Pre-service physics teachers learn how to use peer- and self-assessment in
their teaching
Olga Gioka, Department of Secondary School Science and Mathematics Education, Boğaziçi
University, Istanbul
Abstract: The focus of this research is on the development of peer- and self- assessment skills during
a teacher education program. The aim is to investigate our pre-service physics teachers’ efforts to learn
how to give feedback to one another in order to improve their peers’ and their own work (written
coursework and actual teaching). Our teachers were introduced to research-based assessment
strategies. The twenty-four participants were in their final year. The study looked at our participants as
both learners and prospective teachers. One-to-one interviews were conducted after they gave
feedback to their peers, as well as when they received feedback from their peers. Interview questions
were about their perceptions of the peer-assessment process. On the other hand, interview questions
focused on the process of self-assessment. All physics lessons in their internship schools were videotaped to be watched later in a University module called: “Seminar on Practice in Teaching Physics”.
Each of the participants took some time to give written feedback to the teacher (the peer who taught
each time). A whole class discussion was held after video watching in the same module. Finally, all
coursework (lesson plans, handouts, worksheets and tests given to secondary physics students) was
collected. Our participants were asked to write reflective journals so that we are able to identify their
difficulties and trace their progress. The findings from this research will provide evidence to enable us
to improve our program in response to the difficulties and needs of our participants.
Key words: Classroom assessment, Teachers’ assessment literacy, Peer-assessement, Self-assessment.
Introduction
Many research studies provided strong evidence of the high benefits when using assessment for
learning in learning and teaching. At the same time, research has shown that novice teachers have
limited expedients regarding assessment strategies and have relatively few experiences with a variety
of alternative assessments (Freiberg, 2002). Initial teacher education is a turning point in preparing
assessment literate teachers, especially physics teachers. An adequate preparation of physics teachers
is vital to ensuring good teaching and assessment of physics in secondary schools. If we expect our
teachers to be able to employ assessment for learning strategies in their classes, we need to introduce
to them in their initial teacher education (McDermott, 1990).
A Theoretical Framework for Pre-service Teacher Education and Teacher Learning
The study has looked at the participants as both learners and prospective teachers (Buday and Kelly,
2006). Teacher learning is a slow process and yet, it is essential to allow time for teachers to learn in a
meaningful way. The transition from learner to teacher or from novice to expert teacher is fundamental
and difficult, and it is greately facilitated when student teachers work closely with their peers and
experienced colleagues. The theoretical framework for this study has drawn upon important aspects of
teacher learning and recent research on teacher learning. In their seminal book: “How people learn”,
Bransford, Brown and Cocking (2000), summarised some principles guiding teacher learning as
follows:
1. “Programs should be learner-centered: Programs should not be pre-arranged workshops; they
should ask teachers where they need help.
2. They should be assessment-centered: In order for teachers to change their practices, they need
opportunities to try things out in their classrooms and then receive feedback.
3. Teachers are learners and the principles of learning and transfer for student learners apply to
teachers, too. It is the difficult transition from novice to expert teacher” (pp 190-205).
Also, it is evident that it is much better to offer pre-service teachers the opportunity to try out
innovations in their own learning and practice, rather than trying to “change their existing practices”
through professional developent courses when they are already practicing teachers (Luft et al., 2015).
Our teachers have been introduced to research-based assessment strategies (Black and Wiliam, 1998;
Pellegrino, Chudowsky and Glaser, 2001). According to Black and Wiliam, teachers need to have
opportunities to practice assessment strategies even in their initial eduation. They argued that there is a
need for specialised programs for professional development opportunities to address the development
of assessment practices to support learning.
The context of the study
The study took place in the context of two modules of the program of physics teacher education
called: “Seminar on Practice in Teaching Physics”. We wanted our pre-service teachers to gain
experience and confidence in using assessment for learning practices: communicating clear learning
goals, communicating success criteria, providing secondary students with opportunities to give oral
and written feedback to one another. They were asked to give written feedback to their peers; written
feedback to coursework, even to mid-term and final exam papers. All teaching plans and assessment
tasks were developed by our participants in the context of their initial teacher education. This is one of
the strong points of this study since physics teachers usually take assessment modules which give
them general education and not applied to the specific subject of physics they will teach. The
methodology to be presented in the next section, has been designed to address the following research
question: “What are the difficulties and challenges of prospective/trainee physics teachers in relation
to asessment for learning practices in their internship physics classes?”
Methodology
The study has utilized qualitative case study research methods (Stake, 1995; Yin, 1994) in an effort to
collect in-depth and comprehensive information about the participants’ difficulties and efforts to learn
how to use feedback, how to communicate clear learning goals, success criteria and so on. The study
has been organised so that it provides in-depth, quality information through different research
methods: 1) Interviews with the participants before their teaching and after their teaching. In one-toone interviews, they talk about how they give feedback and how this process helps them improve their
teaching performance and coursework.
2) Collection of written students’ work, written tasks, all coursework (lesson plans, handouts,
worksheets and tests given to secondary physics students). In fact, teaching plans and assessment tasks
were developed by our participants. Participants were also asked to write reflective journals so that we
are able to identify their difficulties and trace their progress (Etkina, 2000, Boud, 2001).
3) Observations of the actual teaching by our participants in schools in which they have their
internship practice.
The participants were asked to “think aloud” when preparing a lesson plan. Interview questions have
helped us learn what difficulties and challenges they experienced. All interviews were videotaped and
transcribed verbatim for analysis. Their teaching was also videotaped and transcribed before analysis.
A qualitative and quantitative data analysis identified particular trends within and among the
participants. Changes and improvement in teachers was also examined, as teaching practice
progressed. The reliability of the analysis is based on the triangulation of the three methods employed
(Creswell, 2009). Qualitative data analysis (Miles and Huberman, 1994) was conducted to identify
particular trends within the participants.
Results and Discussion
Learning how to give feedback to their peers and later to their students and then, how to receive
feedback to improve teaching is a developmental process. Initially, most participants were shy. They
would give written feedback with detailed instruction on how to improve, but when the researcher
asked them to give a grade to a particular piece of work, they hesitated. They explained this attitude in
terms of their friendship, collegiality and so on. For some of them, grades were more important than
feedback, therefore, they should have been careful with what grade to assign in each piece of work.
They also mentioned that “high-stakes” exams restrict their instruction and time available for giving
feedback.
By time, they focused on the assessement criteria or the success criteria and what makes good physics
teaching, what makes a good lesson plan and coursework. By time, they would take into account their
peers’ feedback to improve their teaching. Both assessee and assessor benefit from the process.
What is more striking, is the fact that the low achieving students have benefited more and really
enjoyed the self- and peer-assessment process. Data from their actual teaching and coursework, as
well as answers in interview questions constitute a strong evidence. Trainee teachers experience
difficulties and have needs which must be considered in planning and implementing their initial
education.
In conclusion, learning how to use assessment for learning practices in secondary physics teaching is
complex and challenging. Also, the development of such assessment skills in trainee teachers should
deserve attention from our cmmunity. Understanding of teachers’ experiences, difficulties and
challenges during their practice is necessary to design effective preparation programs. This research
study will give us new understandings of the professional development of teachers with regard
assessment practices, which will be informative to physics teacher educators and professional
development specialists. The findings from this research will provide evidence to enable us to improve
our program in response to the difficulties and needs of our participants.
References:
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi
Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-144.
Boud, D. (2001). Using journal writing to enhance reflective practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, 90, 6-18.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. and Cocking, R. R. (2000). Teacher learning. In J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown and
R. R. Cocking (eds.). How people learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (pp. 190-205).
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Buday, M.C. and Kelly, D. (2006). National Board Certification and the Teaching Profession Committment to
Quality Assurance. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(3), 25-32.
Creswell, J. N. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitaive, and mixed methods approach. London: Sage.
Etkina, E. (2000). Weekly Reports: A two-way feedback tool. Science Education, 84 (5), 594 –605.
Freiberg, H. J. (2002). Essential skills for new teachers. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 56-60.
Luft, J.A., Dubois, S., Nixon, R., and Campbell, B. (2015). Supporting newly hired teachers of science:
Attaining professional teaching standards. Studies in Science Education, 51(1), 1-48.
McDermott, L. C. (1990). A perspective on teacher preparation in physics and other sciences: The need for
special science courses for teachers. American Journal of Physics, 58, 537-742.
Miles, M. and Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., and Glaser, R. (Eds.) (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and
design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. London: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
This work is funded by BAP STUP 10800.