self assessment for understanding - pbworkscsimmonds.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/118283784/self...

Self Assessment for UnderstandingBETTY MCDONALD

r his present paper draws empirical evidence from a more com-

prehensive study on self assessment and academic achievement

that provided undisputed evidence that high school students

trained in self assessment skills outperformed their untrained counter-

parts in external examinations in all curriculum areas. This paper

focuses on one aspect of self assessment: understanding, a key element for

achievement. Self assessment has been defined as "the involvement of

students in identifying standards and/or criteria to apply to their work

and making judgements about the extent to which they have met these

criteria and standards" (Boud, 1986, p. 5). This paper describes how self

assessment training improves students' understanding of concepts.

Beginner teachers will find hands-on suggestions that they could use in

their classrooms. It is hoped that the ideas shared here would provoke

more research in this important area. Longitudinal studies on students

exposed to self assessment training could address issues regarding the

reduction of students' zone of proximal development, where real learning

takes place, and shed further light on how humans create meaning

through understanding.

introductionThe complexity of life offers boundless opportunities and also under-mines our feeling of context and relatedness (Mazarr, 1999). Numer-ous people, and in particular, young students, feel that they are neverunderstood. Clearly, we need a type of assessment that gives thelearner a sense of belonging, achievement, autonomy, independence,empowerment, and mastery over his or her own destiny, while simul-taneously affording the learner a clear understanding of what is beinglearned. In keeping with information about multiple intelligences, theknowledge era, massive globalization, and transformation of modern

The Journal of Education 188.1 © 2007 bythe Trustees of Boston University. All rights reserved. 2 5

26 I Journal of education

society, a climate of unprecedented organizational change, coupled

with student migration—a broad-based approach to assessment

incorporating self assessment—seems the natural progressive way

forward. Furthermore, an argument could be made that this notion

should be introduced to teachers very early in their teaching career in

an effort to make it common practice in the classroom.

It had almost become traditional for assessment to be conceptual-

ized as an activity originating from an external distant source, for

example, an examiner, supervisor, adjudicator, referee or fi'om ah

external close source, for example, a lecturer, teacher, tutor, facilitator,

mentor, or coach. While some individuals had their own homespun

ways of assessing themselves privately, in the public domain not much

emphasis was placed on assessment originating from an internal

source, namely the person himself or herself doing his or her own

assessment. For this reason, it was not surprising that while the cur-

rent literature was replete with empirical research about assessment

ftom both external distant and external close sources, none could be

found about assessment from the internal source or the self Needless

to say, there is continuous need for triangulation or for a multiplicity

of views to provide a 360-degree assessment in order to validate,

increase reliability, and enhance credibility of the final assessment

decision made. Since the individual student is the person constantly

exposed to all aspects of his or her course (textbooks, resource mate-

rials, course content, homework, teacher personality, and pedagogical

methodology), he or she is more advantageously positioned to deter-

mine the effectiveness of those aspects of the course through self

assessment. The individual can focus on himself or herself, cognizant

of his or her idiosyncrasies, peculiarities, and individual differences.

The average high school student often has a myriad of activities

that engage his or her attention to the exclusion of significant others.

Oftentimes, a high school teacher who is normally responsible for a

class of about 30 to 40 students of mixed abilities, coming from

diverse socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds, cannot reasonably

be expected, with any measure of success, to attend to most students'

McDonald • Self Assessment for Understanding \ 27

issues and needs. Darwinian principles demand the natural acquisi-tion of personal skills that wotild maximize academic achievementand sustain effoi-ts over a prolonged period of time. Clearly, selfassessment is a sine qua non for effective learning and the provision ofquality feedback for personal improvement (Sadler, 1989). While sev-eral works have concentrated on providing empirical data in supportof self assessment as it affects different aspects of the whole individ-ual, this present paper will present a descriptive analysis of self assess-ment as it promotes understanding. It will also challenge the facultyof higher education to consider this within teacher education pro-grams, where traditional assessment, much less self assessment, isinfrequently an emphasis.

