly related to learning objectives (Fisher & Frey, 2009). . The
system works together with three sections so that the students use the information provided by
the teacher to improve their educational performance (Brookhart, 2008; Fisher & Frey, 2009).
There are four levels that are opinion, action, self-determination and self-established Hattie
and Timperley (2007). The four are the most effective processes and self-regulation, while most
of the two types of work are self-employed (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). In the evaluation process,
students know what they have understood and where they have mistaken. In addition, students
are provided their strategies or instructions to help them understand their quality. It also affects
when teachers and teachers asked questions (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
2.3 Result of Previous Research
According to Jordan (2011), the quick recovery of feedback was the most commonly known
feature of computerized evaluation. There is a challenge to evaluation to give accurate and timely
feedback. With the intention of making the effective evaluation (Chappuis, 2014) clear
educational goals set at the beginning of the lesson (Tomolin, 2014) .According to Chappuis
(2015), feedback can be identified as an opinion or intervention.
There is no impression that fits in every model; students can interpret the same opinion in
different ways (Hattie & Jaeger, 1998). In addition, the feedback can be made and heard when
feedback is provided publicly or private (Nolen, 2011). Kluger & Denisi 1996) suggested four
ways to give students feedback: increase effort, leave or stop learning, reduce expectations to
reject responses. Students can be provided feedback for different purposes throughout the school
learning throughout the year and support is provided at different levels. Effects and learning
depend on each other (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design

A quantitative research study was conducted to collect data.
3.2 Population
Population of this project was teachers and students of secondary schools located in
tehsil Rawalpindi. Due to limited time study was delimited to secondary schools located in
area of Misrial road Rawalpindi.
3.3 Sample
Two schools i.e. Army Public School SCO and Quality school were targeted for
collecting quantitative data. Eight secondary level classes were purposefully selected
representing Science and Arts Group. Among the eight classes, four classes included 9th
grade students and other four included 10th grade students. In total 128 students participated
in this study. The number of participants who returned the questionnaires was 128; however,
six of them were not marked.

3.4 Study Participants
Table 3. 1
Study Participants
Level 9th grade students 10th grade students
Strength 73 55
Total= 128
3.5 Sampling Technique

Simple random sampling technique was used. Consent of participants was taken before
distribution of questionnaires.
3.6 Research Instrument

A descriptive research study was conducted and one close-ended questionnaires for students
was used as a tool to collect data.
3.7 Validity of the Tool

After developing research tool, pilot study was conducted in one school which is not included
in sample. To validate questionnaire for students, a group of ten students (Five 9th grade and five
10th grade students) were asked to fill the questionnaire as a pilot test. As they completed the
questionnaire, they were asked some questions, making sure they understood the items. The
responses of the pilot test group seemed that they understood the questions, and they had no
difficulty in interpreting each item.

As they completed the questionnaire, their response regarding understanding of
questionnaire was noted and some modifications were made in the tool. After that the validity
of the tool was also assessed by two experts in the relevant field.
3.8 Design and procedure

Data from two schools were collected within three weeks: April 10, 2018 to April 30,
2018. Principal and teachers of both schools were consulted and asked for cooperation. Both
institutions contributed greatly in terms of permitting the study to be held in the institution
and provided facilities, such as a comfortable environment to conduct study. In addition,
institutional permission was given to administer the questionnaire during instruction hours.
For example, 7th and 8th class students, and teachers were informed 1-2 days before the
instrument was administered so that those who were interested were aware and willing to
participate.
In addition, the investigator trained instructors about the questionnaire for those in
whose classes the questionnaire was to be administered. Their engagement was because they
were assisting the investigator administering the questionnaire and having some background
information about the topic and its purpose could help answer some students’ questions;
students had an equal opportunity to rate the questionnaire, too. Anonymity of the students
was confirmed by the investigator so that they felt no threat from their teachers.
3.9 Data Analysis

For statistical analysis of data following statistical techniques were used:
a) Percentage
b) Standard deviation
c) Mean
d) t-test
Quantitative data was analyzed separately given different nature of the data; however,
after analysis the data were integrated to support themes and various points. The quantitative
data, from questionnaires for students and teachers, items were analyzed using the SPSS
program. A sum of 100 respondents from both schools filled the Student’s Perceptions of
Assessment Questionnaire. However; six respondents’ responses were dropped from the
study for two reasons: first, they filled less than half of the items in the questionnaire; second,
the items that they filled were not the major topics that could have an impact on the study.
Therefore, a total of 122 participants responses were analyzed for the sake of this study.
Overall item mean values were averaged over the respondents to compute an average overall
item mean value.

CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
This chapter focuses on the respondent’s answers in terms of formative assessment
practices in their respective institutions. The quantitative section mainly shows an overall
perception of students and teachers about formative assessment including both descriptive and
inferential analyses. This section addresses the themes that emerged from respondent’s responses
that relate to the research questions and the assumptions that were made at the beginning of the
study. For the sake of analysis, both student’s and the teacher’s responses are integrated in relation
to specific topic. The research questions are:
• Does formative assessment effective in student learning?
• How formative assessment play role in self-assessment of students?
• How feedback from students can be way for improvement of teaching?

4.1 Descriptive Statistics

4.1.1 Analysis of student’s response
Initially, the data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to demonstrate an overall perception
of students to the five scale (14 items) assessment questionnaire. The analysis shows that in all
fourteen questions asked in questionnaire, most of response was in favor of formative assessment as
its role in better learning. There were two objectives of study, first 10 questions in questionnaire were
designed to for first objective and remaining four for second objective. The five scales included:
Strongly agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree and Strongly Disagree.

Table 4. 1
Students Perception About Role of Formative Assessment to Concentrate them Into The Class
Frequency Percent
Neutral 20 16.4
Agree
56 45.9
Strongly Agree 46 37.7
Total 122 100.0
Whether formative assessment plays role in involvement of students in the class lesson or not,
student’s response showed that formative assessment helps them to better concentrate in the class
with cumulative percentage 67, M=4.2 and SD=0.7 (see figure 4.1). 46% students agreed that it
helps them to concentrate in the class and 0% disagreed it while 16.4% responded neutral (see
table 4.1). Mean 4.2 transparently indicates that formative assessment plays an active role to keep
students engaged in classroom activities. A large portion of participants have provided positive
response over this statement.

Figure 4. 1: Students perspective about formative assessment as it helps them to concentrate in the
class
Table 4. 2
Students perspective about role of formative assessment as it is Supportive for Better Learning
Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 6 4.9

Disagree 5 4.1
Neutral 29 23.8
Agree 35 28.7
Total 122 100.0
Students with cumulative percent 47, M=3.9 and SD=1 strongly agreed that it supports in better
learning (See figure 4.3). 38.5% students strongly agreed that it is supportive for better learning (see
table 4.3). As students become engaged in classroom activities and lesson so that lesson objectives can
be achieved. Students agreed that its very helpful in better learning process. 4% students disagreed this
statement. They may have contradiction over it.

Figure 4. 2: Students perspective about formative assessment as it is supportive for better learning
Table 4. 3
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in High Grade Scoring
Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 1 .8
Disagree
10 8.2
Neutral 29 23.8
Agree 35 28.7
Total 122 100.0
Students with M=3.96 and SD=1 strongly agreed that formative assessment helps in high grade
scoring (see figure 4.3) and 38% students agreed that while 8% disagreed (see table 4.3). Most of
students believe that it helps in better grade scoring. As high grade score has become main objective
of teaching and learning process.

Figure 4. 3: Students perspective about formative assessment as it helps in high grade

scoring
Table 4. 4
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment as It Pushes Them to Think Critically
Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 1 .8
Disagree 11 9.0
Neutral 29 23.8
Agree 33 27.0
Total 122 100.0
48% students with M=3.9 and SD =1 were strongly agreed that it pushes them to think critically
(see figure 4.4). 39% students agreed and 9% disagreed upon its role in pushing them to think
critically.
Figure 4. 4: Students perspection about formative assessment as it pushes them to think critically
Table 4. 5
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment as It Fulfills Learning Gaps
Frequency Percent
Disagree
4 3.3
Neutral
22 18.0
Agree
31 25.4
Total 122 100.0
70% students with M=4.2 and SD= 0.8 were strongly agreed on that it fulfills learning gaps in
students (see figure 4.5). 53% students strongly agreed that it helps in fulfilling learning gaps in
students (see table 4.5). On basis of high mean 4.2 it is transparent that students are clear about role of
formative assessment in learning of students and they agree about its role in it.
Figure 4. 5: Students perception about role of formative assessment as it fulfills learning gaps in the
students
Table 4. 6
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in Encouraging Them to Learn More
Frequency Percent
Disagree 4 3.3
Agree
31 25.4
Total
122 100.0
Students with M= 4 and SD= 0.6 were strongly agreed on that it encourages me to learn more
(see figure 4.6). 71% students strongly agreed that it encourages them to learn more while 4%
disagreed that (See table 4.6). This high mean indicates that formative assessment role in better
learning and arousal or urge to learn more in students.

Figure 4. 6: Students perception about role of formative assessment in encouraging them to learn
more
Table 4. 7
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment Is Valid and Helpful in All Subjects
Frequency Percent
Disagree 6 4.9
Neutral 15 12.3
Agree
35 28.7
Total 122 100.0
Students with M=4 and SD= 0.5 were strongly agreed on that it is valid and helpful in all subjects
(see figure 4.7). 54% students agreed the statement while 12 % remained neutral and 6% disagreed (see
figure 4.7). These results confirm that formative assessment is not limited to certain subjects like
Mathematics etc. it is also effective in all subjects .

