teachers’ attempts to improve assessment ... - home | ase · the role of the taps pyramid the...

AbstractRecent changes to assessment policy in Englandhave brought the development of primary teachers’assessment literacy in science to the fore. The TAPSpyramid is a tool to help teachers and schoolsimprove their assessment practice in primary science.It has been downloaded thousands of times across45 countries, but little was known until now about its impact upon the assessment practice of theteachers using it.

This report analyses quantitative data from an onlinesurvey of 96 teachers using the TAPS pyramid toshow that changes in practice vary across job roleand teaching experience. These differences areexplored with reference to changes in nationalassessment policy, but also the wider internationalresearch into developing primary teachers’assessment literacy. Finally, an argument is made forschool leaders to consider the diversity in assessmentliteracy present among their teachers whendeveloping primary science assessment practice.

Keywords: Assessment practice, primary science,role, experience, variation.

Formative assessment in primary scienceFormative assessment has been defined byKlenowski (2009) as: ‘[the] everyday practice bystudents, teachers and peers that seeks, reflectsupon and responds to information from dialogue,demonstration and observation in ways thatenhance ongoing learning’ (p.264).

The proven power of formative assessment toimprove teaching and learning across thecurriculum (Black & Wiliam, 1998a, 2009) has led toa gradual shift in attention from summative writtenassessment as the way to judge pupil progress, tothe ongoing use of formative assessment byteachers to ‘identify specific student misconceptions

and mistakes while the material is being taught’(Kahl, 2005, p.11).

In the UK, today’s primary school teachers areexpected to be skilled practitioners of formativeassessment (Ofsted, 2013). Indeed, the importanceof developing teachers’ assessment literacy duringinitial teacher training has been both recognisedfor its importance and lamented for its variability(Carter Review, 2015).

Formative assessment is an intentional form ofassessment (Hondrich et al, 2016). Unlike a writtentest with a fixed marking scheme, it is a dynamicprocess mediated by the teacher, who will planappropriate opportunities to use strategies such asquestioning or elicitation, reflect upon theiroutcomes and use those to shape further input,both ‘on the fly’ while teaching (Serret et al, 2017)and afterwards, while marking students’ work orplanning further lessons.

Subject-specific guidance on how to use formativeassessment effectively in the teaching of primaryscience has been available for over a decade (Black& Harrison, 2004), and various formativeassessment strategies appropriate to the teachingof primary science have been identified in theliterature (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010).

UK primary teachers have been shown to useformative assessment strategies considerably lessin primary science than in other core subjects,however (Hodgson, Pyle & Shamsan, 2009). Tounderstand why this issue might have arisen, it isuseful to understand recent changes to assessmentpolicy and the curriculum for primary science. Thirty years ago in England, summativejudgements of pupil progress were produced bythe class teacher, using a range of sources andexamples of work. This changed in 1988 when, in

Teachers’ attempts to improve assessmentpractice in primary science are influencedby job role and teaching experience

l Isabel Hopwood-Stephens

Primary Science Teaching Trust (PSTT) JES15 Summer 2018 page 57

an attempt to standardise the criteria used and thejudgements themselves, learning outcomes forprimary school pupils in science were assessedthrough externally administered high-stakeswritten tests in the final year of primary education.Progress towards these final summative tests wasmonitored using a system of best-fit descriptors ofability in various skills and knowledge areas, aprocess known as levelling. The perceived needamong school leaders to achieve good outcomesfor their pupils in these national high-stakessummative tests, as well as to demonstrateprogress against the levelling descriptors, led manyschools to rely upon regular written testing ofknowledge to demonstrate that learning wastaking place (Tymms, Bolden & Merrell, 2008).

