Tale of two science teachers’ formative assessment practices in a similar school environment

For the scope of this paper, only two themes, ‘Assessment’ and ‘Feedback’ will be highlighted and discussed.

Assessment
Under this theme, the types of classroom activities and questioning techniques used by these two teachers will be discussed. Since both teachers taught in the same school, they had access to similar resources. One of these resources was a technological teaching aid provided by the Malaysian Ministry of Education. The teaching aid, called Teaching Courseware (TC), was parallel with the Malaysian Year Five Science curriculum and contained notes, simple demonstrations, selected practical work and interactive activities. In Hafiz’s lesson, the Teaching Courseware (TC) would dominate the learning process. Hafiz would put on the TC and make the students interact with the activities, usually without any input or interaction from him. Observation data showed that the TC would be on for almost about 20 minutes without any interaction (asking questions and/or clarifications) among teacher and students. For example,

The TC continues to show the concept of when substances gain heat energy, it becomes warmer. There was a picture of a cup that becomes hot as it gains heat from the hot water. The TC also shows that the handle of the cup receives less heat and thus can be held. The TC move to another concept that shows when substances lose heat it becomes cooler.

Hafiz : …Boil the water using bunser burner. Bunser burner has fire, so the fire (is) hot… the water will become hot after some time.
Hafiz resumes the TC.

(Hafiz, observation)

When the TC did ask questions, Hafiz seldom up-took these cues to invite his students to give their ideas. This meant that Hafiz rarely asked his students to express their thoughts or ideas about the content matter. The researcher’s field note supported this observation.

‘The teacher only asks questions from the courseware and did not ask if the students understood what they were watching. His wait time is generally less than five seconds and he tends to answer the questions himself.’

(Hafiz, field notes)

His questioning techniques during classroom discourses were rather weak as the questions he asked generally were close-ended questions. An example of the classroom discourse is shown.

Hafiz    : Number 6?
Ss         : D
Hafiz    : Yes.
Hafiz    : Number 7?

(Hafiz, observation)

Other than using the TC, most of Hafiz’s assessment tasks or questions came from the textbook. Hafiz conducted a very fixed style of teaching as he controlled the pace and the direction of his lessons. His students were of higher academic ability, yet they rarely participated or gave their ideas as Hafiz did not create opportunities for them to do so. Because of this, his students were seen talking and doing other work during their science lessons. The students were generally bored and it seemed that only a few students were paying attention. For example, one boy was doing his mathematics work under his desk (Hafiz, observation).

As a comparison Alif also used the TC. However, unlike Hafiz, Alif did not depend too much on it. When the TC asked questions, Alif would click on the pause button and discuss the questions with his students.

The TC was about how when substances gain heat energy, they become warmer. There was a picture of a cup that becomes hot as it gains heat from the hot water. Alif stops the TC.

Alif       : Who can explain, why the cup is hot but the handle isn’t?
Ss         : Because the handle is plastic
Alif       : Are you sure the handle is plastic?
Ss         : It looks like the same material.
Alif       : Yes, then why?

(Alif, observation)

Even though both teachers taught high ability students, only Alif constantly ask higher-order thinking questions. He constantly asked students questions that require the students to think and acquire a robust understanding. In fact, Alif tend to ask follow-up questions (uptake students’ answers) so there is a need for his students to be sure of what they are saying and have a good understanding of their answers.

Alif      : All get up. Start rubbing your hands for 30 seconds. Move faster and faster… Okay now, put your hands to your cheeks?
Ss        :Warm… hot
Alif      : Hot? Are you sure?
Ss        : Warm
Alif      :How can your hands become warm?
Ss        : Heat … By rubbing it.
Alif      : So? How did your hands become warm?
Ss        : Because you rub your hands
Alif      : Why when you rub your hands it becomes hot. Because of what?

(Alif, observation)

Moreover, if there were any indecisiveness in his students’ answers, Alif made his students look for more information from the Internet so that they are more certain with their answers.