Figure 4. 7: Students perception about role of formative assessment is valid and helpful in all subjects
Table 4. 8
Students perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in Making Class Room Environment
Conducive for Learning
Frequency Percent
Disagree 9 7.4
Neutral 28 23.0
Agree 32 26.2
Total 122 100.0
Students with M=4 and SD =0 were strongly agreed that it makes classroom environment
conducive for learning (see figure 4.8). 43% students strongly agreed while 7% disagreed (see
table 4.8).
Figure 4. 8: Students perception about role of formative assessment in making classroom

environment conducive for learning
Table 4. 9
Students Perception About Practice of Formative Assessment on Regular Basis
Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 8 6.6
Disagree 10 8.2
Neutral 21 17.2
Agree 36 29.5

Total 122 100.0
Students with M=3.8 and SD= 1 were strongly agreed on that it should be practiced on daily
basis (see figure 4.9). 38% students strongly agreed while 6% disagreed (see table 4.9). As
students get involved in classroom activities so it makes environment conducive for learning and
students also want it to be practiced on daily basis.

Figure 4. 9: Students perception about formative assessment should be practiced on regular basis
Table 4. 10
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in Making Lesson Interactive
Frequency Percent
Disagree 4 3.3
Neutral 35 28.7
Agree 34 27.9
Total 122 100.0
Students with M=4.05 and SD =0.9 were strongly agreed that it makes lesson interactive
(see figure 4.10). 40% students strongly agreed while 3% disagreed (see table 4.10). These above
responses were correspondents to objective i.e. to assess the effectiveness of formative assessment
on learning of students. These results assure that formative assessment is effective for learning of
students.
Figure 4. 10: Students Perception About Role of Formative Assessment in Making Lesson Interactive
Next responses were used to evaluate second objective of study i.e. to examine the impact of
formative assessment on self-assessment of students. Results were positive for formative assessment
as responses from students showed that it also plays role in self-assessment of themselves.
Table 4. 11
Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in Judging Their Work
Frequency Percent
Disagree
4 3.3
Neutral
35 28.7
Agree
34 27.9
Total 122 100.0
48% students with M=4 and SD =0.9 were strongly agreed that it is supportive for judging how well
they did their work (see figure 4.11). 40% students strongly agreed while 3% disagreed (see table 4.11).
A great number of students were enthusiastic about the idea of peer and self-assessment. Their interest
was that peer and self-assessment enhanced communication among students and increased learning.
Figure 4. 11: Students perspective about role of formative assessment in judging their work
Table 4. 12
Students Perceptive About Role of Formative Assessment Is Supportive for Judging How Well They
Did Their Work
Frequency Percent
Disagree
4 3.3
Neutral
35 28.7
Agree
35 28.7
Total 122 100.0
Students with M=4 and SD =0.9 were strongly agreed that it helps them in judging their work
,how well they have did that (see figure 4.12). 37% students strongly agreed while 3% disagreed (see
table 4.12).
Figure 4. 12: Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in helping them to judge how
well they did their work
Table 4. 13
Students Perceptive About Role of Formative Assessment in Diagnosing Where They Are Confused
Frequency Percent
Disagree
4 3.3
Neutral
37 30.3
Agree
35 28.7
Total 122 100.0
Students with M=4 and SD =0.9 were strongly agreed that it helps them in diagnosing where there
are confused in lesson (see figure 4.13). 37% students strongly agreed while 3% disagreed (see table
4.13).
Figure 4. 13: Students perspective about formative assessment role in clearing their concepts
Table 4. 14
Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in Clearing their Concepts
Frequency Percent
1 .8
Strongly disagree
Disagree 4 3.3
Neutral 35 28.7
Agree 31 25.4
Total 122 100.0
Students with M= 4 and SD =0.9 were strongly agreed that it encourages them to clear their
concepts (see figure 4.14). 41% students strongly agreed while 3% disagreed (see table 4.14).
Figure 4. 14: Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in clearing their concepts
So above results support that Formative assessment plays role in both learning and self-
assessment of students. Most of students agreed to statements and showed their perspective. Large
mean of about 4.0 showed transparency of agreement in its role in learning.

