Classroom assessment has been a centrepiece of various educational improvement efforts, placing an emphasis on the role of formative assessment practice in supporting student learning (Black, 2016; Hopfenbeck & Stobart, 2015). Several studies show that teachers who use assessment for formative rather than summative purposes are more effective in promoting student learning outcomes (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). However, even though that teachers appear to hold positive views towards formative assessment that aids learning, their everyday practice appears to be summative oriented. This can partly be attributed to the fact that teachers do not receive sufficient training in classroom assessment both during their initial studies as well as during their in-service professional development programs (DeLuca & Klinger, 2010). Moreover, Teacher Professional Development (TPD) programs intended to improve assessment practice have so far provided mixed results regarding their impact on teachers’ assessment skills (e.g., Andersson & Palm, 2017; Randel et al., 2016), whereas many studies do not provide any empirical evidence on the impact of student assessment TPD programs on student learning outcomes (Sims & Fletcher-Wood, 2021).

In this context, the FORMAS project aimed to contribute to improving professional skills of secondary teachers by supporting them to conduct assessment for formative reasons and become more effective in terms of promoting their students’ learning outcomes, both cognitive and meta-cognitive. To achieve this purpose, the research team of this project has developed a comprehensive framework for measuring teachers’ assessment skills and established valid instruments to measure teachers’ professional needs as well as student learning outcomes in Mathematics (cognitive and meta-cognitive). Based on this framework, a questionnaire measuring teachers’ skills in assessment was developed. Also, a TPD course on formative assessment based on the main assumptions of the Dynamic Approach (DA) (Creemers, Kyriakides, & Antoniou, 2013) has been designed and used in this project. This DA recognises the importance of involving teachers in critical reflection upon their practice and supporting them to develop and implement their own improvement strategies and action plans.

It is emphasized that even though several studies have provided support to the effectiveness of the DA in improving students’ cognitive and affective learning outcomes (e.g., Antoniou & Kyriakides, 2011; Christoforidou & Kyriakides, 2021), all previous studies have been conducted in primary education. Thus, it is necessary to explore the effectiveness of the DA in improving student learning outcomes in secondary education. This is important since primary and secondary education have several important differences (Chapman et al., 2016), apart from students’ age, related with organisation issues. In addition, this study aims to measure the impact of the TPD course based on the DA not only on cognitive but also on metacognitive learning outcomes. The importance of investigating the impact of this TPD on students’ metacognitive leaning outcomes has to do with claims about the importance of formative assessment in developing metacognitive skills (Panadero et al., 2018). However, the impact of formative assessment on student metacognitive learning outcomes has not been systematically examined (Panadero et al., 2016). Thus, the study reported here aims to identify the impact of a TPD course based on the DA on improving secondary mathematics teachers’ assessment skills and on promoting their students’ learning outcomes in mathematics (cognitive and meta-cognitive).

At the beginning of school year 2019-20, each country team (Belgium, Cyprus, Greece, and the Netherlands) invited 60 secondary school teachers who teach Mathematics in Grades 7, 8 and 9 to participate in the study. From all the invited teachers, 206 agreed to participate. These teachers were randomly split into two groups: the experimental (n=102) and the control group (n=104). Randomization was done at the school level to avoid any spillover effect. Students of Grades 7, 8 and 9 of the teacher sample participated in the study. Specifically, all students of two classrooms per teacher were randomly selected. Our student sample was 5447 students coming from 294 classrooms. Teachers of the experimental group were invited to participate in a TPD course with a focus on student assessment. Teachers of the control group did not attend any TPD course. However, they were provided the opportunity to receive the course’s material during the next school year. Data on teacher skills and student achievement were collected not only at the beginning but also at the end of the TPD course. To examine the impact of the TPD course based on the DA, data concerning teachers’ assessment skills, as well as student performance in Mathematics (cognitive and meta-cognitive) were collected. The instruments used were: a) a teacher questionnaire, b) a battery of curriculum-based written tests in mathematics (measuring cognitive skills), and c) a battery of tests measuring meta-cognitive skills in mathematics. Two validation studies were conducted, one for the teacher questionnaire and one for the students’ tests in the four participating countries during the school year 2018-19. It is important to mention that the metacognitive tests were based on an adaptation of the “Meta-cognitive Skills and Knowledge Assessment - MSA” tool (Desoete, Roeyers, & Buysse, 2001) which takes into account the theoretical framework of Brown (1978) and aims to measure two meta-cognitive components: 1) three types of knowledge of cognition (i.e., declarative, conditional, procedural) and 2) four types of regulation of cognition (i.e., planning, predicting, monitoring, and evaluating). Multilevel modelling techniques were used to identify the impact of this course on improving student learning outcomes in mathematics.

