Formative Assessment Case Study

Formative assessment was first used by Scriven (1967), but studies focused on formative assessment in ESL and EFL classes started in 2000. Among very few studies on formative assessment practices includes the ones of Gattullo (2000) Ruiz‐Primo & Furtak (2007), Pham (2012), Buyukkarci (2014) and Wubshet & Menuta (2015).
Gattullo (2000) conducted a case study on formative assessment in English language teaching elementary classrooms in Italy. He observed four primary teachers’ performance in applying formative assessment in their classroom. Gattullo focused on children classes and reported the methods used. He adapted a formative assessment framework which consists of nine categories: Questioning/ eliciting, correcting, judging, rewarding, observing,
She concluded that while formative assessment aims to improve teaching and learning, the implication of formative assessment in particular settings has not yet been successful as expected. One of the reasons is that there is a lack of proper frameworks to guide the practice for optimal results. She conducted a case study into classroom assessment practices of teachers of English in three primary schools in Ha Noi. This study aims to propose some principles toward developing a contextualized formative assessment practice framework. Based on the major findings from observed classroom assessment process, the principles for the suggested framework are built up such as particularity, practicality and learning promotion. In addition, she also emphasized some key points to be considered the necessary conditions for successful application of the framework such as the importance of daily lesson planning, the simultaneous focus on the three components of formative assessment and considerations of the actual teaching and learning
The participants in the studies of Gattullo (2000), Pham (2012) and Buyukkarci (2014) are primary school teachers while those in Ruiz‐Primo & Furtak and Wubshet & Menuta are teachers from secondary or middle school. However, these studies are different in both scope and focus. Specifically, Gattullo focused on formative strategies during instructions. Ruiz‐Primo & Furtak stressed the assessment procedures. Pham & Buyukkarci highlighted the principles for developing a contextualized formative assessment practice framework. In contrast, Wubshet & Menuta emphasized the implication of formative assessment practice in the classroom. The reasons for these differences are these studies are conducted in different contexts and they serve different purposes. This makes a strong case for investigating EFL teachers’ practices of formative assessment into some high schools in Vinh Long so that we can verify the usefulness of formative assessment in teaching and