4.2 Inferential Statistics
4.2.1 Analysis of data
For inferential statistics SPSS one sample t-test was applied to test null hypothesis i.e. there
is no significant relationship between formative assessment and learning. When relation of
formative assessment and increase in concentration of students in the class was tested, results
showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and concentration
(see Table 4.15).
Table 4. 15
Mean difference and t-value for Private school Students on Role of Formative Assessment in
Concentration in the class subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Variable t(121) p Difference LL UL
Concentration -1.203 .000 -.97541 -1.13 -.8150
Table 4.15 indicates that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and
increase in students concentration in the class. Figure shows that formative assessment role is
significant in increasing students concentration in the class ( MD = -0.98, p = 0.00). P ≤ 0.05
was obtained after one sample t-test statistics were applied. This analysis shows that p-value for
the test is 0.00, which is much less than 0.05. So this statistical analysis verifies that formative
assessment role in increasing concentration of students in the class is significant. Thus, the
conclusion of the test is to reject the null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is
significant relationship between them.
When relation of formative assessment and high grade scoring of students in the class was
tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and high
grade scoring (see Table 4.16) .
Table 4. 16
High Grade Scoring subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
High Grade
-1.203 .000 -.17541 -1.13 -.8150
Scoring
high grade scoring among students. Figure shows that formative assessment role is significant in
high grade scoring ( MD = -0.18, p = 0.00). P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-test statistics
were applied. This analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less than 0.05.
So this statistical analysis verifies that formative assessment role in high grade scoring of the
students in the class is significant. Thus, the conclusion of the test is to reject the null hypothesis
and accept alternate that states there is significant relationship between them.
When relation of formative assessment and learning of the students in the class was tested,
results showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and learning
(see Table 4.17) .
Table 4. 17
learning subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Learning -1.073 .000 -.27541 -1.13 -.8150
student learning. Figure shows that formative assessment role is significant in learning of students
( MD = -0.27, p = 0.00). P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-test statistics were applied.
This analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less than 0.05. So this
statistical analysis verifies that formative assessment role in increasing learning of the students in
the class is significant. Thus, the conclusion of the test is to reject the null hypothesis and accept
alternate that states there is significant relationship between them.

When relation of formative assessment and critical thinking of the students in the class was
tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and
critical thinking (see Table 4.18) .
Table 4. 18
Critical Thinking subscale (N=122)
CL 95%
Mean
Critical Thinking -1.119 .000 -.94918 -1.2348 -.8636
critical thinking. Figure shows that formative assessment role is significant in incresing critical
thinking of students ( MD = -0.94, p = 0.00).P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-test
statistics were applied. This analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less
than 0.05. So this statistical analysis verifies that formative assessment role in increase in critical
thinking of students in the class is significant. Thus, the conclusion of the test is to reject the null
hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is significant relationship between them.
.
When relation of formative assessment and fulfilling learning gaps of students in the class
was tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment
and fulfilling learning gaps (see Table 4.19) .
Table 4. 19
fulfilling learning gaps subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Learning Gap -1.203 .000 -.94541 -1.13 -.8150
fulfilling learning gaps. Figure shows that formative assessment role is significant in fulfilling
learning gaps among students ( MD = -0.94, p = 0.00).P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-
test statistics were applied. This analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much
less than 0.05. So this statistical analysis verifies that formative assessment role in fulfilling
learning gaps in students in the class is significant. Thus, the conclusion of the test is to reject the
null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is significant relationship between them.
.
When relation of formative assessment and increase in encouragement to learn of students in
the class was tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative
assessment and this encouragement (see Table 4.20) .
Table 4. 20
Encouragement for learning subscale (N=122)
Mean 95% CL
Variable t (121) p Difference LL UL
Clear concepts -1.107 .000 -.9590 -1.130 -.7875
learning of students. Figure shows that formative assessment role in increasing encouragement to learn
of students in the class is significant ( MD = -0.9, p = 0.00). P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-
test statistics were applied. This analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less
than 0.05. So this statistical analysis verifies that formative assessment role in increasing
encouragement to learn of students in the class is significant. Thus, the conclusion of the test is to reject
the null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is significant relationship between them.
When relation of formative assessment and its validity in all subjects in the class was tested,
results showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and validity
in every subject (see Table 4.21) .
Table 4. 21
Mean difference and t-value for Private school Students on Validity of Formative Assessment in
all Subjects subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Validity -1.203 .000 -.67541 -1.13 -.8150
its validity in all subjects. Figure shows that formative validity in all subjects is significant ( MD
= -0.6, p = 0.00). P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-test statistics were applied. This
analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less than 0.05. So this statistical
analysis verifies that formative assessment is valid irrespective to subject. Thus, the conclusion of
the test is to reject the null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is significant
relationship between them.