It is instructive to establish our working definition for self assess-ment. We shall choose Boud's (1986, p. 5) definition of self assess-ment as "the involvement of students in identifying standards and/orcriteria to apply to their work and making judgments about theextent to which they have met these criteria and standards." To everyassessment (whether conducted by teacher or learner), Boud (1995)insists that two key elements are essential: (1) development ofknowledge and an appreciation of appropriate standards and criteriafor meeting those standards; and (2) capacity to make judgmentsabout whether or not the work involved does or does not meet thosestandards (which involves critical thinking). A desire' for achieve-ment and a clear understanding of what is involved in the process aretwo key elements involved. Clearly, the whole individual is deeplyengrossed in the process.

Self assessment not only encompasses testing/grading one's ownskills/work but also involves an active process on the part of the indi-

. vidual of evaluating what is good, mediocre or poor work in any givensituation. Self assessment represents a much-expanded role in assess-tnent because the construct underscores provisions for strengtheningpersonal accountability for academic achievement. Besides requiringsetting appropriate criteria for meeting standards, self assessmentseeks to offer a method for judging criteria effectiveness, establishes a

28 I Journal of Education

schedule or timetable for ultimate progress of the individual, and alsoestablishes a sequence for failure. Additionally, self assessment estab-lishes a set of procedures that would link criteria over time, acrosssubjects, and with an external assessment. Moreover, self assessmentemphasizes directing assessment at important learning targets, usingassessment to plan next steps in instruction, and communicatingassessment results to others in ways that have positive consequenceson the individual.

Conceived as an instructional tool or an aid to instruction and notas an assessment tool, the comprehensive study, from which this paperdraws information, provides an analytic platform that would be trans-parent enough so that the procedures for self assessment can be bet-ter decoupled from general assessment. Generally, high schoolteachers do not use the assessments done by students as part of theirreporting. Instead, students may use self assessment for their ownformative evaluation. Good and poor practice in self assessment(Boud, 1995, 208-209) may assist in further clarifying the nature ofthe construct and offer a useful skill set of indicators of good selfassessment practice. •

Self assessment may be viewed as the act of evaluating or moni-toring one's own level of knowledge, performance, and understandingin a metacognitive framework, taking into account the contexts inwhich it occurs. Self assessment involves the individual making aninformed assessment of his or her own work, with an appreciation forand the understanding of those concepts of quality upheld and prac-tised by the adjudicators of his or her work. Clearly, the honing of selfassessment skills would not naturally be endowed upon an individualbut requires formal training, like several other skills, incorporatingthe analytical, creative, and practical. It also requires formal trainingon the part of the teachers so that they may effectively integrate it intoclassroom teaching and learning.

Rudd and Gumstove (1993) reported a yearlong study conductedin 1991 that aimed to develop self assessment skills in a third-gradeclass in Australia. A class of 20 students (ages eight to nine years) was

McDonald • Self Assessment for Understanding | 29

present for the entire school year (four 11-week terins). To make plan-ning and post-teaching reflection more manageable for the teacher, aspecific curriculum area (science and technology) was selected. Basedon ideas that students had about the skills they needed in science andtechnology, a self assessment questionnaire was developed early in theyear. Students were introduced to concept maps and learned to usethem in their work. Further, the students also created self assessmentgraphs that allowed them to record additional self assessment con-cepts and techniques introduced during each term. Students acceptedthe self assessment tasks as teaching and learning strategies in theirown right. Rudd and Gumstove (1993) found that student awarenessand use of skuls in these class activities were substantially enhancedand the teacher's role changed from a dominating instructor to a del-egator as students became more proficient at self assessment. No con-trol group was used in this study as a means of comparison. With thisapparent shortcoming, this researcher's comprehensive study soughtto improve on the methodology by using a randomized treatmentgroup from a random stratified sample to determine differences inacademic achievement between treatment groups as a result of formalself assessment training.

Self assessment affects the individual's understanding as it empha-sizes high levels of thinking—metacognitive, self-reflective, self-regu-lated—as well as goal-directed learning and preferred learning styles.Mercer et al. (2004) claim that "talk-based activities can have a usefulfunction in scaffolding the development of reasoning and scientificunderstanding" (p. 370j. As students discuss standards and/or criteriafor making judgments, they are involved in talk-based activities thatforce them to reason one with another and with themselves. In asense, self assessment is a component of metacognition that is appliedmore spontaneously, more deeply, and more automatically as studentsmove through primary school. This developmental aspect of selfassessment continues to influence the whole individual. This is par-ticularly useful for beginning teachers because they are assured thatstudents already have information upon which they could build.


