The impact of criteria-referenced formative assessment on fifth-grade students’ theater arts achievement

References

• Anderson, K. T., Zuiker, S. J., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Hickey, D. T. (2007). Classroom discourse as a tool to enhance formative assessment and practise in science. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1721–1744. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690701217295
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. G. (2001). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in Education, 4(4). Retrieved from https://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1630/665/.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 90–105). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. G., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. The Journal of Educational Research, 97, 21–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrade, H., Chen, F., Lui, A., Mir, H. & Valle, C. ( April, 2014). An empirical investigation of criteria-referenced formative assessment in the arts. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Education Research Association (AERA), Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. & Cizek, G. (Eds.) (2010). Handbook of formative assessment. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric‐referenced self‐assessment and middle school students’ writing. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17, 199–214.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric‐referenced self‐assessment on elementary school students' writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(2), 3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 12–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrade, H., Wang, X., Du, Y., & Akawi, R. (2009). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and self-efficacy for writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 102, 287–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, P. C. (2011). A Tutorial and Case Study in propensity score analysis: An application to estimating the effect of In-Hospital smoking cessation counseling on mortality. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 119–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.540480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett, M. (1990). Guidelines for evaluating and assessment in art and design education 5–18 years. Journal of Art & Design Education, 9, 299–313.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: a critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18, 5–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678
   Google Scholar
• Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 7–73.
   Google Scholar
• Boulet, M.-M., Simard, G., & de Melo, D. (1990). Formative evaluation effects on learning music. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 119–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bransford, J., Brown, A. & Cocking, R. (2000). How People Learn: Mind, brain, experience and school, expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brookhart, S. M. (2007). Expanding views about formative classroom assessment: A review of the literature. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), Formative classroom assessment: theory into practice (pp. 43–62). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. McMillan (Ed.), SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367–394). New York, NY: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Cataloglu, E. (2007). Internet-mediated assessment portal as a pedagogical learning tool: a case study on understanding kinematics graphs. European Journal of Physics, 28, 767–776.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Teou, L.-Y. (2010). Formative assessment: Using concept cartoon, pupils’ drawings, and group discussions to tackle children's ideas about biological inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 44, 108–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.9656206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, K., Nam, J. H., & Lee, H. (2001). The Effects of formative assessment with detailed feedback on students' science learning achievement and attitudes regarding formative assessment. Science Education International, 12(2), 28–34.
   Google Scholar
• Cockett, S. (1998). Formative assessment in drama. Research in Drama Education, 3, 248–250.
   Google Scholar
• Davis-Soylu, H. J., Peppler, K. A., & Hickey, D. T. (2011). Assessment assemblage. Studies in Arts Education: A Journal of Issues and Research, 52, 213–224.
   Google Scholar
• Filsecker, M., & Kerres, M. (2012). Repositioning formative assessment from an educational assessment perspective: A response to Dunn & Mulvenon (2009). Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(16), 2–11.
   Google Scholar
• Fluckiger, J., Vigil, Y. T. Y., Pasco, R., & Danielson, K. (2010). Formative feedback: Involving students as partners in assessment to enhance learning. College Teaching, 58, 136–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2010.484031
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 304–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 36, 143–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01411920902894070
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gogoulou, A., Gouli, E., Grigoriadou, M., Samarakou, M., & Chinou, D. (2007). A web-based educational setting supporting individualized learning, collaborative learning and assessment. Educational Technology & Society, 10, 242–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, S., Hebert, M., & Harris, K. R. (2015). Formative assessment and writing: A meta-analysis. The Elementary School Journal, 115, 523–547.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graney, S. B., & Shinn, M. R. (2005). Effects of reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) teacher feedback in general education classrooms. School Psychology Review, 34, 184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harder, V. S., Stuart, E. A., & Anthony, J. C. (2010). Propensity score techniques and the assessment of measured covariate balance to test causal associations in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 15, 234–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2007). Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis, 15, 199–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hult, A., & Liljeström, M. (2011). Formative assessment in peer review settings online. The University of the Fraser Valley Research Review, 4, 53–64.
   Google Scholar
• Hume, A., & Coll, R. K. (2009). Assessment of learning, for learning, and as learning: New Zealand case studies. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16, 269–290.
   Google Scholar
• Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta‐analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37.
   Google Scholar
• Lalley, J. P., & Gentile, J. R. (2009). Classroom assessment and grading to assure mastery. Theory Into Practice, 48, 28–35. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ823942&site=ehost-live
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mastrorilli, T. M., Harnett, S., & Zhu, J. ( April, 2014). An experimental study of the Arts Achieve Project: Impacting student success in the arts. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Education Research Association (AERA), Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• McKone, F. (1997). Engagement and assessment in drama, Research in Drama Education, 2, 215–216.