When relation of formative assessment and its role in making classroom environment
conducive was tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative
assessment and conducive learning environment (see Table 4.22) .
Table 4. 22
conducive Learning Environment subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Condusive
-1.053 .000 -.87541 -1.13 -.8150
Environment
conducive learning environment. Figure shows that formative assessment role is significant in
conducive learning environment ( MD = -0.87, p = 0.00).P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample
t-test statistics were applied. This analysis shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much
less than 0.05. So this statistical analysis verifies that formative assessment role in making
classroom environment conducive is significant. Thus, the conclusion of the test is to reject the
null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is significant relationship between them.
When relation of formative assessment and its role in making lesson interactive in the class
was tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative assessment and
interactive lesson (see Table 4.23) .
Table 4. 23
Interactive lesson subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Interactive
-1.153 .000 -.94541 -1.13 -.8150
Lesson
interactive lesson. Figure shows that formative role is significant in interactive lesson ( MD = -
0.94, p = 0.00) P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-test statistics were applied. This analysis
shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less than 0.05. So this statistical analysis
verifies that formative assessment role in interactive lesson in the class is significant. Thus, the
conclusion of the test is to reject the null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is
significant relationship between them.

When relation of formative assessment and increase in judgement of work among the students
in the class was tested, results showed that there is significant relationship between formative
assessment and judgement of work (see Table 4.24) .
Table 4. 24
Judgement of Work in the class subscale (N=122)
95% CL
Mean
Judgement of
-1.103 .000 -.98541 -1.13 -.8150
Work
judgement of work. Figure shows that formative role is significant in judgement of work ( MD = -
0.98, p = 0.00). P ≤ 0.05 was obtained after one sample t-test statistics were applied. This analysis
shows that p-value for the test is 0.00, which is much less than 0.05. So this statistical analysis
verifies that formative assessment role is valid in judgement of work. Thus, the conclusion of the
test is to reject the null hypothesis and accept alternate that states there is significant relationship
between them.
Above results supported alternative hypothesis that is formative assessment is effective in learning
of students. When all questions were tested with value 5 then SPSS one sample t-test showed t-value
ranged from ( -5.1) to (-12.2) with degree of freedom 121 and Mean value (-0.9) to (-1.1) as shown in
above tables (see table 4.15- 4.24).
From the above tables, we see that the value of the t-test statistic is less than test value and its
corresponding p-value is 0.000. Since the p-value of the test statistic is less than 0.05, there is sufficient
evidence to conclude that there is a significant association between formative assessment and learning
of students so, null hypothesis is rejected.
As there were two objectives of study, first to check role of formative assessment in learning of
students and second to check its role in self-assessment of students. Above results supported its role in
both learning and self-assessment of students.

CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary
Descriptive statistics and inferential analysis were used to analyze the data collected using
questionnaire. About 122 students participated in data collections who are currently studying at
secondary level. Both male and female students participated in data collection. 14 questions based
questionnaire was designed in which 10 questions were related to objective 1 and remaining to
objective 2. Student’s responses supported alternative hypothesis that supports that formative
assessment is effective in better learning of students. All three research questions were answered
as data showed that it plays important role in learning of students and helps them in self-assessment
of students.
5.2 Findings
Response rate was 90% as 122 filled questionnaires were received. Results were analyzed by
using SPSS 21 for each while compiling the results male to female ratio was ignored.
5.2.1 Regularity in Practice
• Most of the students (60%) were satisfied with placement of assessments in each module
by concerned disciplines. (see table 4.7)
• However, 76.3% agreed that formative assessment was arranged regularly by each
discipline although 22% disagreed with assessment plan. (see table 4.9)
• 40% students strongly agreed that it makes class room environment conducive for
learning. (see table 4.8)
• 43% recommended that it should be practiced on regular bases. (see table 4.8)
5.2.2 Role in Learning
• About 64 % students agreed that it always facilitates learning process and it also motivates
students to learn more. (see table 4.5)
• Descriptive analysis showed that according to student’s perspective formative assessment
helps them to concentrate well in the class. (see table 4.1)
• 46% students strongly agreed on its effectiveness in concentration. 48% students agree
that it is supportive for better learning. (see table 4.6)
• 71% thinks that it is capable to fulfill learning gaps in students. (see table 4.5)
• 54% agreed that it encourages them to learn more. (see table 4.2)
5.2.3 Role in Scoring and Critical Thinking
• 49% students believe that it can help in high grade scoring. (see table 4.3)
• 52% strongly agreed that it pushes them to think critically. (see table 4.4)
• 45% believe it is valid and helpful in all subjects. (see table 4.7)
5.2.4 Role in self-assessment
• 40% agreed that it helps them in judging their work. (see table 4.11)
• 45% believe that it is supportive for judging how well they did their work. (see table 4.12)
• 48% students believe it helps them in diagnosing where they are confused? (see table 4.13)
• 42% strongly agreed it encourages them to clear their concepts. (see table 4.1)
5.3 Discussion
Formative assessment is strongly emphasized over summative assessment in a competency-based
education program. It underscores the development of proficiency through conscious practice. This
concept underlines the need for effective instruction, mentoring, and feedback to the students. The
content, plan, rate and timing of assessment are important factors to establish an assessment policy in
any school. This study was designed to evaluate the process of formative assessment and perception of
students.
Therefore, formative assessment can be used in school education to assess need, progress of
students and to recognize and remediate the suboptimal performance of students. The optimum
placement of formative assessment in each module for each subject with properly arranged effective
constructive feedback to students may provide students to improve their learning.
Regular formative assessment (76.3%) in every module will facilitate learning process. The
students get motivated (63.7%) to become involved in the learning process as it helps to promote their
growth. Regular formative assessment also increases the learning of students (63.7%) and hence the
academic achievements as it guides them to the path of accomplishments. It has a great impact on student
academic success, especially in constant low achievers. Feedback is taken for granted but it helps in
self-correction and improvement. Indirect forms of feedback maintain student motivation and self-
confidence. It should be precise, positive, encouraging, and frequent and substantial.
Successful feedback should clearly specify to the student what is wrong and right. Effective
feedback may be considered as a single most important tool for professional development of students.
The timely feedback was overlooked (33.3%) and was irregularly given (43%) to students.
5.4 Conclusion
Expanded use of formative assessment should be followed by prompt feedback, and stress on
remedial measures to enhance usefulness of formative assessments. regarding its usefulness in
learning. Study revealed that accurate and proper placement of formative assessment is assured in
each module, but improvement in effective feedback with remediation offered is utmost need of
the students. Specified three elements of the learning environment which may affect student's
learning. These elements are lucidity of the goals, aptness of the workload and the usefulness of
the literature. The surface learners recognize these elements negatively. Academic reporting of
achieved competencies has amplified the perplexity and decreased the motivation to learn in
students. The current system of summative assessment encourages the students to find only right
answers but opposes the true learning process. Learning is not merely the collections of right and
wrong facts. Regular formative assessments have a greater impact on academic achievements in
students. It entails the students about their deficiencies in studies. Therefore, proper scheduling of
assessment is important. Clear and suitable assessment criteria shall be given to the students to
judge their own progress during taking the remedial. Formative assessment assists the students to
realize the standards that teachers may expect from them.
5.5 Recommendations
• It should be the integral part of program design. It should be implemented gradually but
consistently. Regular formative assessment feedback given and taken from students may help
in evaluation of curriculum. (see section 5.2.1)