Self assessment is an integral part of both portfolio and authentic

assessment. It involves reflecting on past achievements, critically eval-

uating present performance, and planning future goals. It thus

involves past, present, and future perspectives of the individual,

thereby fostering understanding as situations from the past, present,

and future are compared and contrasted. Personal goal setting and

standards underscore the perspectives (McAlpine, 2000). Sekula, But-

tery, and Guyton (1996) agree that self assessment is premised on

realistic knowledge about the whole self in relation to educational

goals. It asks "How am I doing?," "How can I do better?" Students learn

to compare and contrast their work with models and against a set of

standards and/or criteria (Bourke & Poskitt, 1997). In this regard, it is

important that students understand what they are attempting before,

they commence the task, and this is the process that teachers can facil-

itate. Further, the student needs to understand the standards of per-

formance, know what he or she is trying to achieve, and be able to

compare his or her own performance to that standard. Inherent is the

notion that students need to have an understanding of competence

that can be applied to them. These metacognitive issues associated

with human assessment, and in particular self assessment, may pres-

ent methodological challenges that must be addressed in its training

and measurement. The lack of a common metric for its measurement

may, to many, be a major roadblock to establishing a coherent system

aimed at improving the acceptance of self assessment as a viable

method of a standards-referenced approach to assessment to be incor-

porated into the overall assessment of an individual.

Throughout the literature, proponents of formative assessment

(Black & William, 1998a,b; Ramaprasad, 1983) agree that the student

must take an active, responsible part in assessment if sustained, mean-

ingful learning is to occur. Sadler (1989) recommends that gap closure

between a student's state of knowledge revealed by feedback and the

desired state must be undertaken by the student. A student who sim-

ply follows the instructions of the teacher blindly without under-

standing the purpose of the teacher's comments would have difficulty


in internalizing the work and improving in the future. Consequently,Sadler (1989) posits that teachers must share responsibility of assess-ment with students whose self assessment would contribute to theiroverall assessment.

Goodrich (1997) studied the effects of instructional rubrics andguided self assessment on students' writing and understandings ofgood writing. Thirteen seventh- and eighth-grade classes in the sametwo urban schools formed the sample. Both the experimental andcontrol groups wrote two essays: a historical fiction essay and aresponse to literature. All students in both groups in participatingclasses were given instructional rubrics. The two self assessment les-sons focused on a formal process of guided self assessment designedby the researcher in collaboration with the participating teachers. Stu-dents used markers to color code the criteria on the rubric and theevidence in their essays that showed that they met the criteria. Onlythe experimental classes participated in a process of guided self assess-ment. Control classes received copies of the rubrics but did not for-mally assess their own work in class. The results of the study indicatedthat rubric-referenced self assessment could have a positive effect onfemales' writing but no effect on males' writing. This finding agreeswith research on sex differences in the manner in which males andfemales respond to feedback (Hollander & Marcia, 1970; Dweck &Bush, 1976; Dweck, Davidson, Nelson, & Enna, 1978; Deci & Ryan,1980). It must be pointed out here that the study did not examine stu-dents' cognitive and emotional responses to self assessment, whichmeans that the explanation offered for the differences between malesand females may be speculative. The call for a better understanding ofthé different ways in which males and females respond to self assess-ment further fueled the flame for such an investigation in the holisticmanner in which self assessment affects the individual. Furtherresearch in this area could be useful.

