Education reform in Kazakhstan: Ways of teacher assessment literacy development

Introduction. The reform of many national education systems is associated with a growing focus on assessment as the dominant aspect of the modern educational process. One of the directions of the reform of the Kazakh school system is focused on the transition to criteria-based assessment of the educational achievements of schoolchildren. In this regard, for Kazakhstan, as well as for many countries of the world, the problem of developing evaluative literacy of both practising teachers and today’s students studying in pedagogical educational programmes has become especially acute.

Aim. The aim of the current research is to reveal the essential characteristics of assessment literacy as an important quality of a modern teacher, to actualise the problem of its development in the situation of reforming the school education system, to outline possible directions for solving this problem.

Methodology and research methods. The present research is based on the complex use of theoretical and empirical methods. The theoretical research was carried out using a comparative aspect analysis of scientific and methodological sources and normative documents on the problem of the formation of teacher assessment literacy. Empirical data were obtained when conducting a survey of school teachers, systematising and summarising its results.

Results and scientific novelty. In the course of theoretical analysis, the authors identified the factors, which actualise the problem of teacher assessment literacy development; its main characteristics are summarised, which made it possible for the authors to formulate the definition of this concept. The results of the survey of school teachers demonstrated that shortterm professional development courses for teachers provide a knowledge component of their assessment literacy, but do not solve the problem of developing practical skills, which are in demand in the course of assessment activities. The development of teacher assessment literacy to the behavioural level is a multi-stage and complex process that involves not only theoretical training, but also the independent design of one’s own assessment activity, taking into account the subject characteristics and other contexts accompanying educational practice. Particular attention should be paid to the formation and development of assessment literacy of future teachers during their studies at the university. An integrated approach to solving this problem should provide: the formation of deep knowledge in the chosen subject area, participation in various assessment practices within the framework of methodological courses and pedagogical practices, interaction with practising teachers.

The practical significance of the study lies in the recommendations that determine possible directions for solving the problem of developing school teacher assessment literacy in the context of reforming the educational assessment system.

1. Andrade H. L. Classroom assessment in the context of learning theory and research. In: J. H. McMillan (Ed.). Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2013. p. 17–34. DOI: 10.4135/9781452218649.n2

2. Black P., Wiliam D. Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability. 2009; 21 (1): 5–31. DOI: 10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5

3. Popham W. J. Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory into Practice. 2009; 48 (1): 4–11. DOI: 10.1080/00405840802577536

4. Shapovalova O. N., Efremova N. F. The didactic potential of formative assessment of meta-disciplinary results of schoolchildren: Russian and foreign experience. Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psikhologiya = World of Science. Pedagogy and Psychology [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Aug 05]; 7 (6). Available from: https://mirnauki.com/issue-6-2019.html (In Russ.)

5. DeLuca C., LaPointe-McEwan D., Luhanga U. Teacher assessment literacy: A review of international standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 2016; 28 (3): 251–272: DOI: 10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6

6. Livingston K., Hutchinson C. Developing teachers’ capacities in assessment through career-long professional learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 2017; 24 (2): 290–307. DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2016.1223016

7. Pastore S., Andrade H. Teacher assessment literacy: A three-dimensional model. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2019; 84: 128–138. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.003

8. Martyanov E. A. Improvement of control and assessment activity of a teacher as the factor of professional culture improvement. Pedagogicheskoye obrazovanie i nauka = Pedagogical Education and Science [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2021 Aug 05]; 5: 150–153. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=21519901 (In Russ.)

9. Shmigirilova I. B., Rvanova A. S., Grigorenko O. V. Assessment in education: Current trends, problems and contradictions (review of scientific publications). Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2021; 23 (6): 43–83. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2021-6-43-83 (In Russ.)

10. Vladimirova L. M. Development of teacher assessment competence as a pedagogical problem. Nauka i shkola = Science and School. 2020; 3: 93–98. DOI: 10.31862/1819-463X-2020-3-93-99 (In Russ.)

11. Emelyanova I. N., Teplyakova O. A., Efimova G. Z. Modern evaluation methods at various levels of education. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2019; 6 (21): 9–28. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2019-6-9-28 (In Russ.)

