running head: student perceptions of self-assessment...

Running Head: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF SELF-ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES

A Study Of Student Perceptions Of Self-Assessment Strategies On Performance

At A Leeward Oʻahu Middle School

Devin S. Makizuru

University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa

STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF SELF-ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES 2

Abstract

The purpose of this project on student perceptions of self-assessment strategies was to introduce

self-assessment strategies for students to use in order to keep track of their progress in learning.

Student meta-cognition, or awareness of one’s own learning, and self-reflection are processes

that are crucial to learning, but they are processes that must be intentionally developed by

teachers in educational settings. While it was hoped that students would develop these meta-

cognitive processes through the implementation of self-assessments, this project focused on the

question of whether self-assessments were perceived as helpful to students. The secondary

questions of this research topic asked about self-assessment strategies that students found to be

the most helpful and least helpful. Finally, this project addressed the question of the ways

students perceived self-assessments as helpful to their learning. This project was designed as an

action-research intervention implemented in an 8th

grade US History classroom in a Leeward

School on Oahu. In this action-research intervention, students used three self-assessment

strategies integrated into the US History curriculum in order to comment on their learning

throughout the unit. The research activity consisted of a self-reporting survey using both scaled

and written responses that students completed. After analyzing the data from this survey it was

determined that a majority of students did feel they benefited from self-assessment tasks.

Furthermore, written self-reflections were perceived as the most helpful type of self-assessment,

while margin symbols were perceived as the least helpful type of self-assessment. Finally,

student responses indicated that meta-cognitive processes were in fact, recognized as beneficial

effects of self-assessment practices.


Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge and express my sincere appreciation for Professor Jim

McKown, my first reader; and Professor Scott Robinson, my second reader. I would also like to

thank Professor Deborah Zuercher, advisor and teacher of my Plan B methods courses. I would

like to thank Professor Lorraine Baron, whose course in assessment inspired the topic of my

project. I want to express my gratitude to all of my mentor teachers throughout the MEdT

program: Rudy Domingo and Lance Sato from Leilehua High School, and Pricilla No from

Roosevelt High School. I would like to thank my mentor teacher CJ Hill from my field

schoolwho helped me to implement my research project, and who contributed to the design of

units and lessons I used. And I would like to thank the staff at the UH IRB, for their patience and

understanding with my change in topic, and for their quick approval of my project proposals.

Finally, I would like to extend my appreciation to the staff, students, and parents at my field

school for their support.


Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 2

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 3

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 8

Statement of Research Questions........................................................................................ 9

Review of the Literature ................................................................................................................. 9

What is Assessment?........................................................................................................... 9

Current Trends in Assessment Practice ............................................................................ 12

Standardized testing .............................................................................................. 12

Assessment and grading ........................................................................................ 13

Role of Assessment in Educational Theory ...................................................................... 14

Sociocultural-Constructivist Theory ..................................................................... 14

Measurement Theory ............................................................................................ 16

Critical Pedagogy .................................................................................................. 17

Self-Assessment ................................................................................................................ 18

Research Methodology ................................................................................................................. 23

Research Design................................................................................................................ 23

Advantages to Research Approach ................................................................................... 24


Disadvantages to Research Approach ............................................................................... 25

Role of the Researcher ...................................................................................................... 25

Participants ........................................................................................................................ 25

Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 27

Self-assessment strategy 1: Project reflection ....................................................... 27

Self-assessment strategy 2: Margin symbols ........................................................ 28

Self-assessment strategy 3: Muddiest point cards ................................................ 29

Self-assessment survey ......................................................................................... 29

Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 29

Findings......................................................................................................................................... 31

Responses on Scaled Items ............................................................................................... 31

Preferences in Strategies ................................................................................................... 32

Self-reflections are perceived as most helpful ...................................................... 32

Margin symbols are perceived to be least helpful ................................................ 33

Themes regarding value of self-assessment strategies .......................................... 35

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 36

Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 39

Little follow up ..................................................................................................... 39

Variety of strategies .............................................................................................. 40

Short-term ............................................................................................................. 40


Recommendations for Future Studies ............................................................................... 41

Impact on Teaching Practice ............................................................................................. 42

References ..................................................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A ................................................................................................................................... 48

Appendix B ................................................................................................................................... 49

Appendix C ................................................................................................................................... 51

Appendix D ................................................................................................................................... 52


A Study Of Student Perceptions Of Self-Assessment Strategies On Performance At A

Leeward Oʻahu Middle School

Throughout my time in school, I had been given many reflections to complete as

assignments. The practice of doing reflections began in middle school and continued throughout

high school. To my surprise, I continued to do reflections even during my time as a graduate

student in the MEdT program at UH Manoa. I have come to realize that reflections are extremely

important in articulating my developments as a learner, but reflections are only one part of an

important process of self-assessment. All teachers use assessments to gather information about

student understandings, but fewer teachers encourage the use of student self-assessments, and

fewer still use student self-assessments in intentional ways. As a social studies teacher, it is

extremely important to me that I provide my students with a meaningful and engaging learning

experience. In order to prepare students for success, I have decided to design and implement a

series of self-assessment tasks that I have integrated into my curriculum. It is my intent that these

self-assessment tasks will lead students to become more reflective about their actions in the

learning process, and that students will seek to develop their understandings of the content and of

themselves as learners.

Assessment is considered to be an important part of teaching and learning. Traditional

approaches to assessment have included the use of tests to “assess” student learning. Assessment

continues to be at the center of contentious issues and trends in education, from grading practices

to standardized testing, done on a national level. Assessment practices are complex in their

natures. There are a variety of assessment practices in use and assessment is used at different

stages in the learning process (formative and summative), as well as for different purposes (for

students to learn, and for teachers to learn). Assessment practices have been interpreted and


connected to major educational theories, from socio-cultural constructivist theories (Trumbull &

Lash, 2013), to measurement theory (Trumbull & Lash, 2013), to critical theory (Keesing-Styles,

2003). Research indicates that assessment practices have the potential to improve student

achievement at all levels and across all content areas (Black & Wiliam, 2010). In addition to

helping students master the content for a certain subject, certain types of assessments, such as

self-assessments, provide students with more meaningful learning experiences, and can lead to

the development of specific skills (such as goal setting) and specific patterns of thought (meta-

cognition, self-awareness, and self-reflection). Research on assessment is ongoing, and more is

needed. It is important to recognize the effects of self-assessment strategies since formative

assessments are crucial to the construction of knowledge. This research project is intended to

measure student perception on the effects of self-assessment strategies on their own learning and

performance in the subject of US History.

Purpose

Meta-cognition, or awareness of oneself, is a process that must be intentionally developed

by teachers in educational settings. Both self-awareness and self-knowledge in how one is

progressing in their learning are crucial to becoming a better student, and a lifelong learner. The

purpose of this project is to introduce self-assessment strategies for students to use in order to

keep track of their progress in learning. It is hoped that students will engage in the practice of

becoming more reflective about their own roles in the learning process. It is also hoped that

student self-awareness, as a result of the implementation of self-assessment strategies, will

empower students to take ownership of their own learning. The use of self-assessment strategies

may lead to the development of skills and practices that students can use to improve their own


understandings of content, not only in the subject of social studies, but in all other subjects as

well.

This project is not at all intended to make any type of general or universal conclusions.

Rather, this action research project is specific to a particular school (with particular

demographics) and a particular subject.

Statement of Research Questions

My research will explore student perceptions of self-assessment tasks on their classroom

performance. I will examine possible connections and correlations between implementation of

curriculum integrating self-assessment strategies and perceived levels of improvement in

performance and learning in an eighth grade US History social studies class. The primary

question of this research topic would be, are self-assessment strategies helpful to students? The

secondary questions of this research topic would be, which self-assessment strategies are the

most helpful and least helpful, and, in what ways are self-assessment strategies helpful to

students?

Review of the Literature

What is Assessment?

Assessment is considered to be a normal part of teaching practice and indeed, many

teachers use various forms of assessments in the course of their instruction. The word assessment

is familiar to students and professionals in the field of education. Teachers often use the word

“assessment” to mean “test,” and students often take the meaning of “assessment” as “test.”

