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

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 14 No. 1 (2023): University didactics, innovation and inclusion. Assessment and feedback

Designing embedded assessment in Higher Education workshops: A pilot study with pre-service teachers

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess1-2023oa15175
Submitted
January 8, 2023
Published
2023-07-21

Abstract

Assessment is one of the most controversial and difficult topics to deal with in the context of Higher Education. The following contribution aims to present the proposal of Embedded Assessment within the Didactics workshops included in the Degree Course in Primary Education, which are configured as a mediating activity between Courses and Apprenticeship. Starting from the framework of Pellerey’s (2004) trifocal perspective, the trajectories of observation and monitoring of the workshop have been rethought based on the triangulated system of objective, subjective and intersubjective dimensions of assessment. From this point of view, our assessment shows the objectives to be achieved and suggests which strategies and operational proposals to put in place to enable students to orchestrate a series of skills and competences and knowledge necessary for the achievement of the envisaged objectives. When this formative focus translates into the constant effort to turn every teaching activity into an opportunity for assessment, we enter the logic of assessment as learning.

References

  1. Agarwal P. K., Bain, P. M., and Chamberlain R. W. (2012). The value of applied research: Retrieval practice improves classroom learning and recommendations from a teacher, a principal, and a scientist. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3): 437-448.
  2. Baughan P. (2020). On your marks: Learner-focused feedback practices and feedback literacy. York: Advance HE. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/your-marks-learner-focused-feedback-practices-and-feedback-literacy.
  3. Berthoz A. (2014). La semplessità. Torino: Codice.
  4. Berthoz A. (2015). La vicarianza. Il nostro cervello creatore di mondi. Torino: Codice Edizioni.
  5. Boud D., and Molloy E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6): 698-712.
  6. Carless D., and Winstone N. (2019). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. London, UK: Routledge.
  7. Case J., and Gunstone R. (2002). Metacognitive development as a shift in approach to learning: an in-depth study. Studies in Higher education, 27(4): 459-470.
  8. Castoldi M. (2018). Curricolo per competenze: percorsi e strumenti (pp. 154-160). Roma: Carocci.
  9. Coggi C., and Ricchiardi P. (2018). Developing effective teaching in higher education. Form@re-Open Journal per la formazione in rete, 18(1): 23-38.
  10. Colarusso S., and Giancola O. (2020). Università e nuove forme di valutazione: Strategie individuali, produzione scientifica, effetti istituzionali (Vol. 59). Sapienza Università Editrice.
  11. Colombo M. (1991). La valutazione nella ricerca sociologica: dalla metodologia alla pratica. Studi di sociologia, 281-296.
  12. Damiano E. (2012). Il “senso” della valutazione. Fenomenologia sociale e opzioni epistemologiche. Education Sciences & Society, 2(2).
  13. Dawson P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3): 347-360.
  14. Earl L. (2003). Assessment as Learning. Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student learning. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks (CA).
  15. Evans C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1): 70-120.
  16. Gaynor J. W. (2020). Peer review in the classroom: Student perceptions, peer feedback quality and the role of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(5): 758-775.
  17. Grimaldi E., Landri P., and Viteritti A. (2022). Il movimento delle forme dell’educazione. Epistemologie, governo e soggettività. Scuola democratica, 13(1): 11-24.
  18. Hadji C. (2017). La valutazione delle azioni educative. Brescia: Morcelliana.
  19. Jonsson A. (2013). Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(1): 63-76.
  20. Le Boterf G. (2008). Des cursus professionnalisants ou par compétences à l’Université: enjeux, craintes et modalités. Actualité de la formation permanente, 209: 49-55.
  21. Najafabadi M. K., and Mahrin M. N. R. (2016). A systematic literature review on the state of research and practice of collaborative filtering technique and implicit feedback. Artificial intelligence review, 45(2): 167-201.
  22. Pellerey M. (2004). Le competenze individuali e il portfolio. Milano: La Nuova Italia.
  23. Perrenoud P. (2002). Dieci Nuove Competenze per Insegnare. Invito al viaggio. Roma: Anicia.
  24. Rivoltella P.C. (2014). La previsione. Neuroscienze, apprendimento, didattica. Brescia: La Scuola.
  25. Rivoltella P.C. (2021). Apprendere a distanza, teorie e metodi. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  26. Rivoltella P.C., and Rossi, P. G. (2022). Nuovo agire didattico. Brescia: Scholé.
  27. Pentucci M., and Rossi P. G. (2021). Progettazione come azione simulata. Milano: FrancoAngeli (pp. 1-306).
  28. Sambell K., McDowell L., and Montgomery C. (2012). Assessment for learning in higher education. London, UK: Routledge.
  29. Tessaro F. (2014). Compiti autentici o prove di realtà?. FORMAZIONE & INSEGNAMENTO. Rivista internazionale di Scienze dell'educazione e della formazione, 12(3): 77-88.
  30. Van der Schaaf M., Baartman L., Prins F., Oosterbaan A., and Schaap H. (2013). Feedback dialogues that stimulate students’ reflective thinking. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(3): 227-245.
  31. Wilson M., and Sloane K. (2000). From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system. Applied measurement in education, 13(2): 181-208.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...