Impact on Teachers’ Assessment Skills The experimental group had a higher mean score at the end of the intervention from the control group (t=-4.25, df=164, p<.001). In addition, the t-test paired revealed that the mean scores of the teachers’ skills were higher at the end of the intervention compared to their scores at the beginning of the intervention. This difference was statistically significant at .001 level (t=13.17, df=86, p<0.001). This finding reveals that teachers employing DA, managed to improve their assessment skills. On the other hand, the t-test paired did not reveal any statistically significant improvement in the skills of the control group (t=0.79, df=78, p= 0.43). Impact on Students’ Cognitive and Meta-cognitive Learning Outcomes Multilevel regression analysis revealed that the use of DA had a statistically significant effect on student achievement in mathematics at the end of the intervention at .001 level. As regards to the impact of the intervention on students’ meta-cognitive learning outcomes in mathematics we were able to search for effects of the intervention on each of the three scales measuring the three types of regulation of cognition (i.e. Prediction, Planning and Evaluation). Therefore, separate across-countries multilevel regression analyses for each scale were conducted. The results of all three analyses revealed that the DA had a statistically significant effect on students’ meta-cognitive achievement at .001 level. The positive results of the evaluation of this intervention reveal that countries can make use of the DA to develop TPD courses on promoting formative assessment and through that achieve better student learning outcomes. Thus, implications of findings for theory, policy and practice are drawn. Suggestions for further research are also provided. It is finally stressed that studies investigating the sustainability of this intervention are also needed, as well as research studies for exploring possibilities for scaling-up the specific project.

Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017). The impact of formative assessment on student achievement: A study of the effects of changes to classroom practice after a comprehensive professional development programme. Learning and Instruction, 49, 92-102. Antoniou, P., & Kyriakides, L. (2011). The impact of a dynamic approach to professional development on teacher instruction and student learning: Results from an experimental study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(3), 291–311. Black, P. (2016). The Role of Assessment in Pedagogy – and Why Validity Matters. In Wyse, D. Hayward, L. & J. Pandya (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Curriculum and Assessment, (pp. 725 – 755). London: Sage Publications, Ltd. Brown, A.L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. Advances in Instructional Psychology, 1, 77-165. Chapman, C., D. Muijs, D. Reynolds, P. Sammons, & C. Teddlie (2016). The Routledge international handbook of educational effectiveness and improvement. London: Routledge. Christoforidou, M., & Kyriakides, L. (2021). Developing teacher assessment skills: The impact of the dynamic approach to teacher professional development. Studies in Educational Evaluation 70, 101051. Creemers, B.P.M., Kyriakides, L., & Antoniou, P. (2013). Teacher professional development for improving quality of teaching. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. DeLuca, C., & Klinger, D.A. (2010). Assessment literacy development: Identifying gaps in teacher candidates’ learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(4), 419-438. Desoete, A., Roeyers, H., & Buysse, A. (2001). Metacognition and mathematical problem solving in Grade 3. Journal Learning Disabilities, 34(5), 435-447. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. Hopfenbeck, T.N., & Stobart, G. (2015). Large-scale implementation of assessment for learning. Assessment in Education, Principles, Policy and Practice, 22(1), 1–2. Panadero, E., H. Andrade, & S. Brookhart. (2018). Fusing self-regulated learning and formative assessment: a roadmap of where we are, how we got here, and where we are going. The Australian Educational Researcher 45, 13–31. Panadero, E., G.T.L., Brown, & J.-W. Strijbos (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28 (4), 803-830. Randel, B., Apthorp, H., Beesley, A. D., Clark, T. F., & Wang, X. (2016). Impacts of professional development in classroom assessment on teacher and student outcomes. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(5), 491-502. Sims, S., & Fletcher-Wood, H. (2021). Identifying the characteristics of effective teacher professional development: a critical review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32(1), 47-63.