As explained earlier, in arriving at consensus, students must sharetheir personal views with each other and mutually agree on standardsand/or criteria before for making an evaluation through the vehicle of


language. Mercer et al. (2004) provide support for a generallyaccepted sociocultural hypothesis that "intermental activity (socialinteraction) of using language as a tool for reasoning collectively caninfluence the development of individual thinking (intramental activ-ity) and learning" (p. 369). Further, the multidisciplinary nature ofthe researcher-designed 12 self assessment modules and the trainingusing eclectic approaches mandated students to think across conven-tional subject disciplines. The constant positive reinforcement fromteachers other than those directly involved in the self assessmenttraining program made students realize that self assessment was notsubject-specific or task-specific but targeted at the whole individual.The skills the students learned enabled them to communicate betterwith understanding and make informed choices of routes to and fi-omschool, choices of fi'iends and choices of careers, etc. To use the wordsof Mercer et al. (2004), the teachers created "talk-focused classrooms"(p. 375) as they facilitated exchange among students with a view atarriving at consensus while at the same time ensuring that the stipu-lated curriculum was adequately covered as expected. That richnessin focus, depth in understanding, and breath of information clearlyreflected the performance of the students of the experimental groupas they outperformed their untrained counterparts in all curriculumareas of business studies, humanities, science, and technical studies.With a continually changing context for reference, students quicklylearned that self assessment was all inclusive and definitely pervasiveand transferable enough to accommodate the individual at school andelsewhere. Students also learned that making self assessment a habitsupported Aristotle's famous assertion that we are what we repeatedlydo and that excellence is a habit.

Mercer et al. (2004) posit that the spoken language can be relatedto the learning of science in the context of teacher-led interactionswith students and peer group interaction.

Whue the former pampers to:

. . . the sociocultural account of cognitive development thatemphasises the guiding role of more knowledgeable members of


communities in the development of the learner's knowledge andunderstanding and their induction into the discourses associatedwith the particular knowledge domain, the latter allows for interac-tions which are more 'symmetrical' than in teacher-led discoursesand so present different kinds of opportunities for developing rea-soned arguments, describing observed events, etc. (p. 366)

It is precisely for this reason that, self assessment is an interactive,collaborative process involving all of the self and others in relation tostandards and/or criteria. That interaction with peers is undoubtedlybeneficial to students' learning and understanding. It is no small won-der that in the comprehensive study, high school students whoreceived formal training in self assessment skills were encouraged todiscuss with their neighbors and arrive at mutually agreed solutions toproblems. That process then extended beyond that neighbor to othersin the classroom and also to the group as a whole, with input from theteacher serving as facilitator. Collaboration is the key to its success. Ina sense, the group functioned as a receptacle for "protecting" thethoughts and ideas of the group members, thereby affording them theprivilege of expressing themselves freely and openly without fear ofbeing belittled by peers, a fundamental right of the whole individual.This too explains why this researcher conducted group sessionsthroughout the three terms of the entire academic year of self assess-ment training. Teachers and students became partners in the processof assessment and self directed learning. The questions that teachersasked a class served as models for questions that learners asked them-selves in self assessment. Educational goals underpin the questionsand students were led, at different levels, to a realization of these goals.

Discussion and ConclusionsUnderstanding is pivotal to the interhalization of new concepts asthese must in some way be hinged to already existing concepts if thelearner is to make sense of new information. Accordingly, there seemsto be an incremental developmental process in progress. VanKrayenoord and Paris (1997) reported developmental trends in self


assessment that may suggest the development of understanding with

time. Self assessment may initially commence at the lower levels of the

cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains. As time progresses and

the learner internalizes self assessment skuls, higher levels of those

domains would replace lower levels. With time, the learner would

embrace self assessment as a necessary and sufficient part of his or her

daily activities. Despite the fact that children can start using self assess-

ment to evaluate their achievements when quite young, older students

are more effective at the process. According to their levels of ability and

the "quality" of teaching practices in particular classrooms, there are

differences within older students. Metacognitive abilities associated

with reading determine the quality of self assessment done. Greater

development in students' metacognitive abilities manifested itself in

an improved ability for self-reflection and self-regulation of learning

(Van Krayenoord & Paris, 1997). The foregoing information is espe-

cially helpful to beginning teachers since they often tend to frustrate

themselves by underestimating their students' potential. Incorporating

self assessment into one's repertoire of teaching strategies would pro-

vide more frequent feedback from the learner, enabling teachers to

more quickly identify problems and modify instruction, if necessary.

