This paper addresses two features of Assessment for Learning (AfL) which appear to have been extensively adopted in classrooms throughout the UK and increasingly in Europe and globally: the use of learning intentions (LIs) and success criteria (SC). While  generally accepted that sharing LIs and SC forms part of an effective  AfL strategy, there appears to be little research into whether and in what way the use of these strategies are perceived by teachers and learners as helpful or otherwise. This small scale research aimed to explore the views of teachers and learners in two secondary schools in the West of Scotland,  to  identify what both groups understood by LIs and SC and how, if at all, in their opinion, they affected pupils' learning and what happened in the classroom. 40 pupils and 20 teachers were asked their views on the use of LIs and SC in the classroom. The research questions, therefore, were focused on the meaning and efficacy assigned to LIs and SC by the participants:

• What are teachers’ and learners’ understanding of the purpose of learning intentions and success criteria?
• How useful do learners and teachers find learning intentions and success criteria?

LIs can also be described as Learning Objectives or Learning Outcomes. While acknowledging  differential nuances in these terms, the terminology used in this paper is Learning Intentions, as this was the expression used in both schools in the study. Similarly, Assessment for Learning is employed, although it is also categorised as Formative Assessment. 

Background: Assessment for Learning

AfL has been defined as ‘provid[ing] information that teachers and their students can use as feedback in assessing themselves and one another … the evidence is actually used to adapt the teaching work to meet learning needs’ (Black et al., 2004 p. 10). Black and Wiliam’s (1998) identification of the potential learning gains through  formative assessment strategies in the late 1990s was a catalyst for teachers to re-evaluate an assessment system which, up till then, appeared to rely heavily on grades and ranking. A further publication, Working Inside the Black Box (Black et al., 2002), resulted in formative assessment practices becoming policy within classrooms throughout the UK (LTS, 2006; DCSF, 2008).

Different strategies employed by teachers as part of AfL include learners’ use of ‘traffic lights’ to indicate their level of understanding, self and peer assessment, using ‘three stars and a wish’ and the use of formative feedback, instead of merely grading a piece of  work with a mark, and LIs and SC.  LIs tell the learner what the intended outcome of the lesson is with regard to their learning.  SC provide examples of their expected performance as a result of the lesson, ‘closing the gap’ between learners’ previous knowledge and their developing understanding (Glasson, 2009).The emphasis in AfL is very much on providing pupils with ownership of their learning through the use of LIs and SC (Leahy et al. 2005) and providing opportunities for them to improve, through the use of directed feedback (Hodgson & Pile, 2010).

Bennett (2011)  concludes that AfL is still a ‘work in progress’.  Shavelson (2008) also concluded that there was still much work to be done to ensure that the majority of teachers became ‘masterfully’ proficient in its implementation. The Assessment Reform group  warns that:  ‘Innovation may fail in the face of workload issues or in simply not being a convincing enough change for teachers to adopt’ (Gardner et al., 2008:4).

This paper aims to highlight positive and less positive aspects identified by both cohorts regarding learning and teaching and offers some possible strategies to ensure effective classroom practice.

Basit, T. (2003) Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis. Educational Research 45, 2:143-154. Bennett, R.E. (2011) Formative assessment: a critical review, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18:1, 5-25. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998) Inside the Black Box. London: King’s College. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2002) Working inside the Black Box: assessment for learning in the classroom, London: GL Assessment. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2004) Assessment for Learning. Putting it into Practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Frey, J. H. & Fontana, A. (1991) The group interview in social research. Social Science Journal 28, 2: 175-187. Gardner, J., Harlen, W., Hayward, L. & Stobart, G. (2008) Changing Assessment Practice Process, Principles and Standards. Assessment Reform Group, Nuffield Foundation. Glasson, T. (2009) Improving Student Achievement: a practical guide to assessment for learning. Victoria: Curriculum Corporation. Hodgson, C. & Pile, K. (2010) A Literature Review of Assessment for Learning in Science. Slough, Bucks: The National Foundation for Educational Research. Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M. & Wiliam, D. (2005) Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by Day. Educational Leadership, 63, 3:19-24. Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Mishler, E. (1990) Validation in inquiry-guided research: the role of exemplars in narrative studies. Harvard Educational Review 60, 4: 415-442. Rabiee, F. (2004) Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 63, 4: 655-660. Shavelson, R.J. (2008) Guest Editor's Introduction. Applied Measurement in Education 21, 4: 293-294. Vaughn, S., Schumm, J.S., & Sinagub, J. (1996). Focus group interviews in education and psychology. London: Sage.