Abstract

In teacher education, enhancing pre-service teachers' higher-order thinking skills (HOTs) is very crucial. The effect of comprehensive professional development in assessment for learning (AfL) on pre-service teachers' HOTs in an algebra course was investigated using a nonequivalent group quasi-experimental design. A total of 129 pre-service teachers who took the Fundamental Concepts of Algebra course from three different teacher education colleges [TECs] selected randomly from ten Ethiopian TECs, participated in the study. Among these students who attended the course, a group of 52 pre-service teachers with three mathematics teacher educators who gave them the course engaged in comprehensive training and professional development on AfL, while the remaining pre-service teachers were attending the course the usual way in two different TEC. A one-way ANOVA was used to determine whether there was a mean difference among the three groups and three achiever levels on their HOTs scores. The result showed that there is a statistically significant mean difference in the HOTs scores between pre-service teachers in the treatment group and the comparison groups. The results also showed that there was a statistically significant mean difference among the three achiever levels (low, medium, and high) in their HOTs scores in the treatment group before the intervention, but there was no statistically significant mean difference after the intervention. The implications of the results and recommendations are discussed.

Keywords

References

• Agustyaningrum, N., Sari, R. N., Abadi, A. M., & Mahmudi, A. (2020). Dominant factors that cause students’ difficulties in learning abstract algebra: A case study at a university in Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 847-866. https://doi.org/10.29333/IJI.2021.14151A
• Alemu, M., Kind, V., Basheh, M., Michael, K., Atnafu, M., Kind, P., & Rajab, T. (2019). The knowledge gap between intended and attained curriculum in Ethiopian teacher education: identifying challenges for future development. Compare, 51(1), 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2019.1593107
• Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017a). Characteristics of improved formative assessment practice. Education Inquiry, 8(2), 104-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2016.1275185
• Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017b). The impact of formative assessment on student achievement: A study of the effects of changes to classroom practice after a comprehensive professional development programme. Learning and Instruction, 49, 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.12.006
• Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for Learning: 10 Principles-Research-based principles to guide classroom practice. Author.
• Barnes, A., & Marks, R. (2020). Formative assessment in mathematics education. In G. Ineson & H. Povey (Eds.), Debates in Mathematics Education (pp. 1-10). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429021015-19
• Birenbaum, M., DeLuca, C., Earl, L., Heritage, M., Klenowski, V., Looney, A., Smith, K., Timperley, H., Volante, L., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2015). International trends in the implementation of assessment for learning: Implications for policy and practice. Policy Futures in Education, 13(1), 117-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210314566733
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 81-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171009200119
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 25(6), 551–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441807
• Burkhardt, H., & Schoenfeld, A. (2019). Formative assessment in mathematics. In H. L. Andrade, R. E. Bennett & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment in the disciplines. (pp. 35-67). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315166933-3
• Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin Company.
• Chemeli, J. (2019). Impact of the five key formative assessment strategies on learner’s achievement in mathematics instruction in secondary schools: A case of Nandi County, Kenya. International Academic Journal of Social Sciences and Education, 2(1), 212–229.
• Chigonga, B. (2020). Formative Assessment in Mathematics Education in the Twenty-First Century. In K. G. Fomunyam (Ed.), Theorizing STEM Education in the 21st Century. Intechopen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88996
• Cottrill, J. (2003). An Overview of Theories of Learning in Mathematics Education Research. June, 1–8.
• Cousins-Cooper, K., Staley, K. N., Kim, S., & Luke, N. S. (2017). The effect of the math emporium instructional method on students’ performance in college algebra. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9493
• Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development (research brief). Effective Teacher Professional Development (Research Brief). Learning Policy Institute.
• Ferretti, F., Paraskevi, M. C., & Vannini, I. (2018). Formative assessment for mathematics teaching and learning teacher professional development research by video analysis methodologies. FrancoAngeli.
• Gemeda, F. T., & Tynjälä, P. (2015). Professional learning of teachers in Ethiopia: Challenges and implications for reform. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n5.1
• Goos, M. (2013). Sociocultural perspectives in research on and with mathematics teachers: A zone theory approach. ZDM, 45(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0477-z
• Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students’ self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 100955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100955