• It has maximum effect on student's learning and future performance. Students must be
informed about formative assessment and reason why it is carried out. They should know how
to receive feedback and improve their weaker areas. (see section 5.2.2)
• It should be taken in routine to check the effectiveness of formative assessment in developing
their concepts, modifying the way of delivery of content. (see section 5.2.3)
• The institution should provide an environment which nurtures the development of faculty and
create awareness about need of formative assessment. Faculty should be trained to construct
creative methods of assessment and to give timely and quality feedback. (see section 5.2.4)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., Sarshar, M., & Newton, R. (2002). Quantitative and qualitative research
in the built environment: application of “mixed” research approach. Work study, 51(1), 17-31.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of
feedback in test-like events. Review of educational research, 61(2), 213-238.
Bebeau, M. J., & Monson, V. (2011). Authorship and publication practices in the social sciences:
Historical reflections on current practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(2), 365-388.
Bebeau, M. J., & Monson, V. (2011). Authorship and publication practices in the social sciences:
Historical reflections on current practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(2), 365-388.
Berg, B. L. (2004). Methods for the social sciences. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social
Sciences. Boston: Pearson Education.
Birenbaum, M., & Feldman, R. A. (1998). Relationships between learning patterns and attitudes
towards two assessment formats. Educational Research, 40(1), 90-98.
Black, P. (2015). Formative assessment–an optimistic but incomplete vision. Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(1), 161-177.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2003). ‘In praise of educational research’: Formative assessment. British
educational research journal, 29(5), 623-637.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2003). ‘In praise of educational research’: Formative assessment. British
educational research journal, 29(5), 623-637.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational
Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in
Education), 21(1), 5.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational
Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in
Education), 21(1), 5.
Black, P., Harrison, C., & Lee, C. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. McGraw-
Hill Education (UK).
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box:
Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi delta kappan, 86(1), 8-21.
Bloom, B. S. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning.
Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective
as one-to-one tutoring. Educational researcher, 13(6), 4-16.
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in
continuing education, 22(2), 151-167.
Britton, T. (2011). Using Formative and Alternative Assessments to Support Instruction and Measure
Student Learning. Science Scope, 34(5), 16-21
Broadfoot*, P., & Black, P. (2004). Redefining assessment? The first ten years of assessment in
education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11(1), 7-26.
Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(1), 3-12.
Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students. ASCD.
Brookhart, S. M., Moss, C. M., & Long, B. A. (2010). Teacher inquiry into formative assessment
practices in remedial reading classrooms. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &
Practice, 17(1), 41-58.
Burke, K. (1999). The mindful school: How to assess authentic learning: Introduction.
Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different
feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of
educational psychology, 79(4), 474.
Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of taskinvolving and
ego‐involving evaluation on interest and performance. British journal of educational
psychology, 58(1), 1-14.
Campbell, C., & Evans, J. A. (2000). Investigation of preservice teachers' classroom assessment
practices during student teaching. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(6), 350-355.
Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research:
Carrillo-de-la-Peña, M. T., Bailles, E., Caseras, X., Martínez, À., Ortet, G., & Pérez, J. (2009).
Formative assessment and academic achievement in pre-graduate students of health sciences.
Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14(1), 61-67.
Cavanagh, R. F., & Romanoski, J. T. (2006). Rating scale instruments and measurement. Learning
Environments Research, 9(3), 273-289.
Chappuis, J. (2005). Helping students understand assessment. Educational Leadership, 63(3).
Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R. J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. A. (2012). Classroom assessment for student
learning: Doing it right-using it well. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Chappuis, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership,
60(1), 40-44.
Chappuis, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership,
