Expectancy-value theory as an explanatory theory for the effect of professional development programmes in formative assessment on teacher practice

Figures & data

Figure 1. Simplified model of expectancy-value theory (based on Figure 1 in Wigfield and Cambria 2010, 37).

Table 1. Teachers’ motivation for implementing formative assessment.

Items in Questionnaire 1	Mean value for year-7 teachers	Mean value for year-4 teachers^a
1. How much of a change would you like to make in your teaching towards a more formative assessment practice (compared to your teaching before the PDP) for your mathematics class during this school year?	3.6 (0.7)	4.1 (0.6)
2. How motivated are you to make these changes?	4.2 (0.7)	4.7 (0.5)
3. During the coming school year at times you will have several important things that you need to do at work. To what extent do you plan to prioritize your implementation of a more formative classroom practice during these periods?	3.1* (0.7)	4.1 (0.8)

The first column displays the item in Questionnaire 1. The second and third columns show the average values for the year-7 and year-4 teachers’ responses to each question on a 5-point scale (1 = few or minor changes/to a little extent; 5 = several or major changes/to a large extent). Standard deviations are provided in the parentheses

*Significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between the two groups of teachers.

^aThese values come from Andersson and Palm (2018).

Table 2. Teachers’ expectancy and value beliefs about implementing formative assessment.

Items in Questionnaire 1 (administered directly after the PDP)	Belief	Mean year-7 teachers	Mean year-4 teachers^a
1. To what extent do you think that you have acquired the knowledge of formative assessment you need to feel ready to undertake such teaching in an effective way?	Expectancy of success	3.6 (0.5)	4.1 (0.6)
2. To what extent do you feel it is important for you to make changes in your teaching towards a more formative assessment practice?	Attainment value	3.7 (0.9)	4.2 (0.8)
3. How much of a positive outcome for yourself do you think the changes you plan on making will lead to?	Utility value	3.6* (0.6)	4.2 (0.7)
4. How much of a positive outcome in terms of student learning do you think the changes you plan on making will lead to?	Utility value	3.3* (0.9)	4.0 (0.8)
5. How much of other positive outcomes for students (e.g., interest or welfare) do you think that the changes you plan on making will lead to?	Utility value	3.2* (0.9)	4.1 (0.7)
6. How much (time, effort, scepticism, other) do you think the changes you plan on making will cost you?	Cost	3.3 (1.1)	2.8 (1.0)
Items in Questionnaire 2 (administered one year after the PDP)
1. To what extent does it feel important for you to continue with a formative assessment practice?	Attainment value	3.9* (0.9)	4.8 (0.4)
2. How much of a positive outcome for yourself have you experienced due to the changes in teaching you have made?	Utility value	3.2* (0.8)	4.1 (0.9)
3. How much of a positive outcome in terms of your students’ learning have you experienced due to the changes in teaching you made?	Utility value	2.9* (0.5)	3.7 (0.7)
4. How much of other positive outcomes for students (e.g., interest or welfare) have you experienced due to the changes in teaching you have made?	Utility value	2.8* (0.8)	3.7 (0.8)
5. How high do you feel the costs (time, effort, scepticism, other) have been for you due to the changes in teaching you have made?	Cost	2.9 (0.9)	3.0 (1.0)

The first column displays the questions in Questionnaire 1 and 2 that measure the expectancy and value beliefs specified in Column 2. The third and fourth columns display the average value of the teachers’ responses to each question on a 5-point scale (1 = little or none; 5 = high/very much). Standard deviations are provided in the parentheses.

*Significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between the two groups of teachers.

^aThese values come from Andersson and Palm (2018).

Wigfield, A., and J. Cambria. 2010. “Expectancy-Value Theory: Retrospective and Prospective.” In The Decade Ahead: Theoretical Perspectives on Motivation and Achievement, edited by T. Urdan and S. Karabenick, 35–70. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.

 Google Scholar

Andersson, C., and T. Palm. 2018. “Reasons for Teachers’ Successful Development of A Formative Assessment Practice through Professional Development: A Motivation Perspective.” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 25 (6): 576–597. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2018.1430685.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar