ABSTRACT
Objective
Being skilled in the development and use of assessments is crucial if teachers are to know whether their students are meeting learning objectives. Unfortunately, many preservice teachers hold beliefs at odds with views that are adaptive for the promotion of learning. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to explore the relationships between epistemic beliefs and preservice teachers’ understanding of foundational concepts of assessment.
Method
Participants were 282 undergraduate students enrolled in an educational psychology course. Multiple regression was used to examine these relationships followed by a deductive analysis of field journal entries.
Results
Results revealed a relationship between epistemic beliefs and understanding of assessment. Those with beliefs in knowledge as more fluid and evolving made more connections between the course and their field experience and demonstrated greater understanding of foundational concepts.
Conclusions
Our findings suggest that teacher education programs should be structured in ways to promote these beliefs. Such beliefs may result in more effective teaching and assessment practices more congruent with the promotion of meaningful learning amongst the next generation of students.
KEY POINTS
What is already known about this topic:
(1) Epistemic beliefs play a role in what is learned.
(2) Epistemic beliefs are associated with metacognitive strategy use, reasoning skills, critical thinking skills, creativity, and motivation.
(3) Assessment practices can shape students’ beliefs about the nature of knowledge.
What this study adds:
(1) A mixed-methods examination of epistemic beliefs in teacher education.
(2) Quantitative results reveal epistemic beliefs significantly contribute to the variance in preservice teachers learning of foundation concepts of assessment.
(3) Qualitative results reveal students with more epistemic beliefs are more likely to make connections between coursework and field experiences.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following for their assistance: Mei-Lin Chang, Ming Ming Chiu, Wang Chong, Matthew Della Sala, Barbara Hofer, Allison Osborne, Toni Kempler Rogat, Ala Samarapungavan, David Sears, Ellen Usher, and Anita Woolfolk Hoy.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Data availability statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, M.Y. The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.