However, according to researchers, assessments are much more than just tests. Assessments are

used in a variety of ways and in a variety of contexts in order to achieve different results.


According to Manitoba Education (2006), there are three purposes of classroom

assessment. Assessments can be used either “for learning,” “as learning,” or “of learning.”

Chappuis (2005), Black and Wiliam (2010), and Manitoba Education (2006) all agree that there

should always be clear goals set by teachers in how assessment is used and what we intend to

measure using assessments. Under the criteria set by Manitoba Education (2006), the purpose of

“assessment for learning,” applies to the teacher, who designs specific assessment strategies in

order to understand the student thought process. By using information from assessments to gain

insight into how, when, and whether students apply what they know, teachers can modify their

instruction in order to accommodate students and their learning needs by correcting student

misunderstandings and helping students to understand the content that they are required to show

mastery of. While “assessment for learning,” is intended to give teacher information about the

progress of each individual student, “assessment as learning” is intended to facilitate

metacognitive and reflective practices in students. When the goal of assessment is “assessment as

learning,” students take active roles in the leaning process by recognizing new information that

they are learning and connecting this new information to recognized prior knowledge.

Assessment as learning, “requires that teachers help students develop, practice, and become

comfortable with reflection, and with a critical analysis of their own learning” (p. 14).

Assessment as learning is part of a continuous learning process for students and leads students to

forms of self-examination in which students can change their own understandings of skills and

content through feedback given by the teacher during the assessment process. Finally,

assessment can be designed in order to meet the goal of “assessment of learning.” Assessment of

learning is a summative form of assessment that proves student capabilities, student proficiency

in meeting learning goals, and student performance compared with others. Teachers design


assessments of learning in order to make accurate judgments of student abilities and knowledge

based on performance tasks.

Manitoba Education (2006) stated that the most traditional use of assessment has been to

measure student learning (assessment of learning). “Assessment as learning,” the process of

designing assessments for purposes of reflection and to develop metacognition, has been the least

common. It may be that teachers frequently do not use assessments in intentional ways according

to the different purposes of assessments described earlier. Gusky (2003) wrote that although

assessment is an important part of teaching practice, teachers often do not have formal training in

how to use assessments effectively. Although assessments would be most effective if used in all

three ways, Manitoba Education (2006) argued that “assessment for learning” and “assessment

as learning” both outweigh “assessment of learning,” in their importance.

Assessments are not only designed for different purposes, they also take different forms

in order to fulfill specific purposes. Most teachers immediately think of tests when they think of

assessments. This again, is most likely due to the traditional focus of assessments being used to

show student learning as a summative part of the learning process. However, teachers should not

feel limited in the sole use of tests (and quizzes) as assessment tasks. Arguably, assessment tasks

may include most activities students will do in the classroom including classwork and

homework. Black and Wiliam (2010) state that while assessment is used by all teachers in order

to get information on student learning, assessment is considered formative when it is used by

teachers to adapt their instruction. While they argued that grades have been emphasized over

learning, Black and Wiliam (2010) also suggested that summative assessments have been

emphasized over formative assessments, though the former is more important. Chappuis (2011)

wrote that formative assessment allows students to answer the questions, “where am I going,


where am I now, and how can I close the gap?” Particular attention should be paid to formative

assessment because formative assessment practices are parts of the learning process. Summative

assessments tend to only show results, and while they are important in that role, formative

assessments are needed in order to develop student learning and understandings.

Assessment tasks may fall into different categories depending on the purposes of the

assessments given. Different assessment methods that can be used to gather, interpret, record, or

communicate information. Manitoba Education (2006) writes, “What is important is that teachers

first clarify the purpose of assessment and then select the method that best serves this purpose in

the particular context” (p. 16). In using assessments for different purposes, assessment becomes

imbedded into teaching practice, since students and teachers use assessments in all parts of the

learning process. Teachers use assessments in order to continuously gain information on student

knowledge and development. Teachers then use this information to modify their instruction in

order to accommodate gaps in skills or knowledge that students might have. Students can use

assessments in order to recognize their own strengths and challenges in learning, and can modify

their performance based on how they recognize they are doing. Finally, assessments can serve as

summative tasks in order to prove to teachers and students whether students have achieved

proficiency in meeting learning goals.

Current Trends in Assessment Practice

Standardized testing. Assessment is recognized as critically important in education, not

just in the classroom, but outside of it as well. The most apparent trend in assessment is large-

scale standardized testing. Standardized testing is an attempt to measure student learning and

achievement on a national scale. Many experts including Black and Wiliam (2010) and Gusky

(2003) strongly question the effectiveness of standardized testing. Most experts criticize


standardized testing, arguing that it does not help teachers in their practice or help students to

learn. Additionally, critical theorists such as Keesing-Styles (2003) would argue that

standardized testing is “oppressive,” and “dehumanizing,” while measurement theorists might

criticize whether standardized tests are “reliable, valid, or fair.” Despite these concerns,

standardized testing is a huge issue when considering current assessment practices. Black and

Wiliam (2010) argue that in order to measure authentic learning, there should be more emphasis

on formative assessments that take place within the classroom. The trend of educational policies

focused on accountability, according to most experts, does not actually help students learn, and if

we want to promote learning, we must rethink our policies and conceptions of assessment.

Assessment and grading. According to Black and Wiliam (2010), “The giving of marks

and the grading function are overemphasized, while the giving of useful advice and the learning

function are underemphasized” (p.84). Historically, assessment has had a strong relationship to

grading, as again, traditional uses of assessment have been to use assessment as a method to

“test” learning. Notable experts of assessment practice however, tend to refute the notion that

traditional forms of assessment actually measure learning. Black and Wiliam (2010) argue

against the notion that traditional testing and grading methods of assessments are accurate

measurements of student learning. They state that since assessments have rarely been reviewed,

they can be extremely subjective, dependent on the teacher. Black and William (2010) also state

that quantity (of information) is usually considered over learning itself. Traditional assessments

have focused on comparative results, often being more focused on comparative aspects of

performance rather than actual individual achievement and progress. Lastly, they argue that

assessments have traditionally taken a role of management instead of measuring learning.


Teachers have given tests and other assessments in order to fill in a gradebook, instead of using

assessments as ways to determine learning needs.

Current trends exploring the relationships between assessments and grading tend to look

at grading reforms. When misconceptions of assessments are clarified, and the views on

assessment purposes shift from using assessments as grading tools to using assessments to

authentically measure learning, perspectives on the purpose of grades shift as well. Brookhart

(2011) examined new grading paradigms based on authentic assessment practices. Both

Brookhart (2011) and Cameron, Gregory, and Davies (2000) argue that grading must be “pure”

indicators of student achievement based on well-designed assessments. They argue that grading

systems are so subjective that they do not clearly or accurately measure student abilities. Instead,

grading can measure effort, motivation, and behavior, rather than achievement. Assessment

experts such as Brookhart, and Cameron, Gregory, and Davies advocate standards-based grading

systems or other systems with clearly defined purposes on what is being measured. In this way,

assessment practices would be very effective and accurate in giving a complete measure of what

students are able to do. They argue that if assessment is used to determine a grade (assessment of

learning) the grading system must be consistent in reflecting the authentic assessment practices.

Without a “pure” grading system, even the most accurate and effective assessments would not be

able to accurately reflect the abilities that students have.