Concern about how such testing was distorting theprimary curriculum led to the abolition ofsummative assessment by high-stakes written testin 2009 for primary science, although it remainedfor the other core subjects of literacy andnumeracy. And, while the abolition of nationaltesting in science may have led to a broader andmore balanced science curriculum in some schools

(Wellcome Trust, 2011), the diminished relativestatus of primary science led to a reduction inresourcing for the subject in others, with 40% ofsurveyed schools reporting static or decreasingbudgets (SCORE, 2013), and less subject-specificprofessional development for teachers and ScienceSubject Leaders (SSLs) alike (Wellcome Trust, 2014).

A further government overhaul of assessmentpolicy in 2014 (Department for Education, 2014) ledto the abolition of assessment of pupil progress bylevelling. Teachers were now required to reach asummative judgement of pupil progress based on arange of data sources, which might include writtentests, but not be limited to them (Commission onAssessment Without Levels, 2015). This presentedan opportunity and a risk to all primary schools: theopportunity to develop an assessment frameworkthat produced a well-rounded summative teacherjudgement of progress, and the risk that, withoutany central guidance on how to do this, thebespoke assessment frameworks developed byschools would not be as rigorous, reliable ormanageable as the written tests used previously(Earle, 2017).


Figure 1: The TAPS pyramid.

The role of the TAPS pyramidThe TAPS pyramid is a tool to help teachers andschool leaders understand how rich formativeassessment data can be collected and used forsummative judgement processes (Davies et al,2014) and is based upon an existing model for theflow of assessment data through a school (NuffieldFoundation, 2012). The TAPS pyramid builds uponthis model by specifying the types of assessmentactivities that would be appropriate at each level,from collecting formative data in the classroom tousing it to form summative reports of pupilprogress (see Figure 1). As such, it providesindividual teachers and schools with a tool forevaluating their existing assessment practice andtaking steps to improve it, while also exemplifyingan assessment framework that fits the currentEnglish assessment policy of using teacherjudgment to define pupil progress.

The TAPS pyramid has been presented atconferences, seminars and meetings of sciencesubject specialists, and downloaded many times inthe UK and abroad (Hopwood-Stephens, 2017). Buthow exactly has it been used, and by whom? Andwhat impact has it had upon the assessmentpractice of the primary teachers using it?

MethodologyThis research analyses an excerpt of data from anonline survey to discover where and how the TAPSpyramid had been used in schools.

DisseminationThe TAPS pyramid user survey was hosted on athird party website and was live betweenDecember 2016 and February 2017. A link to thesurvey was disseminated through the website ofthe Primary Science Teaching Trust (PSTT) andtheir College Fellows network. It was alsodisseminated to schools applying for the PrimaryScience Quality Mark (PSQM), and by contactingpeople who had attended professionaldevelopment events where the TAPS pyramid hadbeen presented.

DesignThe thirteen ongoing formative assessmentactivities specified in the blue layers of the TAPSpyramid (see Figure 1) were rationalised andpresented as nine statements. These rationalisedstatements of assessment activities were reviewedby an expert panel and pilot tested before inclusionin the survey. The statements are listed in Table 1for reference. Survey participants rated theirengagement with each of the assessment activitystatements by choosing from three possibleresponses: I was doing this already; I do this as aresult of TAPS pyramid; I don’t do this yet.

Respondents were also asked to select their mostsenior current job role from Teaching Assistant;Class Teacher; Science Subject Lead; and Assistant /Deputy / Headteacher (henceforth referred to asLeadership). They also indicated how long they hadworked in primary school teaching, from the


Key Assessment activityA I plan opportunities for eliciting children’s science knowledge and skills

B I discuss the learning objectives and success criteria for science lessons with my class

C I gather formative assessment data from observations, questioning and / or discussion

D I gather evidence from a range of different science activities for assessment

E I use formative assessment to adapt the pace and challenge of science lessons

F I give children written or oral feedback on how to improve

G I give the children time to reflect upon their science work

H I judge pupil progress in science by looking at a range of formative data

I I have a manageable system for keeping and using formative data

Table 1: Rationalised assessment activities in the online survey, taken from the TAPS pyramid.

following groups: 0-3 years; 4-7 years; 8-13 years;14-19 years; 20 or more years. The groupings foryears in teaching were based upon changes tonational assessment policy and curriculumguidance, hence their irregularity.

