The validity of formative assessment

206 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The validity of collaborative assessment for learning (2007, background): “Subsequently, the article indicates what some of the learning benefits of valid collaborative assessment for learning might be, assuming that an assessment for learning with high validity actually promotes learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Stobart, 2006).”
Teachers' Conceptions of Assessment in Chinese Contexts: A Tripartite Model of Accountability, Improvement, and Irrelevance. (2011, background): “Assessment for learning policy initiatives, while arising especially in England as a response to high-stakes national testing (Stobart, 2006), are being exported throughout the world, including Hong Kong (Berry & Adamson, 2011; Kennedy & Lee, 2008).”
Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading (2009, unknown): “Notable in the field of education is the analysis of various threats to validity identified and discussed by Crooks et al. (1996), and by Stobart (2006) in his chapter on validity as it relates to formative assessment.”
Assessment and learning: fields apart? (2017, background): “The main validity argument for Assessment for Learning is consequential validity (Stobart, 2012) – how effectively it meets its purpose of improving learning.”