Role of Assessment in Educational Theory

Sociocultural-Constructivist Theory. According to Trumbull and Lash (2013),

assessment practices, when used in formative ways, correspond to sociocultural constructivist

theories of education. According to Shepard (2012), constructivist theory describes learning as a

process involving the continuous “constructions” of knowledge based on using new experiences


to add or revise existing knowledge in a process of interpretation. From this lens, assessment is

an instrument used in the construction of knowledge. Trumbull and Lash (2013) state that at the

formative stage, feedback is most important in the learning process, providing “information

about the gap between a student’s current level of understanding and the desired level of

understanding” (p. 3). The feedback that comes through as part of the assessment process, is

again, imbedded into a teacher’s instructional practices. And again, students use insights they

gained through assessments to see differences in their levels of knowledge in relation to learning

goals and their progress in meeting learning goals. Students also use assessments to determine

how they can improve in order to meet learning goals. Feedback itself as part of assessment

corresponds to constructivist theories, however the delivery method of feedback brings the socio-

cultural component that connects to theory. Shepard (2012) explained how thinking and learning

processes are developed according to social and cultural norms. The influences of culture and

society in determining how people develop intellectually, are key elements of the sociocultural

theory in education. Assessment practices connect to sociocultural theory through the

interactions that take place within the classroom, and through how the “cultural practices” of the

classroom are facilitated to create opportunities for learning. Trumbull and Lash (2013) write

that formative assessment can occur through a range of interactions between teachers and

students as feedback is given. These interactions may include teacher-to-student feedback (for

purposes of revision), student-to-student feedback (for purposes of revision), or student-to-

teacher feedback (for purposes of modification of instruction). The sum of these interactions

during processes of assessment between individual students and teachers, and groups of students

or teachers allow for the simultaneous individual and co-constructions of knowledge.


As an extension to supporting the connections between assessment practices to

sociocultural constructivist theories, Trumbull and Lash (2013) cite Vygotsky’s (1962, 1978)

“zone of proximal development” (ZPD) as a model that exemplifies the role of assessment as the

instrument that drives student learning. According to Vygotsky’s ZPD model, students’ progress

in developing their knowledge and abilities by receiving help and guidance. As students’ practice

their skills and develop their understandings, they move from dependence on an outside source

for teaching, to independence, in which they are able to do things for themselves. Assessment

practices work in the context of the ZPD model, as feedback (a component of assessment) from

teachers during the assessment process allows learners to progress through stages of learning

development from “teacher-regulated” to “student-regulated,” levels. Self-assessment is

particularly note-worthy as a form of assessment that allows students to develop metacognitive

processes that would help them to become active participants in the construction of knowledge.

While going through Vygotsky’s stages “I do you watch,” to “you do I watch,” students and

teachers form “a community of learners.” (Ash & Levitt, 2003; Koschmann, 1999). As students

are develop meta-cognitively through self-assessment practices, they become more independent

as learners.

Measurement Theory. When considering the role of assessment as an instrument to

measure student knowledge and capabilities, measurement theory has a role to play in

assessment practices. Trumbull and Lash (2013) discussed how Measurement Theory principles

of “reliability,” “validity,” and “fairness” contribute to creating balanced forms of assessment

that are accurate in providing evidence of what students are able to do. According to

measurement theory, assessments should be reliable, or consistent, in showing what students are

able to do in certain contexts – these reliable assessments can be replicated and still show a


similar result across different locations and times. Assessments should also be valid, giving a

reasonable sense of what students can do. Finally, assessments should be fair, or appropriate for

students when taking into account learning differences. Trumbull and Lash (2013) cite

Shavelston et. al. (2007), in saying that when assessments are given frequently during the course

of instruction, they can create a measure of student abilities that is reliable, valid, and fair

because these assessments are given in a variety of ways and the assessment process is seen as a

continuous process of collecting data on student abilities. Allen and Yen (1979), also discussed

how statistics can help create “reliable,” measurements for use in assessments, though it would

be impractical for teachers to use statistical methods when designing formative assessments for

use in their classrooms.

Critical Pedagogy. Yet another connection of assessment to educational theory can be

found if one interprets the nature of assessment practices in a way that corresponds to Critical

Pedagogy. Critical Pedagogy has strong connections to Critical Theory, which questions power

structures, power relations, and dominant social discourses. Keesing-Styles (2003) argued that

Critical Pedagogy focuses on these power relations specifically in educational settings. Keesing-

Styles (2003) cites the work of Paulo Freire (1984) in expressing the view of education as a

collective effort of expression, and communication of knowledge in which students and teachers

work to build knowledge rather than having teachers hand knowledge down to students.

In terms of assessment practice, in order for assessment to be consistent with the values

of critical pedagogy, traditional assessment methods seen as “dehumanizing,” or “oppressive”

need to be rethought and revised. Again, Keesing-Styles (2003) cites Freire (1984), and Shor

(1980) in describing characteristics of assessments that follow the theory of critical pedagogy.

Assessment is seen as a democratic process in a similar way to all processes in the classroom.


This means that standardized methods of assessment are not valid assessment practices. Instead,

self-assessments might be highly emphasized. Other less traditional methods of assessment are

also preferable to traditional methods. Group projects, portfolios, self-reflections, peer-

evaluations, co-construction of assessment criteria, and co-construction of assessment tasks are

all assessment tasks that fit into the model of assessment strategies in the theory of critical

pedagogy. These assessment tasks are argued to be empowering, and they are done to promote

student ownership of learning.

Self-Assessment

Chappuis (2005), Black and Wiliam (2010), and Gregory, Cameron, and Davies (2000)

all agree that self-assessment is a critical part of formative assessment. Gregory, Cameron, and

Davies (2000) describe self-assessment practices as either formal or informal, but always

intentionally given by teachers. Student self-assessment always involves components of

individual review, and thus, is closely connected to reflection and meta-cognitive practices.

Student conferences with teachers, pair-share activities, written reflections, summarization,

selecting pieces of work to display, and goal setting are all considered self-assessment activities.

Current research studies thus far involving self-assessment have usually been framed in the

context of research on formative assessments. Because self-assessment is considered to be part of

formative assessment, there is considerable overlap in research approaches. Studies such as those

done by Brookhart et al. (2004), and Miller & Lavin (2007) have specifically focused on self-

assessment practices, while other studies, Clark (2012), Furtak et al. (2008), Dargusch (2014)

Walker and Warhurst (2000) have included self-assessment within larger assessment process of

formative-assessment.


Clark (2012) reviewed 199 formative assessment articles in a comparative study. The

articles Clark reviewed included literature (theoretical) on formative assessment, and research

studies on formative assessment practices. As a result of his research, Clark (2012) articulated a

theory of self-assessment, and described the central outcome in assessment-related research as

being the facilitation and development of student self-regulated learning (SRL) based on his

review. Although Clark (2012) did not use the term “self-assessment” specifically in his review,

he cited Bandura (1986, 1997), Zimmerman and Pons (1986), and Pintrich (1999, 2004) in a

framework of SRL strategies related to formative assessment. Within this framework, Clark

described practices that could be considered indicators of self-assessment practices. These

included “self-evaluation,” “self-verbalization,” “self-consequences (regulation),” and “self-

awareness.” Of these, “self-awareness,” or meta-cognition is perhaps the most strongly

connected to self-assessment, being both a practice of self-assessment and an outcome of self-

assessment.

Walker and Warhurst (2000) carried out an action-research study on the use of class

debates as methods of teaching. The role of formative assessment in grading was included as an

issue that Walker and Warhurst addressed in the context of their study. Walker and Warhurst’s

research study addressed two questions, whether debates as an instructional method would help

students learn content knowledge, and whether students could “develop and demonstrate” an

ability to self and peer assess learning. Methods Walker and Warhurst used to address their

second research question included the use of student self-evaluations to describe student

perceptions of self and peer assessment processes after implementing a curriculum designed

around self and peer assessments. Results to their second question on student abilities to self and

peer assess indicated several social aspects of the assessment process. In regard to self-


assessment, research focused on whether students were able to critically examine and reflect on

their individual performance in the same way that they were able to examine the performance of

others. The findings indicated that students could “develop and demonstrate” (p.34) the ability to

self-reflect. Students were able to demonstrate their self-assessment abilities through written

reflections and interviews. Regarding peer assessment, findings indicated that students who are

required to peer assess may feel pressure to conform (assigning all members the same grade

regardless of participation) to avoid hurting other’s feelings or avoid retaliation. Findings also

indicated that students may prefer having an authority use assessment to determine grades (or

“marks”) to avoid the social implications of having to grade others. In discussing their data

Walker and Warhurst commented that self and peer assessment should not necessarily be seen as

empowering (or effective) processes on their own. Self and peer assessment are empowering

only through the negotiation and re-interpretation of power relations in the classroom. Students

may be aware, for example, that power to determine final grades still resides with the teacher.

Furthermore, some students may even prefer this in order to avoid social dilemmas that may

result from peer assessment.

Furtak et al. (2008), conducted an action research study on the implementation of

integrated assessment practices and how the ranges in adherence to set assessment curriculum

design affects student learning. Furtak’s et al. research questions asked whether teachers used

assessment practices developed by the Assessment Development Team (ADT), and if the

“fidelity” (adherence and quality of delivery) of these practices affected student learning. For the

purposes of this study, teachers were trained to use a framework of integrated assessment designs

developed by the Assessment Development Team (ADT). Results of this study indicated there

were no measurable effects on student learning (pre-test and post-test results), though teachers


implemented many of the assessment strategies in the ADT framework. In their data analysis,

Furtak’s et al. stated that “results could be attributed to a poor conceptualization of formative

assessments or to inadequate implementation” (p.386). Fidelity of implementation was

inconsistent among the teacher-participants. Like Walker and Warhurst (2000), Furtak et al.

(2008) explained that assessment practices are not effective on their own, but only when

implemented in intentional ways where teachers understand the underlying meanings behind

why assessment practices are important. Furtak et al. wrote, “the treatment structures—may have

been easier for the teachers to learn than the treatment processes” (p.387).

Brookhart et al. (2004) conducted an action research project on self-assessment practices

applied to an elementary school math curriculum. The research question asked if there were

additional “desirable outcomes” (including higher-order thinking and meta-cognitive

development) resulting from implementation of a consistent self-assessment task. Data was

collected through student reflection forms (given weekly) and exit interviews of teachers.

According to Brookhart’s et al. data, self-assessment can result in the development of reflective

and meta-cognitive processes. According to exit interviews, student performance in learning

improved through self-assessment practices. Furthermore, students generally enjoyed the activity

of self-assessment, as they consistently set goals for themselves and could keep track of how

they were learning.

Miller & Lavin (2007) conducted an action-research study on the correlations between

student self-assessment and self-esteem. Miller & Lavin used Rosenberg’s Self-

Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) to collect quantitative data on student self-esteem in pre-tests

and post-tests. Between these tests, teachers implemented formative-assessment strategies in

their classrooms (including self-assessment strategies) both formally and informally. Assessment


strategies included student self-reflections, conferences, and conversations between teachers and

students. Qualitative data was collected through student group discussions and teacher

interviews. Results of this study indicated increases in student self-esteem, self-worth, and self-

competence as a result of the use of self-assessment strategies. Although Miller & Lavin (2007)

commented that there was a chance that perceived increases in student self-esteem could have

been the result of other factors, triangulation of data responses and consistency in results of

different forms of data indicate validity of the data. Interestingly, Miller & Lavin described how

student responses indicated changes in learning beliefs, as students moved from comparing

themselves to others to internal reflection on performance. Miller & Lavin described this

thinking as a shift from “ego-orientation,” to “mastery-orientation” (p.19).

Dargusch (2014) conducted a study on formative assessment practices through the use of

case-studies. The goal of Dargusch’s research was to develop an understanding of how teachers

practice and implement formative assessment strategies in their classrooms. The study data was

collected through interviews of two 12th

grade Australian English teachers, both of them

explained their approaches to using formative assessments in their classrooms. According to the

data collected, the teachers use artifacts and verbal feedback through conversations to reinforce

expectations of the quality of student work. The use of self-assessment tasks (rubrics and

frameworks) are also part of normal teaching practice according to the teachers interviewed.

Although the teachers in Darusch’s study developed and implemented formative and self-

assessment tasks, these tasks were affected by how teachers chose to interpret the national

standards for content instruction and assessment. According to these case studies, Dargusch

(2014) identified a mismatch between the objectives of assessment practices teachers developed

and implemented in their classrooms, and the objectives of assessment tasks identified in


national standards. In these cases, lack of familiarity with assessment language in national

standards may result in variation in how formative and self-assessment tasks are implemented.

Dargusch (2014) recommended activities for teachers and students to become more familiar with

language of assessment and standards. Teachers in particular were encouraged to develop

“assessment literacy” (p.203).

Self-assessment is again, a crucial part of formative assessments, and falls into that larger

category of assessment. Although studies, such as Brookhart et al. (2004), and Miller & Lavin

(2007) focus specifically on self-assessment practices, self-assessment often appears as a part of

studies regarding formative-assessments, such as those of Clark (2012), Furtak et al. (2008),

Dargusch (2014) Walker and Warhurst (2000). Self-assessment research results usually share

general commonalities in reporting benefits to students, particularly through helping students

develop through the process of “learning how to learn,” developing reflective and meta-cognitive

abilities. Several research studies such as Dargusch (2014), and Walker and Warhurst (2000)

expressed the recommendation that formative assessment practices should be implemented in

more “systematic” ways. Furtak et al. (2008) attempted to implement formative and self-

assessment strategies in a systematic way with mixed results, and both Dargusch (2014) and

Furtak et al. (2008) recognized potential challenges in trying to implement formative and self-

assessment strategies if teachers are not knowledgeable about self-assessment processes and how

they work.

Research Methodology

Research Design

This research project was designed to be a qualitative study on student perception of self-

assessment strategies on performance in an eighth grade US History classroom. This project was


designed as an action research project. According to Ferrance (2000), action research is a process

of guided inquiry in which teachers conduct research activities in the environments where they

are working at in order to collect data to answer self or group-generated research questions, and

in doing so, use their data in order to improve their professional practices. In order to answer my

research questions on whether self-assessment practices are perceived as helpful to students, on

which strategies are most and least helpful, and on the ways that self-assessment strategies are

helpful, I decided to use the action-research approach. The decision to use this approach was due

to my setting and position as an intern in the MEdT program. Because of my volunteer student-

teaching position, I had access to five eighth grade US History classes that I taught. This

opportunity allowed me to conduct an intervention, integrating three self-assessment tasks into

my curriculum, and developing and implementing a self-reporting survey that would allow me

collect data, based on student responses, which would answer my research questions.

Advantages to Research Approach

There were several advantages in taking a qualitative action research approach to this

project. The context of my project in an eighth-grade social studies classroom obtaining data on

student perceptions of self-assessment practices worked well considering my placement at a

middle school, and it fit with my position in that school as a student-teacher volunteer intern.

Because of my accessibility to social studies classes, and my role in teaching them, the action-

research approach was a strong influence on my project methodology regarding data collection.

The instrument I used to collect the research data I would analyze was a survey based on student

self-reporting. This survey was mixed-method, combining Likert-scale type questions with open-

ended questions, though all data collected from these questions would be considered qualitative.


The Likert-scale format allowed for straight-forward analysis based on frequency (counting of

responses).

Disadvantages to Research Approach

Although qualitative data is advantageous as a way to answer my research questions, it is

difficult to go further in depth to understand student rationale, since the self-reporting survey was

limited in the short response questions it posed. Data that is quantitative, that involves

observations, interviews, or written responses might have been valuable as methods to learn

more about student though processes regarding self-assessments.

Role of the Researcher

I had a duel role in this action research project as both a student-teacher and a researcher.

As a teacher-licensed volunteer intern, I was given the primary role of teaching in my host

teacher’s classroom. My role as a researcher was simultaneous to my teaching role when these

roles involved designing and implementing a curriculum in my US History class with integrated

self-assessment strategies. I have solely concentrated on my role as a researcher only after the

data had been collected through the student self-reporting surveys on self-assessment. As a

researcher, I analyzed this data to determine if self-assessment strategies had any effect on

student performance in the classroom. In my role as a researcher, I also analyzed student surveys

to determine the specific self-assessment strategies that were considered most and least helpful to

students.

Participants

Participants in this study were from one public school in the Leeward district of Oahu.

