IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v113y2025ics0149718925001648.html

Elementary school teachers’ and principals’ views regarding components of optimal formative teacher assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Levy-Feldman, Irit
  • Fresko, Barbara

Abstract

Formative teacher assessment models aim at identifying individual strengths and weaknesses as a basis for planning actions to stimulate professional development. School principals and teachers may perceive the process of teacher assessment differently which ultimately may influence its efficacy. In the present study the views of elementary school teachers and principals were compared concerning four major components of an optimal formative teacher assessment scheme: assessment criteria, sources of information, active partners, and actions following assessment. Data were collected by questionnaire from 1166 teachers and 177 principals, who rated the importance of including different aspects of the four components in such a scheme. Overall, teachers and principals held comparable visions that emphasize a comprehensive and varied assessment model encompassing a multiplicity of criteria, several active partners, various sources of information, and the use of teacher assessment for planning individual and staff development. However, consistent differences were found in the strength of their ratings, suggesting that principals tend to be more confident of their views than teachers. Identifying similarities and differences in what principals and teachers expect to be included in optimal formative teacher assessment can inform the design of assessment schemes to effectively support professional development. The findings of this study have broader relevance to formative dialogic assessment practices by emphasizing the importance of agreement between evaluators and those being evaluated regarding the process and purpose of assessment, as well as the need for linkage between assessment results and a concrete plan for their utilization to improve educational processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Levy-Feldman, Irit & Fresko, Barbara, 2025. "Elementary school teachers’ and principals’ views regarding components of optimal formative teacher assessment," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:113:y:2025:i:c:s0149718925001648
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102697
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718925001648
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102697?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Darling-Hammond, Linda & Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey & Haertel, Edward & Rothstein, Jesse, 2012. "Evaluating Teacher Evaluation," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt63n8q20q, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special5:p:269-287 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Akyol, Pelin & Krishna, Kala, 2017. "Preferences, selection, and value added: A structural approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 89-117.
    3. Smyth, Emer & Conway, Paul & Leavy, Aisling & Darmody, Merike & Banks, Joanne & Watson, Dorothy, 2016. "Review of the Droichead Teacher Induction Pilot Programme," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number BKMNEXT303.
    4. Agnieszka Krugielka & Grazyna Bartkowiak & Sebastian Dama, 2021. "Functioning of Academic Teachers in the Conditions of the COVID-19 Epidemy in Poland in 2020 (Qualitative Test on the Basis of Self-Assessment)," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 2), pages 269-287.
    5. Goldhaber, Dan & Cowan, James & Walch, Joe, 2013. "Is a good elementary teacher always good? Assessing teacher performance estimates across subjects," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 216-228.
    6. Jason A. Grissom & Susanna Loeb, 2017. "Assessing Principals’ Assessments: Subjective Evaluations of Teacher Effectiveness in Low- and High-Stakes Environments," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 12(3), pages 369-395, Summer.
    7. Backes, Ben & Cowan, James & Goldhaber, Dan & Koedel, Cory & Miller, Luke C. & Xu, Zeyu, 2018. "The common core conundrum: To what extent should we worry that changes to assessments will affect test-based measures of teacher performance?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 48-65.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:113:y:2025:i:c:s0149718925001648. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.