All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

Publish in OALib Journal
ISSN: 2333-9721
APC: Only $99


Bridge the Gap—Incorporating Classroom Response Systems for Classroom-Embedded Formative Assessment

DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1109829, PP. 1-19

Subject Areas: E-Learning and Knowledge Management, Educational Reform, Language Education, Technology, Teaching and Learning Technologies, Distance and Open Education, Higher Education, Educational Technology

Keywords: Classroom Response System (CRS), Formative Assessment, Assessment for Learning (AfL), Sociocultural Interaction, Web-Based Applications

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


Research on the topic of summative assessments has attracted a large audience. The latest trend of a “process-oriented view of learning” has given rise to a heated discussion about assessment as a facilitative instrument to scaffold learning rather than being regarded solely as a “high-stake” measurement tool. Black and Wiliam contributed heavily to theorizing about the pedagogical use of assessment in the classroom with their widely read papers “Assessment and classroom learning (1998)” and “Classroom assessment and pedagogy’ (2018).” Other scholars in the field also contributed their expertise and experience enormously to further exploration in this field. But there still exists a gap between the ideal theoretical model of assessment for learning (AfL) and the actual practices in a real classroom learning environment. This paper discusses how a solution to the problem can be achieved by incorporating a web-based mobile technology—Classroom Response Systems (CRSs) to implement “Web-based Formative Assessment” in secondary schools. A literature review on the topics of formative assessment and technology-enhanced pedagogy is synthesized. A research project on using CRSs to facilitate classroom learning is presented in terms of 1) the effectiveness of CRSs as instructional instruments for adolescent learners in secondary schools; 2) secondary school students’ preference over CRS question types and response formats; and 3) secondary school students’ reflection on and attitudes towards CRSs as a way of formative assessments and instruction. This research provides evidence that the web-based interactive tasks involving the use of CRSs serve to enable learners to develop learner agency and effective learning strategies.

Cite this paper

Shi, W. and Hargis, J. (2023). Bridge the Gap—Incorporating Classroom Response Systems for Classroom-Embedded Formative Assessment. Open Access Library Journal, 10, e9829. doi:


[1]  Marzano, R.J. and Costa, A. (1988) Question: Standardized Tests Measure General Cognitive Skills? Answer: No. Educational Leadership: Journal of the Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development, N.E.A., 45, 66-71.
[2]  Brown, H.D. and Lee, H. (2015) Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Pearson Education, New York.
[3]  Earl, L. (2010) Assessment: A Powerful Lever for Learning. Brock Education Journal, 16, 1-15.
[4]  Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2018) Classroom Assessment and Pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 25, 551-575.
[5]  Crooks, T.J. (1988) The Impact of Classroom Evaluation Practices on Students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481.
[6]  Crooks, T.J., Kane, M.T. and Cohen, A.S. (1996) Threats to the Valid Use of Assessments. Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice, 3, 265-286.
[7]  Bachman, L.F. and Palmer, A.S. (1996) Language Testing in Practice: Designing and Developing Useful Language Tests. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[8]  Butler, Y.G. (2017) Challenges and Future Directions for Young Learners’ English Language Assessments and Validity Research. In: Wolf, M.K. and Butler, Y.G., Eds., English Language Proficiency Assessments for Young Learners: Innovations in Language Learning and Assessment at ETS, Volume 2, Routledge, New York, 255-273.
[9]  Butler, Y.G. (2019) Assessment of Young English Learners in Instructional Settings. In: Gao, X., Ed., Second Handbook of English Language Teaching, Springer, Berlin, 477-496.
[10]  Bennett, R.E. (2009) A Critical Look at the Meaning and Basis of Formative Assessment (ETS Research Memorandum No. RM-09-06). Educational Testing Service, Princeton.
[11]  Wiliam, D. (2011) Embedded Formative Assessment. Solution Tree Press, Bloomington.
[12]  Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 5, 7-73.
[13]  Fuchs, L.S. and Fuchs, D. (1986) Effects of Systematic Formative Evaluation: A Meta-Analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199-208.
[14]  Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2004) Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 8-21.
[15]  Fies, C. and Marshall, J. (2006) Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15, 101-109.
[16]  Mei, D. and Wang, Q. (2022) New Development of English Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education in the New Era: Interpreting the 2022 English Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education. Elementary Education Curriculum, No. 10, 19-25.
[17]  Van Lier, L. (2004) The Ecology and Semiotics of Language Learning: A Sociocultural Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
[18]  Iwamoto, D. and Hargis, J. (2018) Student Response Systems: A Mindful Approach. In: Harnish, R.J., Bridges, K.R., Sattler, D.N., Signorella, M.L. and Munson, M., Eds., The Use of Technology in Teaching and Learning, The Society for the Teaching of Psychology, 66-73.
[19]  Li, K.C. and Wong, B.T.-M. (2020) The Use of Student Response Systems with Learning Analytics: A Review of Case Studies (2008-2017). International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 14, 63-79.
[20]  Deal, A. (2007) A Teaching with Technology White Paper: Classroom Response Systems. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
[21]  Black, P. and Atkin, M. (2014) Ch. 38. The Central Role of Assessment in Pedagogy. In: Lederman, N.G. and Abell, S.K., Eds., Handbook on Research in Science Education, Volume 2, Routledge, Abingdon, 775-790.
[22]  Mills, K.L. (2014) Effects of Internet Use on the Adolescent Brain: Despite Popular Claims, Experimental Evidence Remains Scarce. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 385-387.
[23]  Poehner, M.E. (2008) Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian Approach to Understanding and Promoting L2 Development (Vol. 9). Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin.
[24]  Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2009) Developing the Theory of Formative Assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5-31.
[25]  Wiliam, D. (2014) Formative Assessment and Contingency in the Regulation of Learning Processes. Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Vol. 2014, Philadelphia.
[26]  Broadfoot, P.M., Daugherty, R., Gardner, J., Gipps, C.V., Harlen, W., James, M., et al. (1999) Assessment for Learning: Beyond the Black Box. University of Cambridge School of Education, Cambridge.
[27]  Cowie, B. and Bell, B. (1999) A Model of Formative Assessment in Science Education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 6, 32-42.
[28]  Looney, J. (2005) Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
[29]  Kahl, S. (2005) Where in the World Are Formative Tests? Right under Your Nose! Education Week, 25, 38.
[30]  Shepard, L.A., Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Rust, F., Snowden, J.B., Gordon, E., et al. (2005) Assessment. In: Darling-Hammond, L. and Bransford, J., Eds., Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able to Do, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 275-326.
[31]  Lantolf, J.P., Thorne, S.L. and Poehner, M.E. (2015) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Development. In: VanPattern, B. and Williams, J., Eds., Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction, 2nd Edition, Routledge, New York, 207-226.
[32]  Lantolf, J.P., Poehner, M.E. and Thorne, S.L. (2020) Sociocultural Theory and L2 Development. In: Theories in Second Language Acquisition, Routledge, London, 223-247.