There were approximately 130 students involved as participants in the assessment strategies,

with five US History classes, and 20-30 students from each class. All classes involved in this


study were in the 8th grade. From this sample of participants, 10% were European American,

73% were Asian, 12% were Pacific Islander, and 5% were African American. Approximately

50% of participants were females and 50% were males (67 females, 69 males). Approximately

4% of students were ELL (English language learners), and an additional 4% of students were

students needing special accommodations (inclusion students). Since the assessment strategies I

used were part of the curriculum, all students were required to complete them as part of their

classwork. Again, 109 students completed the survey, the primary research activity that I used as

my data source. The survey was given to all periods in this 8th

-grade team

Regarding the self-assessment survey, students could choose whether or not to assent to

taking the survey. Participation was completely voluntary. As a researcher I followed UH IRB

research project procedures involving submission of project proposals and drafts of assent and

consent forms that I would give to students and parents for the purpose of obtaining permission

for students to participate my research. My consent and assent forms assured students and

parents that student confidentiality would be protected by making surveys anonymous. Students

and parents were also informed that my research intervention would have no effect on student

grades, as the research activity I would use as my data source would be completely voluntary. In

addition to receiving approval from the UH IRB board to conduct my research activity, I also

received approval from Hawaii’s DOE in order to use my data for this research paper with

permission from students and parents. While doing the survey, students were encouraged to ask

questions if they needed clarification on any of the survey questions. In addition, students were

told that they could skip questions if they did not feel comfortable answering them. A total of

109 out of 136 students completed the surveys. Students were instructed not to write their names


on the surveys and were assured they could answer without concern of being personally

identified.

Data Collection

The research activity that I would use as my data source was completed by students at the

end of the unit. This activity was the self-reporting survey done by students. I implemented three

self-assessment strategies adapted from Gregory, Cameron, and Davies (2000). These strategies

were integrated into my “normal” curriculum. In the process of completing projects, DBQ’s

(Document Based Questions), notes, and other classwork activities given as part of our unit

(Jackson’s Presidency), students also completed self-assessment tasks designed to help them

develop metacognitive and reflective skills. The tasks were designed to help students learn about

their roles in the learning process. After implementing the three self-assessment tasks, students

completed a self-reporting survey that asked them about their perception of the self-assessment

tasks they did. This survey was the research activity that I would use as my data source and was

completed by students at the end of the unit.

Self-assessment strategy 1: Project reflection. The first self-assessment task

implemented was the War of 1812 project reflection. After completing a group project on the

War of 1812, students were asked to write a reflection and respond to four prompts in paragraph

form (Appendix A). The project reflection was an adaption to “reflection cards,” as described in

Gregory, Cameron, and Davies (2000). Although reflection cards are intended to be quick

writing activities, the written reflection took considerably longer (around 30 minutes). Instead of

one prompt (reflection cards usually have one prompt) students had several prompts to respond

to in writing. The written reflection was framed as a personal response.


When implementing this self-assessment strategy in my classroom, I introduced the idea

of learning skills in addition to learning the content. I encouraged students to think about their

learning (especially since the reflection was based on project work) as a process.

Self-assessment strategy 2: Margin symbols. The second self-assessment task

implemented was called “margin symbols.” This task was the most direct adaption from

Gregory, Cameron, and Davies (2000). The margin symbols self-assessment task was

implemented approximately two weeks following the project reflection self-assessment. Margin

symbols (as a part of “pause and think” self-assessments) provide a way for students to comment

on their learning at a certain point in time. Margin symbols are designed to be brief, visual

indicators of how students are progressing in their learning. The margin symbols activity took

around 10 minutes, though students all worked at their own pace (since this was considered part

of the study guide). Margin symbols are not only useful for students, who can see what they have

a hard time on and what they understand, they are also useful for teachers since teachers can

quickly assess where students are at just by looking at the symbols that are drawn.

When implementing this self-assessment task in my classroom, I used four symbols. At

the time, I thought it was most appropriate to use the margin symbols strategy as students were

doing study guides. Study guides consisted of key terms students needed to know; important

people, places, ideas in the unit; and short response questions that would later be on the unit test.

Next to each term, person, idea, or question, students would write one of four symbols in the

margins of their study guide. The symbol [?], indicated the student did not understand the term

well or they did not yet know the term well enough to explain on their own. The symbol []

indicated that the student knew the term. The symbol [] indicated that the student knew the term

so well they could teach the concept to others, and the symbol [=)] indicated that the term was


something the student had already learned in class. After labeling each term with a margin

symbol, students had to do a quick-response (short response) to the question, “What can I do to

turn [?] into [] or, [].”

Self-assessment strategy 3: Muddiest point cards. The final self-assessment task

implemented was called “muddiest point cards,” and was a very loose adaption to the muddiest

point card strategy from Gregory, Cameron, and Davies (2000). The “muddiest point card” is

just one of several types of “reflection cards” that could be used in order to encourage student

recall, questions on the content, or organization of content knowledge. This self-assessment

strategy was similar to the written reflection (Self-Assessment Strategy 1), because students had

to write written responses to prompts and take a reflective stance on their own learning. The

muddiest point self-assessment task was given as part of the final assignment for the unit, and

served as a brief unit reflection. In a similar way to the previous self-assessment task (Self-

Assessment Strategy 2), this task was considered part of another assignment (Indian Removal

Act primary source analysis). On its own, the muddiest point cards took students approximately

10 minutes to complete.

Self-assessment survey. While the assessment-tasks were crucial parts of the study, the

research activity itself (which I used as my data source) consisted of the survey given at the end

of the unit following Self-Assessment Strategy 3. The survey briefly reviewed the three

assessment tasks students did throughout the unit, then asked students about the perceived

helpfulness of these tasks on student performance and learning progress.

Data Analysis

The responses I received through student self-reporting were organized into categories

and analyzed by frequency. Counting and separating survey responses into categories would


allow me to determine if self-assessment strategies were perceived as helpful in improving

student performance, how they were considered helpful, and which strategies (out of the three

strategies implemented) were the most and least helpful.

In order to code data into emergent themes, responses to all questions were analyzed

individually. Since questions 1-5 were Likert-scale responses, each question was individually

analyzed, and surveys were sorted into one of five categories depending on the responses to the

specific question being analyzed. For example, question one asked students to choose one

response to the following prompt: “Self-assessment tasks have helped me to understand what I

am supposed to learn throughout the unit. They have made learning goals clearer.” When coding

this data, surveys were counted and sorted according to the response of either: (1) strongly

disagree, (2) disagree, (3) neutral, (4) agree, and (5) strongly agree. The number of responses for

each category were recorded. This process was repeated for each of the remaining questions up

to question 5. Survey responses to question 6 were sorted twice. Question 6 asked students to

write about the assessment task they found most helpful and least helpful and to explain why.

Therefore, surveys were separated, categorized, and counted depending on the responses. During

the second round of sorting, surveys were separated according to the following responses (1)

assessment task (project reflection) 1 was the least helpful, (2) assessment task 2 (margin

symbols) was the least helpful, (3) assessment task 3 (muddiest point card) was the least helpful,

and (4) invalid responses. After determining the assessment tasks that were most helpful and

least helpful, the responses for those tasks were coded to through triangulation to determine the

reasoning for why the assessment tasks were considered most and least helpful (for example,

since task 1 was determined to be the most helpful according to survey counts, I triangulated

responses explaining why task 1 was most helpful).


Survey responses to question 7 were categorized and counted according to the following

responses (1) assessment tasks were beneficial, and (2) assessment tasks were not beneficial. In

addition, responses to question 7 prompting students to explain their response were coded into

themes through the process of triangulation, in which I looked for common themes among the

survey responses.

Findings

The survey instrument used to gather the data for this project used mixed-methods.

Qualitative data was derived from questions 1-6, while question 7 was a free-write narrative

response. The analysis of data for survey questions 1-6 was a frequency based process. For

questions 1-5, the Likert-scale type questions, the process of data analysis involved counting

participant responses the for each indicator category (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and

strongly disagree). For question 6, data analysis was also frequency based, separating surveys

according to student self-reported most and least preferred self-assessment strategies. Question 7

used triangulation in analyzing written responses for emergent themes.

