Evaluation and feedback: Evaluative competence as a communicative competence. A research with secondary school teachers
Teachers’ evaluative competence is one of the pivots of the teaching action because it represents a potential spring for the promotion of learning, autonomy and educational success of each pupil. Feedback, meant as a privileged tool in the exercise of evaluation practice, offers the opportunity to enhance the singularity of each student's paths by framing communicative interactions aimed at the co-construction of knowledge. The evaluative competence therefore assumes the connotations of a communicative competence, which substantiates and guides teachers’ evaluative choices by diversifying linguistic registers and choices of communication tools according to the type of feedback functional to educational success.
The study illustrates the results of a research process, implemented with 385 secondary school teachers from the province of Caltanissetta in the academic year 2020/2021. Through the research process, we aimed at increasing teachers’ evaluative competence as a communicative-teaching one centred on feedback.
- Austin J. L. (1987). Come fare cose con le parole (trad.it.). Genova: Marietti.
- Black P., Wiliam D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), pp. 7-73. Doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102.
- Bloom B. (1974). An introduction to Mastery Learning Theory. In J. Block (Ed.), Schools, society and Mastery Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
- Bloom B. S., Madaus G. F. and Hastings J. T. (1971). Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Boud D., Molloy E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), pp. 698-712. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2012.691462.
- Brooks C., Burton R. and Hattie J. (2021). Feedback for learning. In Allen. K., Reu-pert, A., Oades L. (Eds) Building Better Schools with Evidence-based Policy. New York: Routledge, pp. 65-70.
- Calonghi L. (1990). Valutazione. Brescia: La Scuola.
- Chiosso G. (2008). Tra scuola efficace e personalizzazione: un nuovo bivio pedagogico? In M. Baldacci & M. Corsi (Eds.) Una pedagogia per la scuola. Napoli: Tecnodid.
- Ciani A., Rosa A. (2020). Sviluppare le competenze dei docenti universitari nella prospettiva del formative assessment: una ricerca valutativa su un intervento formativo rivolto a docenti delle Università del Myanmar. Excellence and Innovation in Learning and Teaching, 1: 44-62. DOI: 10.3280/exioa1-2020oa10076.
- Creswell J., Plano V. (2011). Designing and conducting Mixed Method Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Dixon F.A., Yssel N., McConnell J. M. and Hardin T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37, pp. 111-127. DOI: 10.1177/0162353214529042.
- Glasson T. (2008). Improving student achievement: A practical guide to assessment for learning. Canberra: Curriculum Corporation.
- Goffman E. (1969). La vita quotidiana come rappresentazione (trad. it.). Bologna: il Mulino.
- Greene J. C. (2007). Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
- Grion V. (2011). Valutare a scuola. Dall’approccio docimologico alla valutazione come apprendimento. In P. Sorzio (ed.). Apprendimento e istituzioni educative. Storia, contesti, soggetti (pp. 191-220). Roma: Carocci.
- Guba E.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the Trustworthiness of Naturalistic Inquires. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(2): 75-91. Doi: 10.1007/BF02766777.
- Hattie J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.
- Hattie J., Timperley H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1): 81-112. DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487.
- Huckin T. et alii. (2012). Critical Discourse Analysis and Rhetoric and Composition. College Composition and Communication, 64(1): 107-129.
- Johnson R. B., Onwuegbuzie A. J. and Turner L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2): 112-133. DOI: 10.1177/1558689806298224.
- Keengwe J. (2015). Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active. Hershey, Pennsylvania: Information Science Reference.
- Kronborg L., Plunkett M. (2012). Examining teacher attitudes and perceptions of teacher competencies required in a new selective high school. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 21(2): 33-46.
- Kronborg L., Plunkett M. (2013). Responding to professional learning: How effective teachers differentiate teaching and learning strategies to engage highly able adolescents. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 22(2): 52-63.
- Levenstein J., Jacobs A. and Cohen S.H. (1977). The effects of feedback as interpersonal reciprocities. Small Group Behavior, 8(4): 415-432. Doi: 10.1177/104649647700800402.
- Mehan H., Griffin P. (1980). Socialization: the view from classroom interactions. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3-4): 357-392. Doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00027.x.
- Nicol D., Macfarlane-Dick D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2): 199-218. Doi: 10.1080/03075070600572090.
- Nicol D., Thomson A. and Breslin C. (2014) Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1): 102-122. Doi: 10.1080/02602938.2013.795518.
- Pellerey M. (1994). Progettazione didattica. Metodi di programmazione educativa scolastica. Torino: SEI.
- Scriven M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R.W. Tyler, R.M. Gagné & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (Vol. 1, pp. 39-83). Chica-go: Rand McNally.
- Zanniello G. (2010). L’educazione personalizzata nella scuola. AA.VV. (Eds). Persona e educazione studi in onore di Sira Serenella Macchietti. Roma: Armando, pp. 427-439.