Procedure and ethicsThe survey took between five to ten minutes tocomplete. In line with British Education ResearchAssociation ethical guidelines (BERA, 2011), thepurpose of the survey was made clear toparticipants on the first page, as well as how thedata would be used. Participation was voluntaryand participants could leave the survey at any timewithout completing it. The last page of the surveyalso gave the contact details for the researcher, inthe event that the participants had questions orwished to withdraw their data. No requests towithdraw were received.

Analysis of responsesOnce incomplete data sets were removed, the datacontained 96 complete sets of responses.Descriptive statistics were generated using thirdparty survey analysis software, with all percentagesrounded to the nearest whole number.

ResultsThe following section describes the overall results,and the results when grouped by job role and years’experience in teaching.

Overall impact upon individual practiceFigure 2 shows the percentage of respondentsstating that they now use the assessment activitieslisted in Table 1, as a result of their use of the TAPS pyramid.

The data show that, overall, as a result ofengagement with the TAPS pyramid, activity hasincreased across the specified range of assessmentactivities. This is most obvious for assessmentactivity G, I give the children time to reflect upontheir science work, with almost half of therespondents indicating that they now do this as aresult of using the TAPS pyramid. Forty-twopercent also report that they now judge pupilprogress in science by looking at a range of formativedata (H). This is triangulated by the finding thatover one third also report that they now gatherevidence from a wide range of different scienceactivities for assessment (D).


Figure 2: Overall impact of using the TAPS pyramid upon teacher assessment practice.

Overall impact of TAPS pyramid upon individualteachers’ assessment practice

Assessment Activity

Perc

enta

ge o

f who

le s

ampl

e (N

=96)

Due to TAPS Doing already Not yet

A B C D E F G H I

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Taken as a whole sample, the TAPS pyramid seems to have had the least impact upon thefollowing assessment activities: I discuss learningobjectives and success criteria for science lessonswith my class (B) and I give children written or oralfeedback on how to improve (F). Eighty percent ofall respondents indicate that they already engagein these assessment activities, possibly becausethey are already firmly embedded in lessonplanning templates and school marking policies in many schools.

The activity that seems hardest overall forindividual teachers to implement is I: I have amanageable system for keeping and using formativedata, with 28% overall saying that they have notyet engaged with this assessment activity.Interestingly, this activity also has the lowestnumber of respondents indicating that they did this already.

Impact upon practice by job roleWhen respondents were grouped by job role, there were 12 class teachers, 73 SSLs and 11 inleadership positions.

It is clear from the graph in Figure 3 that the TAPSpyramid had the most pronounced influence upon

the assessment practice of class teachers, followedby SSLs and then leadership. Sixty percent of theclass teachers surveyed indicate that they now planopportunities for eliciting children’s scienceknowledge and skills (A), 60% indicate that theynow give children time to reflect upon their work (G),and 50% report that they now gather formativeassessment data from observations, questioning and/ or discussion (C). Just under one third also reportthat they now give written or oral feedback on howto improve (F).

In comparison, SSLs are more likely to already beengaging in those assessment activities. Instead,they are more likely to report that they now gatherevidence from a range of different science activitiesfor assessment (D) and use formative assessment toadapt the pace and challenge of science lessons (E)as a result of using the TAPS pyramid.

Among leadership roles, the TAPS pyramid has hadmost impact upon giving the children time to reflectupon their work (G). Where it had no impact uponpractice (activities F and I), it was due torespondents stating that they already engaged inthose activities. The modest impact uponassessment activities such as using formativeassessment to adapt the pace and challenge of


Figure 3: Graph to show the impact of the TAPS pyramid upon assessment practice, by job role.

Impact of the TAPS pyramid on assessment practice by job role

Assessment Activity

Perc

enta

ge o

f sam

ple

CT (n=12) SSL (n=73) Leadership (n=11)

A B C D E F G H I

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

lessons (E) may be partly due to these respondentshaving no class teaching responsibilities.