Responses on Scaled Items

The first five questions of the survey were Likert-scale type questions. Student responses

to these questions were counted and separated into categories to be consistent with the categories

on the scale used for the five Likert-scale type survey questions. Charting these responses,

overall there was a prevalence of positive responses (a majority of students indicated they agreed

or strongly agreed) to questions 1-5, meaning that more than half of the students surveyed agreed

that self-assessment tasks helped them to improve in their learning and performance in various

ways. There appears to be a significant group of students who have indicated that they were

neutral as to whether or not they agreed that self-assessment tasks helped them to improve. The


frequency of neutral responses appears to be fairly consistent across the five Likert-scale survey

questions.

According to the frequency of responses there does not appear to be a consistent pattern

of either increasing or decreasing frequencies of agreement (that self-assessment tasks have

helped students) or neutral responses. The number of students indicating they agreed that self-

assessment tasks helped them seems to decrease until question four, which actually had the

highest frequency of students who indicated they agreed. However, there does appear to be an

increasing frequency from questions 1-5 of students that disagree or strongly disagree that self-

assessment tasks have been helpful to them. As the questions progress, questions 4 and 5 also

indicate (for the first time) students that have declined to respond. Although the total number of

students who disagree, strongly disagree, and have declined to respond have increased as they

progressed through questions 1-5 of the survey, the total number of students that agree, disagree,

and declined to respond is less than 10 students throughout.

Survey Questions 1-5 were intentionally put in order from simple to complex, and from

concrete to abstract ideas. In addition, questions 4 and 5 were asking about longer-term processes

(asking about progress throughout the unit, and about general improvement in classroom

performance). Because they self-assessment strategies implemented were implemented in a

shorter span of time, it is reasonable to infer that students may not feel that they were able to

significantly improve or progress within the timeframe in which the self-assessment strategies

had been implemented in.

Preferences in Strategies

Self-reflections are perceived as most helpful. Question six of the survey was phrased

in two parts. Students were asked to write which assessment task (out of the three tasks we did)


they perceived to be the most helpful. Students were also asked to write the assessment task they

found to be the least helpful. With this question, students were also asked to explain their

choices.

Out of 109 participants, 46 indicated that assessment task 1: the written reflection, was

the self-assessment task most helpful to them. There were 32 participants that indicated

assessment task 2: the margin symbols were the most helpful, 16 participants that indicated

assessment task 3: the “muddiest point cards,” were most helpful to them, 2 participants that

indicated all assessment tasks were helpful, and 13 participants that had invalid responses. Of the

13 responses considered invalid, 8 respondents only described the least helpful assessment task,

4 respondents declined to respond, and 1 respondent did not specify specific tasks that were most

helpful. Thus, from this analysis, task 1: the written reflection was determined to be the most

helpful.

Most students that found reflections to be the most helpful task wrote specifically about

being able to recognize what they did well and being able to recognize what they needed help on,

and using that knowledge to improve. One student responded, “written reflection helped me the

most because you have to write out what you think you did wrong and how you can improve,

which helps.” Another student wrote, “if your teachers read your reflection, they will know your

strengths and weaknesses to help you.” Finally, a student wrote, “it made me reflect on what I

just learned and if I understood it or not.” Many students responded in similar ways. To them,

written reflections provided students with opportunities to understand their progress, strengths,

and challenges in their learning.

Margin symbols are perceived to be least helpful. The second part of question six

asked students to write the self-assessment task that was least helpful to them. Out of 109


participants, 14 indicated that assessment task 1: the written reflection, was the self-assessment

task least helpful to them. There were 29 participants that indicated assessment task 2: the

margin symbols were the least helpful, 24 participants that indicated assessment task 3: the

“muddiest point cards,” were least helpful to them, and 40 participants that had invalid

responses. Of the 40 responses considered invalid, 37 respondents only described the most

helpful assessment task, and 3 respondents declined to respond.

Margin symbols were perceived as least helpful by students because they did not show

students anything new about themselves and they was not specific enough in leading students to

self-reflect. Students that did not gain anything from using the margin symbols either already

knew all the terms and ideas on the study guide, or they knew the terms and ideas they did not

know (and did not need a visual aid to express the knowledge gap). Students expressed the idea

that margin symbols are only labels, but did not directly lead to actions students could take to

improve in their understandings. One student responded, “The least helpful one was #2 margin

symbols because it didn’t show me anything,” while another responded, “I think margin symbols

is the least helpful task because the symbols only show what you can or can’t do, it doesn’t really

help you show what you can improve on in detail.” Finally, one student responded, “I think the

symbols were least helpful because it didn’t really teach me anything.” In theory, margin

symbols do show students what they understand and need to improve on, and can be valuable in

helping students to gain awareness of their own knowledge. Students that did choose margin

symbols as the most helpful self-assessment task did comment on the usefulness of having visual

indicators that showed them what they knew at a certain point in time. However, it seems that the

margin symbols were unnecessary or superfluous to the many students that indicated margin

symbols were not helpful.


Themes regarding value of self-assessment strategies. The last question on the

assessment survey asked students if they benefitted from self-assessment tasks. Students were

also encouraged to explain why they felt they benefitted or did not benefit from self-assessment

tasks. After sorting the responses from 109 participants, 98 respondents reported that they felt

they benefited from the self-assessment tasks. There were 3 respondents who were unsure if they

benefitted, 5 respondents who felt they did not benefit, and 3 respondents who did not respond.

Through the process of triangulation, it was determined that the process of meta-cognition was in

fact recognized by students as a beneficial effect of the self-assessment tasks, even when not

explicitly mentioned by the teacher/researcher. One student wrote, “yes (I feel like I have

benefitted) because I know some weaknesses and strengths and I know how to improve on my

work.” Another student wrote, “yes (I feel like I have benefitted) now I know what I’m good at

doing and what to improve on.” Still another student mentioned that they were, “beginning to use

them (self-assessment strategies) in other classes and become used to it.” The themes of meta-

cognition and ownership of learning and the learning process was prevalent as a reason why

students felt they benefitted. Interestingly, self-reflection/meta-cognition was evident to some

degree even in students that did not feel like they benefitted. One student wrote, “I think I didn’t

really benefitted from these self-assessment(s) because I was able to face the truth, but was

unable to change so that I could improve.” In my role as a researcher, I thought this was very

interesting, as developing a sense of meta-cognition (and honesty) is beneficial. Yet in my role as

a teacher, I realize the situation for some students might involve having to repeat the school year

because the grading system may not allow for a student to pass (since at this point in time the

student’s grades are too low). In this sense, there may not be immediate benefit for any new

knowledge/skills let alone for self-assessment strategies.


The vast majority of students feel that self-assessment tasks were beneficial to their

learning because these tasks helped them to learn more about themselves and their abilities. This

study was a short term study, and there is no doubt that continued use of self-assessment

strategies will continue to be beneficial to learning and growth of students.

Discussion

Regarding my research questions, I had posed three questions at the start of my project

that I set out to answer. The primary question was: are self-assessment strategies helpful to

students? The secondary questions were: which self-assessment strategies are the most helpful

and least helpful, and, in what ways are self-assessment strategies helpful to students? From the

data I analyzed in my research study, I can definitely say that self-assessment strategies are

helpful to students. The self-assessment tasks we did helped students because, (1) they improved

clarity of learning goals, (2) they helped in self-identification of strengths, (3) they helped in

self-identification of challenges, (4) they helped develop understandings of how students

progressed in their own learning, (5) they help students improve in classroom performance, and

(6) they are beneficial to students. In addition, students found self-reflections to be the most

helpful task.

In the context of the assessment literature I reviewed, my findings corresponded to the

results of previous studies on self-assessment and formative assessment in the sense that a

majority of students felt they benefitted from self-assessment tasks. The development of meta-

cognitive practices through the use of self-assessment is another result of this study that is found

in other assessment studies, such as Walker & Warhurst (2000), and Clark (2012). It can even be

said that the results of this action-research study reflect data found in previous studies regarding

students who did not feel they improved through the use of self-assessments. Again, Walker &


Warhurst (2000), and Furtak et al. (2008), commented that self-assessment is not necessarily

empowering on its own, it must be used in a context where students feel ownership of their

learning in other ways. The students that did not feel like they were able to benefit from self-

assessment (in my study) did not feel empowered, even if they developed meta-cognitive

processes, as they did not feel they had the power to change circumstances and conditions related

to their academic performance even if they were aware of their learning progress.