12. DeLuca C., Braund H. Preparing assessment literate teachers. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. 2019. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.487

13. Gotch C. M., French B. F. A systematic review of assessment literacy measures. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2014; 33 (2): 14–18. DOI: 10.1111/emip.12030

14. Looney A., Cummin J., van Der Kleij F., Harris K. Reconceptualising the role of teachers as assessors: Teacher assessment identity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 2018; 25 (5): 442–467. DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2016.1268090

15. Andersson C., Palm T. Characteristics of improved formative assessment practice. Education Inquiry. 2017; 8 (2): 104–122. DOI: 10.1080/20004508.2016.1275185

16. McMunn N., McColskey W., Butler S. Building teacher capacity in classroom assessment to improve student learning. International Journal of Educational Policy, Research and Practice [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2021 Sep 23]; 4 (4): 25–48. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251817047

17. Popham W. J. Assessment literacy overlooked: A teacher educator’s confession. The Teacher Educator. 2011; 46 (4): 265–273. DOI: 10.1080/08878730.2011.605048

18. Brookhart S. Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2011; 30: 3–12. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2010.00195.x

19. Xu Y., Brown G. T. L. Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2016; 58 (1): 149–162. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010

20. Randel B., Apthorp H., Beesley A. D., Clark T. F., Wang X. Impacts of professional development in classroom assessment on teacher and student outcomes. The Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 109 (5): 491–502. DOI: 10.1080/00220671.2014.992581

21. Willis J., Adie L., Klenowski V. Conceptualizing teachers’ assessment literacies in an era of curriculum and assessment reform. Australian Educational Researcher. 2013; 40 (2): 241–256. DOI: 10.1007/s13384-013-0089-9

22. Selyukov R. V. Model of development of the evaluation competence of future teachers in the process of dual training. Vestnik Buryatskogo Gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Obrazovanie. Lichnost’. Obshchestvo = Bulletin of the Buryat State University. Education. Personality. Society [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Sep 15]; 2: 66–74. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=38250352& (In Russ.)

23. Selezneva N. A. Kachestvo vysshego obrazovanija kak ob’ekt sistemnogo issledovanija: lekcija-doklad = The quality of higher education as an object of systemic research: Lecture-report [Internet]. Moscow: Research Center for the Problems of the Quality of Training of Specialists. 2002 [cited 2021 Oct 21]. 95 p. Available from: https://www.twirpx.com/file/1984308/ (In Russ.)

24. Subetto A. I. Qualimetry of a person and education: genesis, formation, development, problems and prospects. In: Materialy XI simpoziuma “Kvalimetriya v obrazovanii: metodologiya, metodika i praktika” = Materials of the XI Symposium “Qualimetry in Education: Methodology, Methodology and Practice” [Internet]. Moscow: Research Center for the Problems of the Quality of Training of Specialists; 2006 [cited 2021 Oct 21]; 97 p. Available from: https://sng1lib.org/book/3008082/f415e2 (In Russ.)

25. Subetto A. I. Ontologija i jepistemologija kompetentnostnogo podhoda, klassifikacija i kvalimetrija kompetencij = Ontology and epistemology of the competence-based approach, classification and qualimetry of competencies [Internet]. Moscow: Research Center for the Problems of the Quality of Training of Specialists; 2006 [cited 2021 Oct 21]. 72 p. Available from: https://sng1lib.org/book/3212873/28f2c7 (In Russ.)

26. Subetto A. I. Kvalimetrija: malaja jenciklopedija = Qualimetry: Small encyclopedia. Issue 1 [Internet]. St. Petersburg: IPTS SZIU – fil. RANKhiGS; 2015 [cited 2021 Oct 21]. 244 p. Available from: http://www.trinitas.ru/rus/doc/0001/005a/00011573.htm (In Russ.)

27. Safonova O. A. Development of qualimetric competence of a preschool teacher in the context of corporate learning. Upravleniye doshkol’nym obrazovatel’nym uchrezhdeniyem = Preschool Educational Institution Management [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2021 Oct 23]; 8: 12−23. Available from: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=27208860 (In Russ.)