In summary, the impact upon practice seems tovary according to the job role and associatedresponsibilities of the person using it, with classteachers using it to develop their range offormative assessment strategies and SSLs using it to expand their use of the formative data that they were already generating. It has had theleast impact upon the practice of those inleadership roles.

Impact upon practice by years in teachingThe line graph in Figure 4 shows the impact of eachof the assessment activities across therespondents’ years in primary teaching.

A prominent feature of this graph is the peak inimpact among teachers who have been teachingfor three years or less. For activities C: I gatherformative assessment data from observations,questioning and / or discussion, G: I give the childrentime to reflect upon their work and H: I judge pupilprogress by looking at a range of formative data,80% of this group report that they now engage inthese assessment activities as a result of using theTAPS pyramid.

A second, smaller, peak in impact can be seen insome of the assessment activities for teachers whohave worked for between eight to thirteen years,such as I have a manageable system for keeping andusing formative data (I) and I give the children timeto reflect upon their work (G).

There is a further spike in the impact upon practicefor respondents who have taught in primaryschools for the longest (twenty years or more); theonly activities that show a decline in impact uponpractice for this group are I plan opportunities foreliciting children’s science knowledge and skills (A)and I give children written and oral feedback on howto improve (F).

Overall, it looks as though the TAPS pyramid hasinfluenced assessment practice most in thoseteachers who are newest to the profession, followedby those who have worked in it for the longest.

DiscussionThe following themes identified in the results willbe explored in this section: the changing impactupon practice as job role and years in teachingchange, and also the diversity of assessmentliteracy among the primary workforce.


Figure 4: Line graph to show impact of TAPS pyramid across years in teaching.

All assessment activities by years’ experience

Years’ experience in teaching

Perc

enta

ge o

f gro

ups

A

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

B C D E F G H I

0-3 yrs 4-7 yrs 8-13 yrs 14-19 yrs 20+ yrs

Impact upon practice changes with seniority of job roleThese data show a noticeably higher level ofimpact upon the assessment practice of classteachers, compared to SSLs or leadership roles.This might be partly explained by a lower baselinelevel of assessment literacy among this group but, if so, what has caused this?

As previously discussed, primary science has beendemoted in status from a core subject with regionaltraining centres and staff development budgets(Harlen, 2008) to a lower priority core subject withno national summative testing programme for allpupils. Reductions to school funding since 2010have also severely curtailed school budgets fortraining and professional development (TeacherDevelopment Trust, 2017) and the increasedautonomy of schools to set their curriculum leavesprimary science vulnerable to the preferences andpriorities of school leaders (Ickowitz-Seidler, 2017).Class teachers working within this context may notbe given access to the subject-specific training inaspects of primary science that are offered to theirsubject-leading peers, nor be aware of local subjectsupport networks for primary science. A possibleexplanation for the study results is that, due toconstrained resources and science’s deprioritisedstatus in the primary curriculum, class teachers area neglected group within the school for receivingprofessional development in this subject.

This notion is lent further weight by analysing theimpact of the TAPS pyramid upon the assessmentpractice of SSLs. This group reported that theywere already using many of the assessmentactivities that had such an impact upon classteachers’ assessment practice. By contrast, thebiggest impact upon the assessment practice ofSSLs was upon activities that put the rich formativedata that they were already gathering towardsfurther use, such as adapting the pace of the lessonas they taught it or forming summative judgementsof pupil progress from a range of formative data.

The limited impact of the TAPS pyramid upon theassessment practice of the leadership group mightbe partly explained by the changes in assessmentpolicy that they have worked under – 45% of thisgroup had served in teaching for twenty years ormore – but also the reduced likelihood that theyhave a regular teaching responsibility.