A surprising aspect to my data that I did not find reference to in assessment literature was

the neutral result that my data showed. Around thirty-percent of the students surveyed indicated

that they were neutral about the role of self-assessment strategies on their classroom

performance. It may be that the assessment-tasks were given to students in a time frame which

was too short to show any measurable results. It is also possible that students could not connect

the results of self-assessment practices mentioned on the survey to themselves as learners. They

might not have been able to get the benefits from self-assessments that are intended from self-

assessment practices.

There were several advantages to the action-research intervention. All self-assessment

strategies used in this study were integrated with normal instructional practices. In terms of

assessment theory, this integration of assessment strategies with “normal” classroom

instructional routines is how assessment should work in practice (Manitoba Education, 2006).

Using self-assessment strategies as part of my research process allowed me to try a variety of

different methods ranging from simple, less time consuming methods (like margin symbols), to

more complex methods (such as the project reflection). In this way I could see different types of

self-assessment approaches being implemented in my practice.


Using different types of self-assessments as part of the research process also allowed me

to see practical uses for each type of assessment given. The assessment tasks I gave to students

fell into either “assessment as learning,” or “assessment for learning,” categories, the format

developed by Manitoba Education (2006). That is to say, my assessments were intended to

develop metacognitive processes in students as students used self-assessments to reflect on the

progress of their own learning (assessment as learning). A secondary result of implementing

these assessment tasks was for myself as a teacher to reflect on my own teaching practices and

how I could modify my teaching based on what my students were able to understand and what

my students had challenges with (assessment for learning). The project reflection (task 1) fell

into the “assessment for learning category,” as did the muddiest point cards (task 3). Task 2

however, fell into both “assessment for learning,” and “assessment as learning” categories. The

margin symbols not only helped students to reflect on their own learning progress, it helped me

to (visually) identify concepts and terms that students were struggling with.

The research activity (survey) also proved to be an advantageous research method, in that

the nature of the question formats made the data very easy to code. Using a Likert-scale format

for most of the questions allowed me to take a very straightforward approach to organizing my

data. Question 6 was a short response question, but I was still able to use a similar framework to

the Likert-scale questions when coding my responses because there were limited options to

select from in a response (students chose the assessment task that they found the most helpful out

of the three tasks, and they chose the assessment task they found least helpful out of the three

tasks). The only question where I used a different way to code my data into an emergent theme

was question 7, where I used a process of triangulation in order to look for patterns and similar

responses.


Limitations

Although there were distinct advantages to the research approach, there were also

disadvantages as well. Although the margin symbols task (task 2) is considered “assessment for

learning,” there is no way to ensure the follow up and review of the concepts student struggled

with, as well as no way to follow up on whether students take steps to improve in their learning.

Previously, I mentioned the advantage in using a variety of self-assessment strategies, however,

there are many more strategies that I chose not to use. While it would not be reasonable to expect

to use every self-assessment strategy I know of for this project, there is a limitation in only using

three strategies, and other projects may consider trying out different strategies than the ones I

chose to use. Finally, the three self-assessment strategies used in this project could be considered

“short-term,” and they were not part of a semester or year-long study.

Little follow up. The primary research questions in this study asked if self-assessment

strategies are perceived as helpful and how they are perceived as helpful. This study does not

actually measure changes in performance, only perceived changes in performance as reported by

students. In saying that the self-assessment strategies used were either in the categories of

“assessment as learning,” or “assessment for learning,” it is suggested that students and teachers

both not only reflect on their learning, but make changes in order to improve. Students

supposedly use self-assessment tasks to gain an awareness in what they find challenging and

actively take steps to gain the knowledge and skills that they are missing. Teachers are also

supposed to use the student self-assessments to see ways to improve in their instruction and use

the information from student self-assessments to make changes in their practice. Because this

study is not designed to measure progress in learning, and only examines perceived progress,


there is no way to follow up and ensure that students actively put into practice what they say they

will do according to their self-assessments.

Self-assessments are designed to be practical and normally would ensure that both

teachers and students follow up on what they learn through self-assessments, however,

measuring the actual progress that has been made requires a more long-term approach, using

assessment strategies designed to be implemented in the long-term. The assessment strategies

used for this study were all short-term, and so actual progress could not be measured.

Variety of strategies. This research project used three self-assessment strategies that I

selected to use in my study. The strategies I used were adapted from Manitoba Education (2006),

and were only three examples out of more than 16 self-assessment strategies described. While I

designed my research intentionally around three strategies (and while I would probably decide

against using more than three), there is a limitation in my study since I limited the number of

assessment strategies I implemented. This research project is by no means comprehensive, and it

is very limited in the ways the data can be used due to the specific nature of the situation,

context, and number of self-assessment strategies implemented.

Short-term. One potential disadvantage with the research approach might be the short-

term nature of this study. The self-assessment strategies were all implemented in a short time

frame, and as such, may be not considered “well-connected” in a continuous process of using

self-assessment strategies throughout the school year. The short time frame in which these self-

assessment strategies have been introduced and implemented limits their effectiveness overall.

Manitoba Education (2006) described several types of self-assessment strategies that

when implemented, takes place over a longer period of time. These tasks include personal

records (where records on meeting learning goals are kept over days, weeks, and months), and


goal setting (when short and long term learning goals are set and kept by students over the course

of the unit). These self-assessment strategies are kept over a period of time to be started, updated,

and then completed over the course of a unit. In contrast, I chose to design my research project

around “one-shot” self-assessment strategies. The self-assessment strategies I chose for my

research cold be recurring (after every project I could have my students do project reflections, or

with every study guide I could have my students use margin symbols). However, in terms of how

these strategies were implemented in my research project, according to my research design, I

tested out each strategy separately and on its own. Students saw the self-assessment tasks as a set

of tasks all grouped under “self-assessment practices,” but these tasks all examined different

parts of the learning process at different points (similar to snapshots). The research did not show

continuous progress, but relied on student self-reporting to see how students perceived changes

in their own learning progress through these self-assessments. Overall, the strategies would be

considered short-term assessment strategies, rather than long term strategies.

Recommendations for Future Studies

This research study was valuable in proving to me that self-assessment practices are

perceived to make a difference to students and their learning. If one were to do future studies

using a similar methodology as my study, one could still gain valuable data by choosing a

different set of self-assessment strategies to use. I selected three strategies, with two out of the

three being reflection-based. There was a strong writing component to the strategies I

implemented, however, those who might want to use other strategies might include verbal

components (such as teacher interviews) or other tasks that emphasize specific skills or

techniques.


Yet another aspect for future studies to take into consideration might be to measure

whether self-assessment strategies actually do improve student performance. My study focused

on whether self-assessment strategies are perceived to improve student performance. This relied

on student self-reporting through surveys. If one wanted to actually find out whether self-

assessment strategies improve student performance, their future studies may need to follow

different methods and procedures.

It would be interesting for future studies to focus on perceived helpfulness of long-term

self-assessment methods, such as goal setting and personal records. I feel that these methods of

self-assessment might be even more effective in helping students, as students would be able to

use the same method consistently and over a longer period of time (months). Again, my study

was short term, and took place over a period of several weeks. The self-assessment strategies I

used were “short-term” strategies and worked as snapshots in showing student progress at a

certain point in time. These strategies did not really work together, but stood on their own as

separate. Examining the effects of one (long-term) strategy that would remain consistent

throughout the entire unit may be very valuable as the effectiveness of self-assessment strategies

can help teachers to improve in their practice. There are many directions one could take when

doing assessment studies, even when limited to self-assessment strategies. Assessment is a broad

topic with research needed in almost every aspect one could think of.

Impact on Teaching Practice

I definitely felt that I learned a lot about my own teaching practice while doing this study.