Paris and Cunningham (1996) and Van iCrayenoord and Paris

(1997) found that effectiveness of self assessment and self-manage-

ment of learning improve with age, experience, intelligence, academic

achievement, and the quality of instruction. Self assessment assists the

whole student to "learn how to learn" and it encourages reflection to

become second nature. As students develop, they rely less on the

authority of grades and adults' evaluations as the sole source of feed-

back about their performance, and self assessment tends to become a

foundation to the development of intrinsic motivation and

autonomous learning. .

Van Krayenoord and Paris (1997), Blumenfeld, Pintrich, Meece,

and Wessels ( 1982), and Stipek and Maclver ( 1989) posit that in judg-

ing their own achievements, as children grow up, they gradually

change from equating achievement with "effort" and see it related


more to "ability." As the development process progresses, the learnertakes initiative for assessing his or her own work. In a study on self-appraisals using work sample interviews based on both portfolio andauthentic assessments. Van Krayenoord and Paris (1997) observedthat activities related to portfolio assessment mandate that the learnertakes the first step in assessing his or her individual work. Such initia-tive could be achieved autonomously but more often in associationwith peers and teachers.

Van Krayenoord and Paris (1997) believe that one of the mainpurposes of authentic assessment is to encourage students to becomeinvolved more actively in monitoring and reviewing their own per-formance. This includes self assessment of the products as well as theprocess of daily learning so that students learn to reflect on their workand evaluate their effort, feelings, and accomplishments, not just theirpast grade. This kind of assessment develops feelings of ownershipand responsibility for learning and assists students in becoming inde-pendent learners who develop control over their own learning. Begin-ning teachers especially will do well to observe that special abilitystudents may gain enormously from self assessment training and seekto develop this practice early in their careers. Self assessment couldarguably make a teacher's job easier, as more information about thestudents becomes available.

Continuing in the developmental trend. Hill (1995) confirmed that:

using portfolios engages learners in self assessment as they reflecton how well they have achieved the standards and/or criteria theyset out for themselves, and gather samples and artifacts with theirteachers, peers, parents or other interested people, (p. 66)

Many high school students practice journaling and this, too, is partof self assessment. Journaling is easy to practice so beginning teacherscould include this in their teaching methods. Journaling forces thewhole individual to reflect on past experiences, make evaluative state-ments of those experiences, and compare those experiences with sim-ilar experiences on a judgmental basis. Finally, this researcher hasobserved that while self assessment may be taken seriously by older


children, there may be some difficulty in getting younger students toappreciate its worth. Herein lies a significant role for the beginningteacher; if it were an integral component in teacher education, then itmight follow that it would be implemented with students of all ages.As with most practices, the younger it is introduced, the greater thechance for fluency.

By its very nature, self assessment is also a social activity requiringunderstanding on the part of the individual. It occurs in situationsthat are social and collaborative and frequently with others who aremore expert than the self assessor. Establishment and maintenance ofmutually agreed ground rules—active listening, waiting on others,mutual respect, information sharing, appropriate discourse analysis,focused engaging discussion, critical questioning, decision negotia-tion, and accurate transcription skills—are essential ingredients of theself assessment process. Van Krayenoord and Paris (1997) noted thatself assessment does not occur in isolation because the self has verylittle meaning unless it relates to others. This inevitably means thatthere must be relationship with peers and teachers. The reliability andvalidity of scores derived from self assessment is forniulated not onlyin relation to standards and/or criteria but also in relation to socialinteractions with assessments of peers and teachers. Before studentscan decide on acceptable standards and/or criteria for their work, theymust use some reliable and valid forms of reference by which theycould be confident that the standards and/or criteria they intend touse to make judgments about their whole corpus of work are "univer-sally" acceptable as far as they exist within their locus of control. Thisundoubtedly demands understanding. Self assessment may be the keyto producing a common currency for evaluating an individual's pro-ductivity. Much research in this area is recommended.