The changing influence upon practice as seniorityof role increases can be seen as further proof thatthere is no ‘one size fits all’ in the professionaldevelopment of a teacher workforce (Hargreaves,1999). As such, it serves as a reminder to schoolleaders that their perceptions of the training needsand priorities in their school should not be definedby them alone, but in partnership with thoseteaching in the classrooms.

Impact upon assessment practice is influenced byyears’ experience of teachingIt has been argued above that one reason for a lowlevel of assessment literacy among class teachersmight be their limited access to subject-specificprofessional development and training. Anotherreason might be the adequacy of initial teachertraining in the appropriate and beneficial use offormative assessment in primary science, however.

As mentioned earlier, variability of initial teachertraining in the theoretical and technical aspects ofassessment has been identified as an area forimprovement among teacher training providers(Carter Review, 2015). The fact that so manyrecently qualified survey respondents indicatedthat their use of the specified assessment activitieswas due to using the TAPS pyramid may indicatethat these respondents had not learned these skills– or realised their applicability to primary science –until they engaged with the resource. And whileissues in initial teacher training in assessmentpractice for primary science might be partlyexplained in England by science’s fluctuatingstatus, it is worth noting that variability indeveloping teachers’ assessment literacy is notlimited to one country; this is a live internationalconcern, which has also been explored in Holland(Heitink et al, 2015), Norway (Smith, 2011) andThailand (Yamtim & Wogwanich, 2014).

In the mid-range of experience (eight to thirteenyears’ teaching experience), there is a smaller spikein impact upon assessment practice. Teachers inthis group would have entered the primaryworkforce while levelling and best-fit statementsfor pupil progress were being used.

Now that assessment policy has shifted to teacherjudgements and post-levels assessmentframeworks, the TAPS pyramid might prove auseful resource for developing their repertoire of


formative assessment strategies and their use ofthat formative data; indeed, 50% of this group saythat, as a result of using the TAPS pyramid, theynow judge pupil progress by looking at a range offormative data.

At the other end of the spectrum, the TAPSpyramid has had a noticeable impact upon some ofthe assessment activities for respondents withtwenty years’ or more teaching experience. Fifty-nine percent of teachers in this group report usingevidence from a wide range of activities forassessment as a result of using the TAPS pyramid.

It would be interesting to know whether the recentchanges in assessment policy outlined above havegiven these teachers the opportunity to dust offpreviously learned skills for forming a teacherjudgement of progress that fell from favour duringthe era of levelling and best-fit statements, orwhether they feel that they have learned theseassessment skills anew.

Further qualitative inquiry is planned to tease out the complex reasons for how and why theteachers in this study chose to engage with theTAPS pyramid. It nevertheless remains clear fromthese data that the TAPS pyramid is a resource thatcan be adapted to the needs of the teacherengaging with it. As such, it can be considered auseful and well targeted tool for teachers wishingto improve their individual assessment practice inprimary science.

Supporting diverse assessment literacy in theteacher workforceThe results of this study indicate that the TAPSpyramid has helped teaching staff in various jobroles and with differing experience to evaluate andimprove their assessment practice. The followingquote from a survey respondent, however,illustrates the opportunities and limitations of theTAPS pyramid as a resource for professionaldevelopment: ‘I would like to use the TAPS pyramidbetter, but changing practice takes time. I’m notdissatisfied with the TAPS pyramid – I think it’s great– but with my current usage of it.’

This respondent, a Science Subject Lead, is keenlyaware of the limitations on her practice followingher engagement with the TAPS pyramid, but seemsunable to put her desire to improve into action.

It must be remembered at this point that therespondents to this survey were a self-selectingsample, reached through primary sciencecommunication networks. If one of theserespondents, with access to subject-specificsupport and training in their role as SSL, has foundit hard to know how to implement more of theactivities on the TAPS pyramid, it can be assumedthat those without subject-specific training andsupport would also struggle. As such, this quotesimultaneously represents the usefulness of theTAPS pyramid as a roadmap for improvement, andits insufficiency in providing detailed directions.