Alif : Okay so now, what is the exact body temperature? (Students were shouting out various answers). Okay, I give you 20 minutes to serve the Internet to get an answer. Hello! Human body temperature?

Classroom becomes noisy as students surf the Internet and discuss with their peers.
Then the teacher holds a discussion to allow students to share the information that they have obtained from the Internet.
Some said that body temperature 36.9 °C and 37 °C. Some said it was 98.2 °F.

Alif : Okay, Adrian, can you share with us your report? What are your findings?

(Alif, observation)

Alif’s lessons were more student-centred as he created opportunities for his students to work in groups. Alif also did not confine his classroom activities to the TC and textbook only. In addition Alif asked questions from activity books and from the Internet. In this manner, Alif exposes his students to the various ways a question may be asked. For example, Alif had downloaded a question from the Internet on the concept of expansion and contraction. One of the questions asked the students to ‘Draw a conclusion based on your observation’. A student asked Alif where he was supposed to draw the conclusion as he literally thought that he had to draw a picture to explain the conclusion (Alif, observation). This question was worded very differently from the questions in the Malaysian textbooks and local context. Alif had to explain to his students that the question actually meant for them to explain the conclusion of the experiment. Since Alif took the trouble to prepare questions from multiple sources, his students were exposed to different ways the questions can be asked.

When the researcher asked Alif why he took the trouble to prepare various assessment tasks and from various sources, Alif stated that he did not want his students to feel bored and so they will be motivated to learn the science.

‘… for them to learn various skills and avoid feeling bored. …Are attracted to the subject… when students are confident, they are close to me, friendly, so they will be brave to try even if they do not know the answer, they will be brave to try.’

(Alif, interview)

Feedback
Feedback can only be given if there was an assessment task done. Unless teachers ask questions or provide tasks to their students, no students’ responses will be forthcoming that can assist the teachers gain understanding of their students’ learning progression. With this understanding, only then can teachers provide appropriate feedback (Black et. al., 2004). Both teachers taught students of similar academic ability. Since Hafiz’s assessment tasks were only confined to the TC and textbook, his questioning techniques were focused on lower order thinking questions. Perhaps because of this he was unable to gain necessary information on his students’ learning progression and thus the quality of feedback he provided his students were generally evaluative. He normally provided the right answer without discussing the subject matter with his students. For example, instead of encouraging his students to elaborate on their answer ‘the colour’ as shown in the excerpt below, he provided them with the right answer. It was observed that even when his students provided the wrong answer, he simply corrected them without any further discussion.

Hafiz   : …Okay, what is observed?
Ss        : Litmus paper (students are uncertain of their answer)
Hafiz   : No.
Ss        : The colour.
Hafiz   : No.
Ss        : The colour of litmus paper?
Hafiz   : The colour change of litmus paper. You write that down.

(Hafiz, observation)

In contrast, since Alif constantly asked his students for reasons and justifications and he provided assessment tasks from various sources, he was able to obtain a better landscape of his students’ understanding of the subject matter. Consequently, he was able to provide constructive feedback. Constructive feedback is antithesis to evaluative feedback where teachers show students where their strengths and weaknesses are.

Alif   : Can you hold and touch the thermometer’s bulb?
Ss     : No.
Alif   : No, why?... Give reasons.
S      : Mercury.
Alif   : There is mercury there. So why can’t we hold the bulb?
S      : The mercury can go into our skin. …
Alif   : The mercury is very sensitive to heat. When the mercury gains heat it expands and it will rise.

(Alif, observation)

Even when his students gave him the right answer for the question, can you hold and touch the thermometer’s bulb? not only did Alif praise them and then move on, but he followed up on his students' answers and asked them to give him reasons for their answers. Only when he discovered where in the learning progression his students’ lacked understanding (mercury can go into our skin), did he then provide his students with the accurate explanation.