60(1), 40-44.
Cohen, V. B. (1985). A reexamination of feedback in computer-based instruction: Implications for
instructional design. Educational Technology, 25(1), 33-37.
Creswell, J. W. (2010). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and mixed methods approaches,
Canada.
Creswell, W. J. (2005). Educational Research Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Qualitative and
Quantitative.
Crisp, B. R. (2007). Is it worth the effort? How feedback influences students’ subsequent submission
of assessable work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(5), 571-581.
Danielson, C. (2011). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. ASCD.
Das, S., Alsalhanie, K. M., Nauhria, S., Joshi, V. R., Khan, S., & Surender, V. (2017). Impact of
formative assessment on the outcome of summative assessment–a feedback based cross
sectional study conducted among basic science medical students enrolled in MD program.
Asian Journal of Medical Sciences, 8(4), 38-43.
De Vaus, D. A., & de Vaus, D. (2001). Research design in social research. Sage.
DeLuca, C., & Bellara, A. (2013). The current state of assessment education: Aligning policy,
standards, and teacher education curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 356372.
Dhindsa, H. S., Omar, K., & Waldrip, B. (2007). Upper secondary Bruneian science students’
perceptions of assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 29(10), 12611280.
Dorman, J. P., Fisher, D. L., & Waldrip, B. G. (2006). CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT,
STUDENTS'PERCEPTIONS OF ASSESSMENT, ACADEMIC EFFICACY AND
ATTITUDE TO SCIENCE: A LISREL ANALYSIS. In Contemporary approaches to research
on learning environments: Worldviews(pp. 1-28).
Driscoll, M. (2001). Building Better E-Assessments, ASTD’s Source for E-Learning: Learning
Circuits.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (Eds.). (2009). On common ground: The power of professional learning
communities. Solution Tree Press.
Duncan, N. (2007). ‘Feed‐forward’: improving students' use of tutors' comments. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(3), 271-283.
Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The
limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical
Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.
Engel, R. J., & Schutt, R. K. (2012). The practice of research in social work. Sage.
Erkens, C., & Tree, S. (2012). Leading Assessment Literacy.
Falchikov, N. (2013). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for
aiding learning in higher and further education. Routledge.
Gordon, E. W. (2017). The transformation of key beliefs that have guided a century of assessment. In
The future of assessment (pp. 3-6). Routledge.
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement.
routledge.
Jain, V., Agrawal, V., & Biswas, S. (2012). Use of formative assessment as an educational tool. Journal
of Ayub Medical College Abbottabad, 24(3-4), 68-70.
McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement.
Association for Supervison and Curriculum Development.
Moves, S. E. (2014). Formative Assessment in Seven Good Moves.
Pellegrino, J. W., & Goldman, S. R. (2017). Beyond rhetoric: Realities and complexities of integrating
assessment into classroom teaching and learning. In The future of assessment (pp. 7-52).
Routledge.
Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Systems Research and Behavioral Science,
28(1), 4-13.
Reiley, D. A. (2016). Teacher and administrator beliefs and implementation of formative assessments
in grades K-8. Western Illinois University.
Rennie, L. J., Goodrum, D., & Hackling, M. (2001). Science teaching and learning in Australian
schools: Results of a national study. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 455-498.
Sadler, D. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535-550.
Salend, S. J. (2008). Determining Appropriate Testing Accommodations; Complying with NCLB and
IDEA. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(4), 14-22.
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153189.
Smith, L. M. (1978). 8: An Evolving Logic of Participant Observation, Educational Ethnography, and
Other Case Studies. Review of research in education, 6(1), 316-377.
Velan, G. M., Jones, P., McNeil, H. P., & Kumar, R. K. (2008). Integrated online formative assessments
in the biomedical sciences for medical students: benefits for learning. BMC Medical Education,
8(1), 52. what method for nursing?. Journal of advanced nursing, 20(4), 716-721
Wiliam*, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning:
Impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice,
11(1), 49-65.
Appendix A
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS
This questionnaire aims to explore your perception about formative assessment (classroom
assessment) as a student who is studying at Secondary level. Please read the following
statements carefully and circle the number in front of the item that applies to your
perspective. In these items 5= strongly agree, 4= agree, 3= neutral, 2= disagree, 1= strongly
disagree
OBJECTIVE 1: To assess the effectiveness of formative assessment on learning of students.
Key: 5= strongly agree, 4= agree, 3= neutral, 2= disagree, 1= strongly disagree
Sr Statements S.DA D.A N A SA