This does not indicate a shortcoming of the TAPSpyramid as a resource, however. Instead, itillustrates the need among teachers for ongoingmutual support to achieve lasting and sustainablechanges to their practice (Gassenheimer, 2013). Asthe respondent states, changing practice takestime, and many interventions to develop formativeassessment skills in primary science have run overseveral months (Hondrich et al, 2016; Serret et al,2017). Faced with shrinking training budgets andchanging assessment requirements, the TAPSpyramid represents a tool for school leaders andSSLs to provide bespoke professional developmentin assessment practice to their non-specialistteaching staff. But this provision depends in turn ontheir own assessment competency andunderstanding of the need for support. In theirreview of the prerequisites for implementingformative assessment in Dutch primary schools,Heitink et al (2015) underlined the importance of a supportive work culture that facilitates theteachers’ learning and, in Thailand, Yamtim andWogwanich (2014) noted primary teachers’preference for collaborative working and teamworkto develop their assessment literacy. Perhaps this isthe missing piece in the puzzle of changingpractice: if the aim is to transform the practice ofnot just some but all of our teachers, we need toprovide not just the physical resources, but alsoongoing peer support for those who cannot accessand engage with those resources independently.

Limitations to the studyThe high number of respondents holding the roleof SSL means that the experience of class teachers,while present in the data, is under-represented bycomparison. Splitting the responses by years’


experience in teaching also produced somevariability in group sizes. As such, all results shouldbe viewed as indicative.

The quantitative analysis in this report hasproduced a useful snapshot of the impact of theTAPS pyramid upon assessment practice, but thenuanced explanations of why respondentsimplemented different activities cannot bediscovered by this means. In the next phase of thisresearch, case study data from schools using theTAPS pyramid will lead to a fuller understanding ofthe contextual, social and hierarchical factors thatcan affect the decisions of those attempting toimprove their science assessment practice within aprimary school environment.

The issue of variability in initial teacher training forassessment skills in primary science has beenraised in this analysis. Although beyond the scopeof this report, it would be a profitable avenue forfurther scholarly inquiry.

ConclusionBaseline variations in primary teachers’ trainingand experience of using formative assessment havecreated diversity in the ability of the primaryteacher workforce to assess pupil progress inprimary science. Teachers’ timely access to relevantprofessional development in this area can beinfluenced by factors such as job role, changes toassessment policy and the fluctuating status of thesubject. The impact of the TAPS pyramid uponteachers’ assessment practice indicates that thisresource is well targeted and useful but, if schoolleaders wish to use it to develop the assessmentliteracy of their staff in primary science, they willneed to formatively assess the range of assessmentskills present in their workforce before devising an appropriate intervention, because these data suggest a wide diversity among in-serviceprimary teachers.

AcknowledgementsThe author would like to thank Melissa Nice at thePrimary Science Quality Mark and Dr. Sophie Franklinat the Primary Science Teaching Trust for theirassistance with disseminating the online survey.

ReferencesBERA (2011) Ethical guidelines for educational

research. London: British Education ResearchAssociation

Black, P. & and Harrison, C. (2004) Science inside theblack box: Assessment for learning in the scienceclassroom. London: GL Assessment

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998a) ‘Assessment andclassroom learning’, Assessment in Education,(5), 7–71

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2009) ‘Developing the theoryof formative assessment’, EducationalAssessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21,(1), 5–31

Carter, S.A. (2015) Carter review of initial teachertraining (ITT). London: Department forEducation

Commission on Assessment without Levels (2015)Final report of the commission on assessmentwithout levels. London: Crown Copyright

Davies, D., Collier, C., Earle, S., Howe, A. & andMcMahon, K. (2014) Approaches to scienceassessment in English primary schools. Bristol:Primary Science Teaching Trust

Department for Education (2014) Nationalcurriculum and assessment from 2014:Information for schools. London: CrownCopyright

Earle, S. (2017) ‘The challenge of balancing keyprinciples in teacher assessment’, Journal ofEmergent Science, (12), 41–47

