The aim of this paper is to discuss our adaptation and implementation, within the FaSMEd Project, of specific teaching materials developed during the project which relate to the use of technology and formative assessment. These materials are “ArAl – Arithmetic pathways towards favouring pre-algebraic thinking” (Malara & Navarra 2003, Cusi, Malara & Navarra 2011). The theoretical considerations at the base of the choice and subsequent adaptation of these teaching materials can be summarised with these basic assumptions: • Low achievement is linked to lack of basic competences, but also to affective and metacognitive factors. • Argumentation could represent a formative assessment tool in the interaction between teacher and students. For these reasons, during class activities, it is important to make students work formatively to: - develop ongoing reflections on the teaching-learning processes; - make their thinking visible (Collins, Brown and Newmann 1989) and share it with the teacher and the classmates; - highlight their affective pathways (De Bellis & Goldin, 2006). Connected classroom technologies (Irving 2006, Roschelle et al. 2004, Shirley et al. 2011) are promising because they both enable to share the ongoing and final productions of the students, and to collect their opinions during the activities and at the end of them. In order to enable teachers to get used to this methodology, a toolkit for teachers should include: • the mathematical meaning and the objectives of the activities • excerpts of class discussions • typical students’ trajectories and comments on their behavior, (d) reflections on teachers’ behavior. The ArAl Units, which are models of sequences of didactical paths, provide all this information. In this paper we will highlight, by showing examples from our experimentations, how we integrated the use of connected classroom technologies within the ArAl Units to develop a complete toolkit for teachers, and to make them become aware of the ways in which connected classroom technologies could foster, and support, formative assessment.

Collins, A., Brown, J.S. e Newman, S.E. (1989). Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Crafts of Reading, Writing and Mathematics! In L.B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cusi, A., Malara, N. A., & Navarra, G. (2011). Early Algebra: Theoretical Issues and Educational Strategies for Bringing the Teachers to Promote a Linguistic and Metacognitive approach to it. In J. Cai, & E. J. Knuth (Eds.), Early Algebraization: Cognitive, Curricular, and Instructional Perspectives (pp. 483-510). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. DeBellis, V. A., & Goldin, G. A. (2006). Affect and meta-affect in mathematical problem solving: a representational perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63,131–147. Irving, K.I. (2006). The Impact of Educational Technology on Student Achievement: Assessment of and for Learning. Science Educator, 15(1), pp. 13-20. Malara, N. A., & Navarra, G. (2003). ArAl Project: Arithmetic Pathways Towards Pre-Algebraic Thinking. Bologna: Pitagora. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R. and Abrahamson, L. (2004). The networked classroom. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 50-54. Shirley, M., Irving, K.E., Sanalan, V.A., Pape, S.J. and Owens, D. (2011). The practicality of implementing connected classroom technology in secondary mathematics and science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 459-481.