No
According to my perspective formative
assessment:
1. Helps me to concentrate in the class 1 2 3 4 5
2. is supportive for better learning 1 2 3 4 5
3. Can help in high grade scoring 1 2 3 4 5
4. Pushes me to think critically 1 2 3 4 5
5. Is capable to fulfill learning gaps in students 1 2 3 4 5
6. encourages me to learn more 1 2 3 4 5
7. Is valid and helpful in all subjects 1 2 3 4 5
8. Makes class room environment conducive for 1 2 3 4 5
learning
9. should be practiced on regular bases 1 2 3 4 5

10 Makes lesson interactive 1 2 3 4 5
OBJECTIVE 2: To examine the impact of formative assessment on self-assessment of

students
Key: 5= strongly agree, 4= agree, 3= neutral, 2= disagree, 1= strongly disagree
Sr Statements S.DA D.A N A S.A

No
According to my perspective formative
assessment:
11 Helps me in judging my work 1 2 3 4 5

12 Supportive for judging how well I did my 1 2 3 4 5
work
13 Helps me in diagnosing where I am confused? 1 2 3 4 5
14 Encourages me to clear my concepts 1 2 3 4 5

B.ed Study Report

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

B.ed Study Report

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative

Assessment on Learning of Students at

ALLAMA IQBAL OPEN UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD

Tehmina Aziz, 2018

Supervisor: Dr. Muhammad Basharat

“To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning of Students at Secondary

Date: ---------------------------- ---------------------------------

Research project entitled To Determine the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment on Learning of

Dr. Muhammad Basharat

Quantitative approach, Self-assessment

Table Name Page No.

Table 4. 1 Students Perception About Role of Formative Assessment to 22

Concentrate them Into The Class

Table 4. 2 Students perspective about role of formative assessment as it 24

is Supportive for Better Learning

Table 4. 3 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in 26

High Grade Scoring

Table 4. 4 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment as It 28

Pushes Them to Think Critically

Table 4. 5 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment as It 30

Fulfills Learning Gaps

Table 4. 6 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in 32

Encouraging Them to Learn More

Table 4. 7 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment Is 34

Valid and Helpful in All Subjects

Table 4. 8 Students perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in 36

Making Class Room Environment Conducive for Learning

Table 4. 9 Students Perception About Practice of Formative Assessment 38

Making Lesson Interactive

Table 4. 11 Students Perspective About Role of Formative Assessment in 42

Judging Their Work

Table 4. 12 Students Perceptive About Role of Formative Assessment Is 44

Supportive for Judging How Well They Did Their Work

Table 4. 13 Students Perceptive About Role of Formative Assessment in 46

Diagnosing Where They Are Confused

Table 4. 14 Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in 48

clearing their Concepts

Assessment in concentration in class subscale (N=122)

Assessment in High Grade Scoring subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Learning subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Critical Thinking subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Fulfilling Learning Gaps subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Encouragement for Learning in the class subscale (N=122)

Assessment in All Subjects on subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Conducive Learning Environment subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Interactive Lesson subscale (N=122)

Assessment in Judgement of Work in class subscale (N=122)

Figures Page No.

4. 1 Students perspective about formative assessment as it helps them to 32

concentrate in the class

4. 2 Students perspective about formative assessment as it is supportive for 34

4. 3 Students perspective about formative assessment as it helps in high grade scoring 27

4. 4 Students perspection about formative assessment as it pushes them to think 38

4. 5 Students perception about role of formative assessment as it fulfills 40

learning gaps in the students

4. 6 Students perception about role of formative assessment in encouraging them 42

4. 7 Students perception about role of formative assessment is valid and helpful 44

4. 8 Students perception about role of formative assessment in making 46

classroom environment conducive for learning

4. 9 Students perception about formative assessment should be practiced on regular basis 39

4. 11 Students perspective about role of formative assessment in judging their work 43

4. 12 Students perceptive about role of formative assessment in helping them to 54

judge how well they did their work

4. 13 Students perspective about formative assessment role in clearing their concepts 47