A considerable amount of time is required to implement and sus-tain self assessment as it influences understanding and this may pres-ent a major demand on beginning teachers as they are learning manyother new skills. However, if the task is skillfully implemented andneatly interwoven into the normal curriculum as the comprehensive

McDonald • Self Assessment for Understanding \ y;

study was, the rewards are overwhelming. Teachers need to have dia-logue with students during the course of their learning, as studentshave to be trained to develop sound self assessment skills with under-standing. Some beginning teachers may feel that their authority ischallenged if they allow student self assessments to count in assess-ment and learning. Further, since there is some degree of "disclosure"in some areas of self assessment, the procedure may be seen as a threatto privacy (McAlpine, 2000). There is also the danger of breech of con-fidentiality in sharing self assessment results with a wider audienceespecially with the school environment. Sometimes there might evenbe uncertainty as to who the real audience might be. Being aware ofthese issues, this researcher designed the comprehensive study to takeaccount of these challenges, thereby minimizing as much as possiblerandom or systematic experimental errors. In self assessment training,beginning teachers should take responses ñ'om students very seriously.Bourke and Poskitt (1997) believe it is important to avoid a tokenist"claim" or to pretend,to empower students through self assessmentbut record one's own assessment. Students are less likely to take selfassessments seriously in an environment where school and nationalexaminations are seen to be the main measure of performance. It ishoped that the ideas shared would be useful to beginning teachers.Longitudinal studies on students exposed to self assessment trainingcould address issues regarding the reduction of students' zone of prox-imal development, where real learning takes place, and shed furtherlight on how humans create meaning through understanding.

ReferencesAdams, C. & King, K. (1995). Towards a framework for student self-assess-

ment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(4),336-343.

Andrane, H. G., (1999). Student self assessment: At the intersection ofmetacognition and authentic assessment. Retrieved March 10, 2008from ERIC NO. ED 431030, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.

BUlingsley, D. (1995). Improving students' ability to self assessment writing.Retrieved March 10,2008 from ERIC NO. ED 386749, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.


Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assess-ment in Education, 5{l), 7-7 i.

Black, P & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the Black Box: Raising standardsthrough classroom assessment. London: School of Education, King'sCollege. Phi Delta Kappan,l39. Retrieved March 10, 2008 fromwww.pdkintl.org/kappan/kbla9819.htm.

Black, P, Harrison, C , Lee, C , Marshall, B. & Wiliam, D. (2002). Workinginside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. London,UK: King's College, London School of Education.

Blatchford, P. (1997). Pupils' self-assessments of academic attainment at 7,11and 16 years: Effects of sex and ethnic group. British Journal of Educa-tional Psychology, 67,169-184.

Blumenfeld, P C , Pintrich, P, Meece, I. & Wessels, K. (1982). The formationand role of self perceptions of ability in elementary classrooms. Ele-mentary School Journal, 82, 401-420.

Boersma, G. (1995). Improving student self-evaluation through authenticassessment ERIC Document Reproduction Service. NO. ED. 393885.

Boud, D. (1986). Implementing student self assessment. Sydney: HERDSA.Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self assessment. London: Kogan

Page.Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the

learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.Bourke, R. & Poskitt, J. (1997). Self assessment in the New Zealand classroom

(Booklet). Wellington: Ministry of Education.Butler, D. L. & Winne, P. H. (1995). Eeedback and self-regulated learning: A

theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65 (3), 245-281.Cort, M. & Disario, N. (1994). Point yourself in the right direction. Work-

place literacy self-test. Einal report. Retrieved March 10, 2008 fromERIC NO. ED 376370, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motiva-tional processes. In L. Berkowitz, (Ed.), Advances in Experimental SocialPsychology. New York: Academic Press, 13, 39-80.

Dixon, S. (1999). Towards self-assessing colleges. EE matters. RetrievedMarch 6, 2008 fromERIC NO. ED 39450, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Dweck, C. & Bush, E. (1976). Sex differences in learned helplessness: 1. Dif-ferential debilitation with peer and adult evaluators. DevelopmentalPsychology, 12,147-156.

Dweck, C , Davidson, W., Nelson, S. & Enna, B. (1978). Sex differences inlearned helplessness: 2. Contingencies of evaluative feedback in theclassroom and 3. An experimental analysis. Developmental Psychology,14(3), 268-276.


Goodrich, H. (1997). Thinking-centered assessment. In S. Veenema, L. Het-land, & K. Chalfen (Eds.), The Project Zero classroom: New approachesto thinking and understanding. Cambridge, MA: Project Zero, HarvardGraduate School of Education.