Before this study I had not considered the importance of assessment and the role it plays in

helping both students and teachers gather data on learning. Although teachers can use assessment

to critically examine their own teaching practices, I felt I concentrated more on using assessment


to help students develop meta-cognitive skills. Although this was part of the goal I stated at the

start of my paper and I felt I reached it, I am still bothered by the few students that did not feel

that self-assessment strategies helped them to improve.

This study confirmed to me that students can use self-assessment strategies to develop

meta-cognitive ways of thinking. I gained experience in testing and implementing different types

of self-assessment strategies through this study, and I feel that as I grow in my teaching practice,

I will become more experienced in integrating assessment practices into my curriculum. I will

also become more experienced in using assessment tasks for different purposes. One thing I feel

I will need to improve on would be following up on student-identified challenges. Due to time

constraints, it was difficult for me to “go back” and re-approach teaching topics that students

found challenging. It was only after collecting the study guides that I could see patterns in the

margin symbols students were drawing for certain terms and questions. For purpose of using

assessment for feedback on my own teaching, much of the correction of student misconception,

or filling in student gaps in knowledge occurred informally or on the spot as I talked with

students. If in the future, I am to approach assessment with the goal of using it to improve my

own teaching, then I would need to make sure my feedback is quick, organized, and consistent.

I will use assessment strategies in the future, and consider assessment to be very

important in my teaching practice. Many teachers are just starting to learn about assessment in

depth, and research is ongoing. Assessment is important and is used (and misused) at all levels,

being practiced in classrooms and on a national scale. Many teachers are starting to learn more

about assessments and how to use them properly, effectively, and intentionally. I noticed that my

field school currently uses “formative” and “summative” grading formats, and the grading

system is seen as a year-long continuous measure of student progress. By being more aware of


how assessment practices work, changes can be started by teachers and schools. It is important to

realize the huge role of self-assessment, and I will continue to encourage students to think about

their roles and responsibilities as learners through reflection, goal setting, and communication.


References

Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Long Grove, IL:

Waveland Press, Inc.

Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-

assessment. Theory Into Practice. 48(1), 12-19.

Ash, D., & Levitt, K. (2003). Working within the Zone of Proximal Development: Formative

assessment as professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14(1):

1-313. http://people.ucsc.edu/~dash5/publications/pubs/ash_lev.pdf

Black, P., & William, D. (2010). Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom

assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 81-90.

Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Starting the conversation about grading. Educational Leadership, 69

(3), 10-15.

Brookheart, S. M., Andolina, M., Zuza, M., & Furman, R. Minute Math: An action research

study of student self-assessment. (2004). Educational Studies in Mathematics. 57(2), 213-

227.

Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning.

Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 205-249.

Chappuis, J. (2005). Helping students understand assessment. Educational Leadership, 63 (3),

39-43. http://ati.pearson.com/downloads/Helping-Students-Understand-Assessments-by-

Jan-Chappuis.pdf

Dargusch, J. (2014). Teachers as mediators: Formative practices with assessment criteria and

standards. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy. 37(3).


Ferrance, E. (2000). Themes in Education Action Research. Retrieved from:

http://www.brown.edu/academics/education-

alliance/sites/brown.edu.academics.education-alliance/files/publications/act_research.pdf

Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shemwell, J. T., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Shavelson, R.

J., & Yin, Y. (2008). On the fidelity of implementing embedded formative assessments

and its relation to student learning.

Gregory, K., Cameron, C., & Davies, A. (2000). Self-Assessment and goal setting: For use in

middle and secondary school classrooms. Canada: Hignell Printing Limited.

Gusky, T.R. (2003). How classroom assessments improve learning. Educational Leadership,

60(5), 6-11. http://deeprunwildcats.org/metcalf/wp

content/uploads/2011/03/HowClssrmAssess.pdf

Keesing-Styles, L. (2003). The relationship between critical pedagogy and assessment in teacher

education. In Radical Pedagogy, 5(1). Retrieved from

http://www.radicalpedagogy.org/radicalpedagogy/The_Relationship_between_Critical_P

edagogy_and_Assessment_in_Teacher_Education.html

Koschmann, T. (1999). Toward a dialogic theory of learning: Bakhtin's contribution to

understanding learning in settings of collaboration. CSCL '99 Proceedings of the 1999

conference on computer support for collaborative learning. Christopher M. Hoadley, C.

M., & Roschelle, J. International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth. (2006). Building capacity for enhancing

classroom assessment. Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind:

assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. (pp.75-80).

Winnipeg, Manitoba: Manitoba Education: Citizenship and Youth.


Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth. (2006). Why Change Classroom Assessment?.

Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: assessment for learning,

assessment as learning, assessment of learning. (pp.3-11). Winnipeg, Manitoba:

Manitoba Education: Citizenship and Youth.

Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth. (2006). Purposes of Classroom Assessment.

Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: assessment for learning,

assessment as learning, assessment of learning. (pp.13-25). Winnipeg, Manitoba:

Manitoba Education: Citizenship and Youth.

Miller, D., & Lavin, F. (2007). ‘But now I feel I want to give it a try’: formative assessment, self-

esteem and a sense of competence. Curriculum Journal. 18(1), 3-25.

Shepard, L. A. (2012). Assessment lessons from K-12 education research: Knowledge

representation, learning, and motivation. AIP Conference Proceedings. 1413(1), 73-76.

Turmbull, E., & Lash, A. (2013). Understanding formative assessment insights from learning

Theory and Measurement Theory. San Fransisco, CA: WestEd.

Walker, M., & Warhurst, C. (2000). `In most classes you sit around very quietly at a table and

get lectured at…’: debates, assessment and student learning. Teaching in Higher

Education, 5(1), 33.


Appendix A

Reflection Prompts

Directions: Please respond to the following prompts in paragraph form.

1. Regarding your project, what things went well? (Research, interaction with group members,

presentation, etc.)

2. Regarding your project, what things did not go well? (Research, interaction with group

members, presentation, etc.)

3. Describe your role/responsibilities as a group member. What things do you feel you did well

in?

4. Do you feel that you could have contributed more as a group member? How could you have

done better in fulfilling your role/responsibility? Describe how you can improve as a group

member.


Appendix B

Self-Assessment Survey

We have done three self-assessment tasks this quarter:

-Assessment Task #1: War of 1812, written project reflection

-Assessment Task #2: Margin symbols

-Assessment Task #3: “Muddiest point cards”

This survey will ask you about how you feel about the self-assessment tasks we have done in

class, and what you think about these self-assessment practices.

Directions: Please complete this survey respond to the questions below.

1. Self-assessment tasks have helped me to understand what I am supposed to learn throughout

the unit. They have made the learning goals clearer.

1. Strongly Disagree

2. Disagree

3. Neutral

4. Agree

5. Strongly Agree

2. Self-assessment tasks have helped me to understand my own strengths (skills) while doing

assignments/learning activities throughout this unit.


2. Disagree

3. Neutral

4. Agree

5. Strongly Agree

3. Self-assessment tasks have helped me to understand the things I find challenging (skills I need

to improve on) throughout this unit.


2. Disagree

3. Neutral

4. Agree

5. Strongly Agree


4. I feel that self-assessment tasks have helped me to become aware of how I progressed

throughout the unit.


2. Disagree

3. Neutral

4. Agree

5. Strongly Agree

5. I feel that completing self-assessment tasks have helped me to improve in my classroom

performance.


2. Disagree

3. Neutral

4. Agree

5. Strongly Agree

6. Which self-assessment task did you find to be the most helpful (task 1: written reflection, task

2 margin symbols, or task 3 “muddiest point cards”)? Which task did you find least helpful?

Please explain.

7. Do you think you have benefitted from doing these self-assessment tasks? Please explain.


Appendix C

Chart of Student Responses to Survey (Questions 1-5)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Questio

n 1

Questio

n 2

Questio

n 3

Questio

n 4

Questio

n 5

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

No Respose


Appendix D

Chart of Student Responses to Survey (Question 6)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Most

Helpful

Least

Helpful

Task 1: Reflection

Task 2: MarginSymbols

Task 3: MuddiestPoint

All

No response

running head: student perceptions of self-assessment...

Documents