   Google Scholar
• McManus, S. (2008). Attributes of effective formative assessment. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
   Google Scholar
• McMillan, J. H., Venable, J. C., & Varier, D. (2013). Studies of the effect of formative assessment on student achievement : So much more is needed. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18, 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Meyen, E. L., & Greer, D. L. (2010). Applying technology to enhance STEM achievement for students with disabilities: The Blending Assessment with Instruction Program. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(3), 49–64.
   Google Scholar
• Miedijensky, S., & Tal, T. (2009). Embedded Assessment in Project‐based Science Courses for the Gifted: Insights to inform teaching all students. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 2411–2435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newby, L., & Winterbottom, M. (2011). Can research homework provide a vehicle for assessment for learning in science lessons?. Educational Review, 63, 275–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2011.560247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyedeji, O. A. (1994). Effect of the use of formative evaluation on some cognitive and non-cognitive student learning outcomes in secondary mathematics. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 20, 223–225.
   Google Scholar
• Parr, J. M., & Timperley, H. S. (2010a). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing Writing, 15, 68–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.05.004
   Google Scholar
• Parr, J. M., & Timperley, H. S. (2010b). Multiple “black boxes”: inquiry into learning with a professional development project. Improving Schools, 13, 158–171.
   Google Scholar
• Pattanayak, C. W., Rubin, D. B., & Zell, E. R. (2011). Propensity score methods for creating covariate balance in observational studies. Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition), 64, 897–903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phelan, J. C., Choi, K., Niemi, D., Vendlinski, T. P., Baker, E. L., & Herman, J. (2012). The effects of POWERSOURCE assessments on middle-school students’ math performance. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19, 211–230.
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing..
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P. R. & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, J. A., Hogaboam-Gray, A., & Rolheiser, C. (2002). Student self-evaluation in grade 5-6 mathematics effects on problem-solving achievement. Educational Assessment, 8, 43–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326977EA0801_03
   Google Scholar
• Ross, J. A., Rolheiser, C., & Hogaboam-Gray, A. (1999). Effects of self-evaluation training on narrative writing. Assessing Writing, 6, 107–132.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. B., & Thomas, N. (1996). Matching using estimated propensity scores: relating theory to practice. Biometrics, 52, 249–264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers’ informal formative assessment practices and students ' understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 57–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salazar, L. (1996). Theater teacher assessment and evaluation. Arts Education Policy Review, 98(1), 27–31.
   Google Scholar
• Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, J. J., King, J. R., Kozdras, D., Minick, V., & Welsh, J. L. (2012). Accelerating reflexivity? An ethno-theater interpretation of a pre-service teacher literacy methods field experience. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25, 1037–1066. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2011.595740
   Google Scholar
• Schonmann, S. (1997). How to recognize dramatic talent when you see it: And then what? Journal of Aesthetic Education, 31(4), 7–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schonmann, S. (2007). Wrestling with assessment in drama education. In L. Bresler (Ed.), International handbook on research in arts education (pp. 409–422). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Seely, S. R., Fry, S. W., & Ruppel, M. (2011). Information literacy follow-through: enhancing preservice teachers’ information evaluation skills through formative assessment. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 30, 72–84.
   Google Scholar
• Shepard, A. L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29, 4–14
   Google Scholar
• Shepard, L. A. (2009). Commentary: Evaluating the validity of formative and interim assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(3), 32–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00152.x
   Google Scholar
• Shirbagi, N. (2007). Feedback in formative evaluation and its effects on a one sample of Iranian primary students’ achievement in science. Pedagogika, 88, 99–105.
   Google Scholar
• Shirbagi, N., & Kord, B. (2008). Using different feedbacks in formative evaluation and their effects on achievement in Iranian elementary school students. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 18, 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stallings, V. & Tascione, C. (1996). Student self-assessment and self-evaluation. Mathematics Teacher, 89, 548–555.
   Google Scholar
• Stuart, E. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25, 1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuart, E. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2008). Best practices in quasi-experimental designs: Matching methods for causal inference. In J. Osborne (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods (pp. 155–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Topping, K. (2013). Peers as a source of formative and summative assessment. In J. McMillan (Ed.), SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 395–412). New York, NY: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Van Buuren, S. (2012). Flexible imputation of missing data. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weeden, P., Winger, J., & Broadfoot, P. (2002). Assessment: What's in it for schools?. London, United Kingdom: Routledge-Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning?. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001
   Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D., & Leahy, S. (2007). A theoretical foundation for formative assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), Formative classroom assessment: theory into practice (pp.29–42). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education, 11(1), 49–65.
   Google Scholar
• Zou, X., & Zhang, X. (2013). Effect of different score reports of Web-based formative test on students' self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 66, 54–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar