Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2021): Evaluation, feedback, equity: a challenge in education

Testing for the future: A workshop hands-on experience for training in formative assessment

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2021oa12371
Submitted
agosto 14, 2021
Published
2021-12-21

Abstract

The paper describes the results of an online workshop proposed to students of the course “Techniques of assessment” within the Primary Education Science degree course at University of Macerata (Italy). The initiative, managed thanks to a co-teaching approach, had the objective to focus on feedback and to deepen students’ knowledge and experience of using digital tools.

References

  1. Ammaniti M. (2015). La famiglia adolescente. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  2. Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. NJ: Prentice-Hall. DOI: 10.4135/9781446221129.n6.
  3. Boud D., Soler R. (2015). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment and Evalua-tion in Higher Education, 41(3): 400-413. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133.
  4. Calò R., Guerriero A.R. and Marchese M.A. (2019). I principi dell’educazione lingui-stica democratica. In: Loiero S., Lugarini E., editors, Tullio De Mauro: Dieci Tesi per una scuola democratica. Firenze: Franco Cesati Editore.
  5. Clark I. (2012). Formative Assessment: Assessment Is for Self-regulated Learning. Educational Psychological Review, 24 (2): 205-249. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-011-9191-6.
  6. Cornoldi C., Meneghetti C., Moè A. and Zamperlin C. (2018). Processi cognitivi, motivazione e apprendimento. Bologna: il Mulino.
  7. Deluigi R., Fedeli L. (2021). Approccio laboratoriale e co-teaching: metodologie plurali per una formazione integrata. Lifelong Lifewide Learning- LLL, 17: 95-106.
  8. De Mauro T. (1982). Minisemantica dei linguaggi non verbali e delle lingue. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  9. Drescher T. (2017). The Potential of Modelling Co-Teaching in Pre-Service Education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(3): 1-17.
  10. Dutto M.G. (2013). Acqua alle funi. Per una ripartenza della scuola italiana. Mila-no: Vita e Pensiero.
  11. Fedeli L. (2021). Space-Time Variable In The Teaching-Learning Process: Technolo-gy Affordances For The Educational/Didactical Relation. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of the Journal Scuola Democratica “Reinventing Education”, Learning with New Technologies, Equality and Inclusion; Associa-zione “Per Scuola Democratica”, pp. 329-338.
  12. Fedeli L., Pennazio V. (2021). Drivers of student engagement in a global emergency period: some reflections on transition from face-to-face to online learning. In INTED2021 Proceedings15th International Technology, Education and Devel-opment Conference; IATED Academy, pp. 691-697.
  13. Fischer G. (2001). External and shareable artifacts as opportunities for social creativi-ty in communities of interest. In: Gero J.S., Maher M.L., editors, Computational and Cognitive Models of Creative Design VI, University of Sydney.
  14. Fominykh M., Prasolova-Førland E., Divitini M. and Petersen S.A. (2016). Boundary objects in collaborative work and learning. Information Systems Frontiers, 18: 85-102. DOI: 10.1007/s10796-015-9579-9.
  15. Fredericks J., Blumenfeld P. and Paris A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74 (1): 59-109. DOI: 10.3102/00346543074001059.
  16. Galli N. (1994). Educazione dei preadolescenti e degli adolescenti. Brescia: Editrice La Scuola.
  17. Grion V., Tino C. (2018). Verso una “valutazione sostenibile” all’università: percezioni di efficacia dei processi di dare e ricevere feedback fra pari. Lifelong, Lifewide Learning (LLL), 14(31): 38-55. DOI: 10.19241/lll.v14i31.104.
  18. Hattie J., Timperley H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational re-search, 77(1): 81-112. DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487.
  19. INDIRE (2021). Nel crepuscolo dell’ora di lezione. La “normalità” post-pandemica nell’immaginario degli insegnanti «testo disponibile al sito https://tinyurl.com/5y79bhr8».
  20. Kress G. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge (trad. it: Multimodalità. Un approccio socio-semiotico alla comunicazione contemporanea. Bari: Progedit, 2015).
  21. Linell P., Lukmann T. (1991). Asymetries in Dialogue: Some Conceptual Preliminaries. In: Marlová I., Foppa K., editors, Asymetries in Dialogue. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
  22. Lumbelli L. (1982). Psicologia dell’educazione. Comunicare a scuola. Bologna: il Mulino.
  23. Nicol D. (2018). Unlocking generative feedback through peer reviewing. In V. Grion, A. Serbati, editors, Valutare l’apprendimento o valutare per l’apprendimento? Verso una cultura della valutazione sostenibile all’Università. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia.
  24. Price M., Handley K. and Millar J. (2011). Feedback: focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8): 879-896. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2010.483513.
  25. Robinson B., Schaible R.M. (1995). Collaborative Teaching. College Teaching, 43(2): 57-59. DOI: 10.1080/87567555.1995.9925515.
  26. Sposetti P. (2013). Comunicare in contesti di apprendimento. In: Lucisano P., Salerni A., Sposetti P., editors, Didattica e conoscenza. Riflessioni e proposte sull’apprendere e l’insegnare. Roma: Carocci.
  27. Wenger E. (2010). Conceptual Tools for CoPs as Social Learning Systems: Boundaries, Identity, Trajectories and Participation. In: Blackmore C., editor, Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice. London: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-84996-133-2_8.
  28. York-Barr J., Bacharach N., Salk J. Frank J. and Beniek B. (2004). Team Teaching in Teacher Education: General and Special Education Faculty Experiences and Perspectives. Issues in Teacher Education, 13: 73-94.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...