Gassenheimer, C. (2013) ‘Best practice forspreading innovation: Let the practitioners doit’, Kappan Magazine, 95, (3)

Hargreaves, D.H. (1999) ‘The knowledge-creatingschool’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 47,(2), 122–144

Harlen, W. (2008) ‘Science as a key component ofthe primary curriculum: A rationale with policyimplications’, Perspectives on Education 1(Primary Science), 4–18

Heitink, M., Van der Kleij, F., Veldkamp, B.,Schildkamp, K. & Kippers, W. (2015) ‘Asystematic review of prerequisites forimplementing assessment for learning inclassroom practice’, Educational ResearchReview, (17), 50–62

Hodgson, C. & and Pyle, K. (2010) A literaturereview of assessment for learning in science.National Foundation for Educational Research


Hodgson, C., Pyle, K. & Shamsan, Y. (2009)Assessment for learning in science: What goes onin the primary schools in England? Conferenceposter. AEA Europe Conference, USA

Hondrich, A., Hertel, S., Adl-Amini, K. & andKlieme, E. (2015) ‘Implementing curriculum-embedded formative assessment in primaryschool science classrooms’, Assessment inEducation: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23, (3),353–376

Hopwood-Stephens, I. (2017) Does disseminationmode for research make a difference for reachingin-service primary teachers? Paper presented atTeacher Education Advancement NetworkConference, 11th May 2017, Aston University,Birmingham UK

Ickowitz-Seidler, L. (2017) What is happening inprimary science across the UK? [Guest blog post].Retrieved from: http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/news-media/guest-blog/what-is-happening-in-primary-science.html (Accessed02.02.18)

Kahl, S. (2005) ‘Where in the world are formativetests? Right under your nose!’, Education Week,25, (4), 11

Klenowski, V. (2009) ‘Assessment for learningrevisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective’,Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &Practice, 16, (3), 263–268

Nuffield Foundation (2012) Developing policy,principles and practice in primary scienceassessment. Report from a working group led byProfessor Wynne Harlen. London: NuffieldFoundation

Ofsted (2013) Maintaining curiosity: A survey intoscience education in schools. Manchester: CrownCopyright

SCORE (2013) Resourcing practical science inprimary schools. London: Science CommunityRepresenting Education

Serret, N., Harrison, C., Correia, C. & and Harding,J. (2017) ‘Transforming assessment and teachingpractices in science inquiry’, Journal of EmergentScience, (12), 48–54

Smith, K. (2011) ‘Professional development ofteachers—A prerequisite for AfL to besuccessfully implemented in the classroom’,Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, (1), 55–61

Teacher Development Trust (2017) Twenty-onethousand teachers in school reporting no CPDbudget, says TDT study. Teacher DevelopmentTrust website at: http://tdtrust.org/press-release-21000-teachers-schools-reporting-no-cpd-budget-says-teacher-development-trust-study (Accessed 31.10.17)

Tymms, P., Bolden, D. & and Merrell, C. (2008)‘Science in English primary schools: Trends inattainment, attitudes and approaches’,Perspectives on Education 1 (Primary Science),19–41

Wellcome Trust (2011) Primary Science SurveyReport. London: Wellcome Trust

Wellcome Trust (2014) Primary science: Is it missingout? Recommendations for reviving primaryscience. London: Wellcome Trust

Yamtim, V. & Wogwanich, S. (2014) ‘A study ofclassroom assessment literacy of primary schoolteachers’, Procedia: Social and BehavioralSciences, (116), 2998–3004

Isabel Hopwood-Stephens, Associate Lecturer,Primary Science and Doctoral Researcher at Bath Spa University.E-mail: [email protected]


http://www.sciencecampaign

http://tdtrust.org/press-release-21000-teachers-schools-reporting-no-cpd-budget-says-teacher-development-trust-stu





mailto:[email protected]

teachers’ attempts to improve assessment ... - home | ase · the role of the taps pyramid the...

Documents