• Güler, M., & Çelik, D. (2022). Supporting novice mathematics teachers: The impact of e-mentoring on lesson analysis skills. Teaching and Teacher Education, 113, 103658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103658
• Hadi, S., Retnawati, H., Munadi, S., Apino, E., & Wulandari, N. F. (2018). The difficulties of high school students in solving higher-order thinking skills problems. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(4), 520-532. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/18.76.520
• Hadzhikoleva, S., Hadzhikolev, E., & Kasakliev, N. (2019). Using peer assessment to enhance Higher Order thinking skills. TEM Journal, 8(1), 242-247. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM81-34
• Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332
• Hausberger, T. (2018). Structuralist praxeologies as a research program on the teaching and learning of abstract algebra. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 4(1), 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-017-0063-4
• Johnson, C. C., Sondergeld, T. A., & Walton, J. B. (2019). A Study of the Implementation of Formative Assessment in Three Large Urban Districts. American Educational Research Journal, 56(6), 2408-2438. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219842347
• Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
• Kruiper, S. M. A., Leenknecht, M. J. M., & Slof, B. (2021). Using scaffolding strategies to improve formative assessment practice in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(3), 458-476. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1927981
• Kyaruzi, F., Strijbos, J. W., Ufer, S., & Brown, G. T. L. (2019). Students’ formative assessment perceptions, feedback use and mathematics performance in secondary schools in Tanzania. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 26(3), 278-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1593103
• Lyon, C. J., Nabors Oláh, L., & Caroline Wylie, E. (2019). Working toward integrated practice: Understanding the interaction among formative assessment strategies. Journal of Educational Research, 112(3), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1514359
• McCowan, R. J. R., & McCowan, S. S. C. (1999). Item analysis for criterion-referenced tests. Center for Development of Human Services.
• Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2019). Advancing formative assessment in every classroom: A guide for instructional leaders. ASCD.
• Moyo, S. E., Combrinck, C., & Van Staden, S. (2022). Evaluating the impact of formative assessment intervention and experiences of the standard 4 teachers in teaching higher-order-thinking skills in mathematics. Frontiers in Education, 7, 771437. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.771437
• Radmehr, F., & Drake, M. (2019). Revised Bloom’s taxonomy and major theories and frameworks that influence the teaching, learning, and assessment of mathematics: a comparison. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(6), 895-920. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1549336
• Rakoczy, K., Pinger, P., Hochweber, J., Klieme, E., Schütze, B., & Besser, M. (2019). Formative assessment in mathematics: Mediated by feedback’s perceived usefulness and students’ self-efficacy. Learning and Instruction, 60, 154–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.004
• Shepard, L. A., Penuel, W. R., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2018). Using learning and motivation theories to coherently link formative assessment, grading practices, and large-scale assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 37(1), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12189
• Siobhan, L., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & William, D. (2005). Classroom assessment: minute by minute, day by day. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 19-24.
• Tanışlı, D., Türkmen, H., Turgut, M., & Köse, N. (2020). How a teacher professional development program influences students’ algebra performance? Reflections from a web-based platform. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(3), 327-343. http://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2020464571
• Tanudjaya, C. P., & Doorman, M. (2020). Examining higher order thinking in Indonesian lower secondary mathematics classrooms. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(2), 277-300. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.2.11000.277-300
• Van den Berg, M., Bosker, R. J., & Suhre, C. J. M. (2018). Testing the effectiveness of classroom formative assessment in Dutch primary mathematics education. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29(3), 339-361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2017.1406376
• Wilson, D. M., & Narasuman, S. (2020). Investigating teachers’ implementation and strategies on higher order thinking skills in school based assessment instruments. Asian Journal of University Education, 16(1), 70-84. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v16i1.8991
• Workneh, A., & Tassew, W. W. (2013). Teacher training and development in Ethiopia: Improving education quality by developing teacher skills, attitudes and work conditions. Young Lives.
• Wright, D., Burton, M., Cusi, A., & Thompson, D. R. (2018). Looking to the Future: Lessons Learned and Ideas for Further Research. In D. Wright, M. Burton, A. Cusi, & D. R. Thompson (Eds), Classroom Assessment in Mathematics (pp. 231–242). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73748-5_15
• Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010
• Zepeda, S. J. (2013). Professional development : What works. Routledge.
• Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145-181. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_1

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.