Questions interview Christina Schneider
1. Distribution of teachers: We could not find information in the paper on what the distribution of teachers was across the experimental and control group, only that there were 151 teachers in total. How many teachers were there in the experimental and control group? And how many students?
2. Performance standards/modelling: In the paper, we read that teachers were informed on performance task criteria. Were there written standards for “good” formative assessment (“using evidence of student learning to adjust instruction to improve the response to identified student learning needs”)?
3. Activating prior knowledge: In phase one, teachers viewed a video-presentation of material that focused on a specific aspect of classroom assessment, and they read a related chapter in a classroom assessment text. Were these ways for activating prior knowledge regarding formative assessment practices beforehand?
4. Differentiation: Teachers may have had different needs and wishes regarding their development. In addition, teachers can have various misconceptions and negative beliefs regarding formative assessment, which can hinder teachers’ positive attitude necessary to improve their teaching practice.
(A) Did the assessment coach handle potential differences between teachers in prior knowledge and learning progress?
(B) Was intervention time spent on developing a positive teacher attitude towards formative assessment?
5. Monitoring: Was teachers progress regarding formative assessment monitored during the PD modules?
(B) If so, what was done with monitoring results?
6. Retrieval practice: To solidify knowledge and skills, retrieval practice (deliberately stimulating the recall of the training content learned) can be beneficial.
(A) Was retrieval practice applied in the PD?
(B) If so, how and how often ?
7. Spaced practice: Another instructional strategy that can be productive when developing a skill is spaced practice ( spreading practice over time). Were teachers supposed to practice the skills necessary for each strategy? If so, in which way?
8. Ratio instruction/practice: The formative assessment PD program included approximately 30 hr of PD along with approximately 24 hr of independent study. If you would be asked to divide 100%, what was in your view the ratio of the PD received by teachers in terms of knowledge transmission, and the PD focussing on practicing skills?
9. Representativeness of tasks: If we understood correctly, the task for the teachers was to develop a performance task for their students, which were analyzed with the use of a rubric. We know from research that for formative assessment to be effective, multiple strategies have to be aligned, such as establishing learning intentions, assessment and tasks.
(A) Did you stimulate teachers’ integration of the various formative assessment strategies in their own lessons?
(B) If yes, how?
10. Encourage self-regulation: Were teachers stimulated to monitor and plan their own progress? If yes, in what ways?
11. Class feedback: Did teachers receive guidance in their own lessons on how to implement the learned material?
12. Teacher participation rate: We could not find in the publication information about whether all teachers remained participating in the program (i.e., the attrition rate).
(A) Do you have an idea of the participation rate throughout the sessions?
(B) If teachers dropped-out, were they substituted?
(C) What was the implementation fidelity of the program (the actual implementation versus how the program was designed)?