Hill, M. (1995). Self assessment in primary schools: A response to studentteacher questions. Waikato Journal of Education, (1), 61-70.

Izard, J. F. (2004). Best practice in assessment for learning. Paper presented atthe Third Gonference of the Association of Gommonwealth Examina-tions and Accreditation, Bodies on Redefining the Roles of EducationalAssessment, March 8-12, 2004, Nadi, Eiji: South Pacific Board for Edu-cational Assessment.

Klein, P. A. (1998). Self assessment in mathematics as a placement/advisingtool. Retrieved March 7, 2008 from ERIG NO. ED 577982, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Le Blanc, R. (1985). Second language student placement through self assess-ment. Retrieved March 10, 2008 from ERIG NO. ED 267605,http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Le Blanc, R. & Psinchaud, G. (1985).Self assessment as a placement test.Retrieved March 1, 2008 from ERIG NO. ED 259584, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Mazarr, M. J. (1999). Clobal trends 2005: An owner's manual for the nextdecade. New York: Palgrave.

McAlpine, D. (2000). Assessment and the gifted. Tall Poppies, 25(1).Retrieved March 10,2008 from http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/pedagogy/tallpoppies_e.php.

McDonald, B. (2004). Self assessment and academic achievement. Unpub-lished doctoral thesis. University of The West Indies, Gave HiU, Barba-dos, West Indies.

Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R. & Sama, G. (2O04). Reasoning as a scien-tist: ways of helping children use language to learn science. British Edu-cational Research Journal, 30(3), 359-377.

Miller, M. & Turner, T. (1987). Eormats for assessing students' self assessmentabilities. Retrieved March 5, 2008 from ERIG NO. ED 286302,http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Moritz, G. E. B. (1996). Student self assessment of language proficiency: Per-ceptions of self and others. Retrieved March 1,2008 from ERIG NO. ED399771, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Paris, S. G. & Gunningham, A. (1996). Ghildren becoming students. In D.Berliner and R. Galfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology. NewYork: Macmillan, 17-147.

Ramaprasad, A. ( 1983 ). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28,4-13.


Richard, G. D. & Helmes, E. (Eds.) (2000). Problems and solutions in humanassessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy. Boston: BQuwerAcademic Publications.

Rudd, T. J. & Gumstove, R. F. (1993). Developing self assessment skills ingrade 3 science and technology: The importance of longitudinal stud-ies of learning. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from ERIC NO. ED 358103,http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructionalsystems. Instructional Science, 18,119-144.

Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assess-ment in Education, 5(1), 77-84.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. London: Jpssey-Bass.Sekula, J., Buttery, T. & Guyton, E. (1996). Authentic assessment. In Hand-

book of Research on Teacher Education. New York: Prentice Hall Inter-national, 5-15.

Shepard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. EducationalResearcher, 29(7), 4-14.

Sink, C. A., Barnett, J. E. & Hixon, J. E. (1991). Self-regulated learning andachievement by middle-school children. Psychological Reports, 69(3),979-989.

Stipek, D. I. & Maclver, D. (1989). Developmental changes in children'sassessment of intellectual competence. Child Development, 60,521-538.

Topping, K. I. (2002). Self and peer assessment in school and university: Reli-ability, validity and utility. In M. S. R. Segers, F. J. R. C. Dochy, and E. C.Cascallar, Optimizing new modes of assessment: In search of qualities andstandards. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 43-60.

Topping, K. J. & Sanders, W. L. (2000). Teacher effectiveness and computerassessment of reading: Reading value added and learning informationsystem data. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3),305-337.

Van Krayenoord, C. E. & Paris, S. G. (1997). Australian students' self-appraisal of their work samples and academic progress. ElementarySchool Journal, 97 (5), 523-537.

Yerian, J. M. & Miller, T. K. (Eds.) (1989). Putting the students to work:Training manual for the GAS self assessment guides. Retrieved March9, 2008 from ERIC NO. ED 305547, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

Zuercher, N. T. (1989). Students' self assessment. Retrieved March 9, 2008from ERIC NO. ED 305659, http://www.ericir.syr.edu/plweb-cgi.htm.

self assessment for understanding - pbworkscsimmonds.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/118283784/self...

Documents