Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Education Research International
Volume 2012, Article ID 382465, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/382465
Research Article

How Teachers Understand and Use Power in Alternative Assessment

Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Singapore 637616

Received 11 October 2011; Revised 17 January 2012; Accepted 23 January 2012

Academic Editor: James P. Spillane

Copyright © 2012 Kelvin H. K. Tan. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. M. Buhagiar, “Classroom assessment within the alternative assessment paradigm: revisiting the territory,” Curriculum Journal, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39–56, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  2. P. Belanoff and M. Dickson, Eds., Portfolios: Process and Product, Heinemann, Portsmouth, UK, 1991.
  3. L. Darling-Hammond, “Setting standards for students: the case for authentic assessment,” The Educational Forum, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 14–21, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  4. C. Janisch, X. Liu, and A. Akrofi, “Implementing alternative assessment: opportunities and obstacles,” The Educational Forum, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 221–230, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  5. G. Wiggins, “Teaching to the (authentic) test,” Educational Leadership, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 41–47, 1989. View at Google Scholar
  6. E. Maclellan, “How convincing is alternative assessment for use in higher education?” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 311–321, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  7. E. L. Baker, H. F. O'Neil, and R. L. Linn, “Policy and validity prospects for performance-based assessment,” American Psychologist, vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 1210–1218, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. G. Wiggins, “A true test: toward more authentic and equitable assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 70, pp. 703–713, 1989. View at Google Scholar
  9. B. Worthen, “Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 444–454, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  10. J. Biggs, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open University Press, London, UK, 1999.
  11. M. Wilson and K. Sloane, “From principles to practice: an embedded assessment system,” Applied Measurement in Education, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 181–208, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. L. Leach, G. Neutze, and N. Zepke, “Learners' perceptions of assessment: tensions between philosophy and practice,” Studies in the Education of Adults, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 107–119, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  13. M. Reynolds and K. Trehan, “Assessment: a critical perspective,” Studies in Higher Education, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 266–278, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. Heron, “Assessment revisited,” in Developing Student Autonomy in Learning, D. Boud, Ed., Kogan Page, London, UK, 1988. View at Google Scholar
  15. P. Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1991.
  16. T. McMahon, “Using negotiation in summative assessment to encourage critical thinking,” Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 549–554, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  17. D. Boud, R. Cohen, and J. Sampson, “Peer learning and assessment,” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 413–426, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  18. M. Paxton, “A linguistic perspective of multiple choice questioning,” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 25, no. 2, p. 109, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  19. E. Shohamy, “Democratic assessment as an alternative,” Language Testing, vol. 18, no. 4, p. 373, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  20. L. Shepard, “The role of assessment in a learning culture,” Educational Researcher, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 4–14, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  21. P. Ramsden, Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Routledge, London, UK, 1992.
  22. K. H. K. Tan, “Does student self-assessment empower or discipline students?” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 651–662, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  23. S. R. Clegg, Frameworks of Power, Sage, London, UK, 1989.
  24. J. M. Gore, “Foucalt's poststructuralism and observational education research : a study of power relations,” in After Postmodernism: Education, Politics and Identity, R. Smith and P. Wexler, Eds., The Falmer Press, London, UK, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  25. R. Usher and R. Edwards, Postmodernism and Education, Routledge, London, UK, 1994.
  26. K. H. K. Tan, Reframing Alternative Assessment in Schools: A Research Based Perspective, Pearson South East Asia, Singapore, 2010.
  27. D. Hogan, P. Towndrow, and K. Koh, “The logic of confidence and the social economy of assessment reform in Singapore: a new institutionalist perspective,” in Assessment of Abilities and Competencies in the Era of Globalization, E. Grigorenko, Ed., Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  28. A. Filer, Assessment: Social Practice and Social Product, Routledge Falmer, London, UK, 2000.
  29. K. Tan, “Assessment for learning in Singapore: unpacking its meanings and identifying some areas for improvement,” Educational Research for Policy and Practice, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 91–103, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. K. Koh and A. Luke, “Authentic and conventional assessment in Singapore schools: an empirical study of teacher assignments and student work,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 291–318, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  31. S. Stralberg, “Students, teachers and alternative assessment in secondary school: Relational Models Theory (RMT) in the field of education,” Australian Educational Researcher, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 83–106, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  32. T. T. Revital and H. Miedijensky, “A model of alternative embedded assessment in a pull-out enrichment program for the gifted,” Gifted Education International, vol. 20, pp. 166–186, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  33. V. Klenowski, “Assessment for Learning revisited: an Asia-Pacific perspective,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 263–268, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  34. P. Ashworth and U. Lucas, “Achieving empathy and engagement: a practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research,” Studies in Higher Education, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 295–308, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. F. Marton and S. Booth, Learning and Awareness, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1997.
  36. M. Prosser and K. Trigwell, Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in Higher Education, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, UK, 1999.
  37. F. Marton, G. Dall'alba, and E. Beaty, “Conceptions of learning,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 19, pp. 277–300, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  38. G. Akerlind, “Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods,” Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 321–334, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  39. F. Marton and A. Tsui, Classroom Discourse and the Space of Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 2004.
  40. K. Koh and R. L. Velayutham, “Improving teachers' assessment literacy in Singapore schools: an analysis of teachers' assessment tasks and student work,” Research Brief, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1–4, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  41. K. Trigwell, “A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography,” in Phenomenography, J. Bowden and E. Walsh, Eds., pp. 62–82, RMIT Publishing, Melbourne, Australia, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  42. K. Trigwell, M. Prosser, and P. Taylor, “Qualitative differences in approaches to teaching first year university science,” Higher Education, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 75–84, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. J. Bowden, “Experience of phenomenographic research: a personal account,” in Phenomenography, J. Bowden and E. Walsh, Eds., pp. 47–61, RMIT Publishing, Melbourne, Australia, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  44. F. Marton, “Phenomenography—a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality,” Journal of Thought, vol. 21, pp. 28–49, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  45. J. Bowden, “The nature of phenomenographic research,” in Phenomenography, J. Bowden and E. Walsh, Eds., pp. 1–18, RMIT Publishing, Melbourne, Australia, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  46. R. A. Dahl, “The concept of power,” Behavioural Science, vol. 2, p. 201, 1957. View at Google Scholar
  47. B. J. Bocock, Hegemony, Tavistock, London, UK, 1986.
  48. A. Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, Lawrence and Wishart, London, UK, 1971.
  49. J. A. Whitt, “Towards a class-dialectical model of power: an empirical assessment of three competing models of political power,” American Sociological Review, vol. 44, pp. 81–100, 1979. View at Google Scholar
  50. P. Black and D. Wiliam, “Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 139–148, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. E. Maclellan, “How convincing is alternative assessment for use in higher education?” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 311–321, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  52. H. Torrance, Authentic Assessment, Open University Press, Burmingham, UK, 1995.
  53. Assessment Reform Group, “Assessment for Learning: Research-based principles to guide classroom practice,” 2002, http://www.assessment-reform-group.org/CIE3.PDF.
  54. L. Leach, G. Neutze, and N. Zepke, “Assessment and empowerment: some critical questions,” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 293–305, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  55. M. Taras, “Issues of power and equity in two models of self-assessment,” Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 81–92, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. N. Pope, “The impact of stress in self- and peer-assessment,” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 51–63, 2005. View at Google Scholar