[33]  Thorne, S.L. (2008) Mediating Technologies and Second Language Learning. In: Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C. and Leu, D., Eds., Handbook of Research on New Literacies, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, 417-449.
[34]  WIDA (2020) WIDA English Language Development Standards Framework, 2020 Edition: Kindergarten-Grade 12. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, Madison.
[35]  Strange, C.C. and Banning, J.H. (2015) Learning through Mobile Technology. In: Designing for Learning: Creating Campus Environments for Student Success, 2nd Edition, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 113-133.
[36]  Lantolf, J.P. (2009) Dynamic Assessment: The Dialectic Integration of Instruction and Assessment. Language Teaching, 42, 355-368.
[37]  Birenbaum, M. (1996) Assessment 2000: Towards a Pluralistic Approach to Assessment. In: Birenbaum, M. and Dochy, F.J.R.C., Eds., Alternatives in Assessment of Achievements, Learning Process, and Prior Knowledge, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 3-29.
[38]  Earl, L. and Katz, S. (2006) Rethinking Classroom Assessment with Purpose in Mind: Assessment for Learning, Assessment as Learning, Assessment of Learning. Canada: Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth, Winnipeg.
[39]  Wiliam, D. (2013) Assessment: The Bridge between Teaching and Learning. Voices from the Middle, 21, 15-20.
[40]  Wolf, D., Bixby, Glenn III, J. and Gardener, H. (1991) To Use Their Minds Well: Investigating New Forms of Student Assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17, 31-74.
[41]  Shulman, L. (2005) The Signature Pedagogies of the Professions of Law, Medicine, Engineering, and the Clergy: Potential Lessons for the Education of Teachers. In: Talk Delivered at the Math Science Partnerships (MSP) Workshop: “Teacher Education for Effective Teaching and Learning”, 6-8.
[42]  Wiliam, D. (2016) Leadership for Teacher Learning: Creating a Culture Where All Teachers Improve So That All Learners Succeed. Learning Sciences International, West Palm Beach.
[43]  Jiang, D., Renandya, W.A. and Zhang, L.J. (2017) Evaluating ELT Multimedia Courseware from the Perspective of Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30, 726-744.
[44]  Hargis, J., Cavanaugh, C., Kamali, T. and Soto, M. (2014) A Federal Higher Education iPad Mobile Learning Initiative: Triangulation of Data to Determine Early Effectiveness. Innovative Higher Education, 39, 45-57.
[45]  Jiang, D. and Zhang, L.J. (2020) Collaborating with “Familiar” Strangers in Mobile-Assisted Environments: The Effect of Socializing Activities on Learning EFL Writing. Computers and Education 150, Article ID: 103841.
[46]  Kern, R.G. (1995) Restructuring Classroom Interaction with Networked Computers: Effects on Quantity and Characteristics of Language Production. Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.
[47]  Darhower, M. (2002) Interactional Features of Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication in the Intermediate L2 Class: A Sociocultural Case Study. CALICo Journal, 19, 249-277.
[48]  Chun, D.M. (1994) Using Computer Networking to Facilitate the Acquisition of Interactive Competence. System, 22, 17-31.
[49]  Salaberry, M.R. (2000) L2 Morphosyntactic Development in Text-Based Computer-Mediated Communication. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13, 5-27.;1-K;FT005
[50]  Payne, J.S. and Ross, B. (2005) Synchronous CMC, Working Memory, and Oral L2 Proficiency Development. Language Learning and Technology, 9, 35-54.
[51]  Krathwohl, D.R. (2002) A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 212-218.
[52]  Stroup, W.M., Kaput, J.J., Ares, N.M., Wilensky, U., Hegedus, S., Roschelle, J., et al. (2002) The Nature and Future of Classroom Connectivity: The Dialectics of Mathematics in the Social Space. The 24th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Athens.
[53]  Stroup, W.M., Ares, N. and Hurford, A. (2004) A Taxonomy of Generative Activity Design Supported by Next Generation Classroom Networks. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of Psychology in Mathematics Education North America, Bergen, 14-18 July 2004, 1401-1410.
[54]  Stroup, W.M., Ares, N. and Lesh, R.A. (2006) Diversity by Design: The What, Why and How of Generativity in Next Generation Classroom Networks. In: Lesh, R.A., Hamilton, E. and Kaput, J.J., Eds., Foundations of the Future: Twenty-First Century Models and Modeling, Lawrence Erlbaum, New York, 367-393.
[55]  Melchor-Couto, S. (2018) Virtual World Anonymity and Foreign Language Oral Interaction. ReCALL, 30, 232-249.
[56]  Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2003) Assessment for Learning: Putting It into Practice. Open University Press, Berkshire.
[57]  Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
[58]  Puentedura, R. (2010) SAMR and TPCK: Intro to Advanced Practice.
[59]  Black, P. (2016) The Role of Assessment in Pedagogy and Why Validity Matters. In: Wyse, D., Hayward, L. and Pandya, J., Eds., Sage Handbook of Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment, Vol. 2, Sage, Thousand Oaks, 725-739.
[60]  Wiliam, D. and Thompson, M. (2007) Integrating Assessment with Instruction: What Will It Take to Make It Work? In: Dwyer, C.A., Ed., The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, 53-82.


comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us


WhatsApp +8615387084133

WeChat 1538708413