28. Shikhov Y. A., Shikhova O. F., Yushkovna V. V. Developing the qualimetric competence of the undegraduate bachelors − Prospective teachers. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2013; 1 (1): 30−41. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2013-1-30-41 (In Russ.)

29. Savinykh G. P., Volchek M. G. Teacher evaluation competencies as a component of intra-school assessment. Sibirskiy uchitel’ = Siberian Teacher [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Oct 23]; 3 (136): 80−85. Available from: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=46654498

30. Boytsova E. G. Formative assessment of educational outcomes students in a modern school. Chelovek i obrazovanie = Man and Education [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2021 Sep 18]; 1 (38): 171–175. Available from: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=21483517 (In Russ.)

31. Cisterna D., Gotwals A. W. Enactment of ongoing formative assessment: challenges and opportunities for professional development and practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education. 2018; 29 (3): 200–222. DOI: 10.1080/1046560X.2018.1432227

32. Zhakiyanova Zh. G. To the question about the implementation of teacher evaluation and its impact on the learning outcome. Vestnik KazNPU im. Abaya. Seriya “Pedagogicheskiye nauki” = Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University “Khabarshy” Scientific Journal. Series “Pedagogical Sciences” [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Sep 16]; 1 (61): 47–51. Available from: http://sp.kaznpu.kz/docs/jurnal_file/file20190529031225.PDF (In Russ.)

33. Zaruba N. A., Kozhevnikova E. E. Model for development of evaluation competence of teachers in the system of advance training as a factor of healthcare of schoolchildren. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv = Bulletin of the Kemerovo State University of Culture and Arts [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2021 Sep 20]; 21: 159–169. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/model-razvitiya-otsenochnoy-kompetentnosti-uchiteley-v-sisteme-povysheniya-kvalifikatsii-kak-faktor-sohraneniya-zdorovya-shkolnikov (In Russ.)

34. Panyushkina M. A. Assessment and qualimetric competencies of a future teacher as a pedagogical concept. Nauchno-metodicheskiy elektronnyy zhurnal “Kontsept” = Scientific-Methodical Electronic Journal “Concept” [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Oct 12]; 4: 70–78. Available from: http://e-koncept.ru/2019/191031.htm (In Russ.)

35. Matvievskaya E. G. Kul’tura ocenochnoj dejatel’nosti = The culture of appraisal activity. 2nd ed. Moscow: Publishing House FLINTA; 2014. 303 p. (In Russ.)

36. DeLuca C., Bellara A. The current state of assessment education: Aligning policy, standards, and teacher education curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education. 2013; 64 (4): 356–372. DOI: 10.1177/0022487113488144

37. Vlasenko S. V. Innovative forms of education in modern teachers’ professional development system. Nauchnoye obespecheniye sistemy povysheniya kvalifikatsii kadrov = Scientific Support of the Personnel Development System [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2021 Sep 17]; 1 (18): 5–12. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/innovatsionnye-formy-obucheniya-v-sovremennoy-sisteme-povysheniya-kvalifikatsii-pedagogov (In Russ.)

38. Panfilova L. G. Organization of in-service teacher training with the use of productive models. Chelovek i obrazovanie = Man and Education [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2021 Sep 16]; 4 (49): 83–86. Available from: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=32655187 (In Russ.)

39. Lekwa A. J., Reddy L. A., Shernoff E. S. The magnitude and precision of estimates of change in formative teacher assessment. School Psychology. 2020; 35 (2): 137–145. DOI: 10.1037/spq0000355

40. Shmigirilova I. B., Rvanova A. S., Tadzhigitov A. A. Pedagogical workshop as a form of development of estimated competence of a mathematics teacher. Sovremennyye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya = Modern Problems of Science and Education [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2021 Sep 17]; 6: 87 Available from: http://www.science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=30408 (In Russ.)

41. DeLuca C. Preparing teachers for the age of accountability: Toward a framework for assessment education. Teacher Education Yearbook XXI. 2012; 34 (5/6): 576–591. DOI: 10.1080/01626620.2012.730347

42.