Schools in Kazakhstan witnessed the most profound changes to the national curriculum and in terms of assessment in order to meet international standards. As the deep educational reforms are implements in the classroom,  a phased transition of classes from the grading system to criteria-based assessment was initiated for primary classes in the 2015-2016 academic year (MoES Strategic Plan for 2016; Fifth report, 2016). The assessment reformation was needed because, in the past, teachers evaluated students' knowledge using a 1 to 5-rated scale throughout compulsory schooling (OECD,2014). However, these grades did not provide a clear picture of the students’ true academic performance.

This shifting process began in the NIS (Nazarbayev Intellectual schools). The reason for this, according to ‘The State Programme of the Education Development in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2011-2020’ (MoES, 2010), was that the main tasks of  NIS were to act as a platform for the introduction of new policies and the transfer teachers’ experience to mainstream schools. Thus, the criteria-based assessment was experienced between 2011-2016 in NIS (National Academy of Education. I. Altynsarina, 2015). From 2015, 30 pilot schools started implementing a new curriculum and criteria-based assessment, while OECD countries experienced this stage in 1980-90 (Irsaliyev et al., 2017). It was only eight years since implementation of criteria-based assessment. As a researcher I am interested to get teachers views on implementation of criteria-based assessment.

There are many purposes of FA in the classroom and the learning process in general. Students frequently have misconceptions about what are they learning, and also about the why they are learning something (White & Frederiksen, 1998). FA is its provision of quality feedback for learners, which allows the current level of students to be assessed and adequate instruction which outlines the next steps to be taken (Black et al., 2003). Thus, a main objective of FA is to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses and to inform students of their current level based on evidence, and then directing them as to how their learning needs can be met (ARG, 2002).  In addition, Roskos and Neuman (2012) noted that FA helps teachers to be more conscious of the gaps in every students’ development. Teachers using FA are better able to meet the learning needs of their students, give constructive feedback, support independent learning, organize interactive assessments of students' attainments, adjust the teaching process, and find students’ weaknesses and strengths (OECD, 2014; Black &William, 1998). Hence, this positive interaction with students may only be achieved when the teacher believes in the advantages of FA. Thus, it is crucial to gain information about what do teachers think about FA. There is a gap in the literature about teachers’ perceptions of FA in Kazakhstan; I was only able to find a minimal amount of research in this context. Therefore, this study focusses on the teacher’s experience, perception, attitudes, and beliefs about FA. This study's first purpose is to gain a deeper understanding of the main opportunities and obstacles to implementing FA according to teachers' realities, whilst the second is to get teachers’ suggestions regarding the integration of FA.

Based on the purposes mentioned in the research scope and research value, two research questions have been generated to guide this study:

1) What do primary school teachers perceive as the opportunities and obstacles to using FA to support learning in their classrooms?

2) What recommendations would teachers give to improve support the use of formative FA in primary schools in Kazakhstan?

This qualitative research interviewed six primary school teachers from a Kazakhstani public school, and the data will be analysed through thematic analysis.

This study aims to understand teacher perception of formative assessment better and identify opportunities and obstacles in implementation of classroom practice. Therefore, a qualitative research design was chosen to interpret teachers’ experiences. The philosophical stance that I hold for this research is interpretivism. Interpretivism is an epistemological position that is based on people's understandings of social phenomena. My aim in this research, as an interpretivist, is to seek the reality of participants in the way they understand it rather than giving the general results of research as a complete truth. Compared to positivists who accept one correct answer, interpretivists accept multiple viewpoints of subjects (Quang, 2015). Thus, according to Than & Than (2015), the idea of multiple perspectives in interpretivism allows researchers to do in-depth research. As my research questions focus on primary school teachers’ opinions, attitudes and beliefs, I use an interpretive approach in this research. Since my research is based on gathering qualitative data and the research purpose is to explore teacher perceptions about opportunities and obstacles in implementing formative assessment, I decided to use purposeful sampling. Six participants were chosen.. As I am looking to obtain teachers’ perceptions, I decided to use semi-structured interview as the main instrument of data collection. As my research questions explore individual teachers’ views and opinions about formative assessment practice, to use this technique provided the opportunity to communicate with participants, listen to their attitudes and provide recommendation that could not be done had a questionnaire been used instead. Before the actual research, a pilot study was designed to test the implications of the method. When I analyzed the data , I transcribed all interviews in Kazakh language and proof-read against the recordings. Apparently, there were difficulties in dealing with participants’ unfinished thoughts and repeated words. When all the interviews had been transcribed and anonymized to investigate teachers’ perceptions about formative assessment, an inductive thematic analysis was done. I started the interviewing process when I received ethical approval from the University of Bristol Ethics Committee. I ensured that the participants were not harmed from the beginning of the research up until the final report. This is because the involvement of human beings in research emphasizes the critical role of principles such as autonomy, privacy, confidentiality, and the well-being of participants.

Mainly, it was found that teachers believe that FA could promote effective learning and teaching (Black & William, 1998). They claimed that FA develops life-long skills amongst students and that it meets international standards. They could see opportunities for FA in terms of providing feedback and promoting individual work . They also noted that they reflected on their use of FA methods. It seems that self-reflection helps them to make corrections and generally improve subsequent lessons. With regards to obstacles, teachers considered certain challenges that could prevent the implementation of FA. Thus, though they were keen to use FA, they pointed out that it is not easy to do so in practice (Torrance & Pryor, 2001). All the primary school teachers involved in the present study emphasized parents' and students' resistance to FA and time constraints to its implementation. Therefore, participants suggested recommendations to cope with these issues. The primary school teachers perceived PDP as a means for developing the assessment literacy of teachers as necessary, but they felt that PDP would only be effective when it is practical and ongoing. The teachers were asked to give their suggestions to understand what issues teachers need to solve with regard to the previously mentioned obstacles to the implementation of FA. Firstly, teachers highlighted the importance of having appropriate technology such as a computer, printer, and interactive board in the school. They believed that using technology is important to the effective use of FA. They did note that they already had such facilities in their school, but did not have sufficient for all the teachers to use. Secondly, they needed to have ongoing PDP to support substantial classroom changes. Thirdly, teachers asked for organized workshops and training sessions for parents to explain the opportunities offered by formative assessment from the school administration.

Absolum, M., Flockton, L., Hattie, J. & Hipkins, R. (2009) Directions for Assessment in New Zealand.Available from : http://www.tki.org.nz/r/assessment/pdf/danz.pdf [Accessed 20th June 2020]. Adams, W.C. (2015) Conducting Semi-Structured Interviews. In: Wholey, J.S., Harty, H.P. & Newcomer, K.E. (eds.) Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation.Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 492-505. Andrade, H. & Du, Y. (2007) Student responses to criteria-referenced self-Assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 32 (2), 159-18. Ash, D. & Levitt, K. (2003) Working within the zone of proximal development: Formative assessment as professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education. 14(1),1–26. Askew, S. & Lodge, C. (2000) Gifts, ping-pong and loops - linking feedback and learning. In: Askew, S. (eds.) Feedback for Learning. London: RoutledgeFalmer, pp.1-18. Aslamtas,I. (2016) Teachers’ Perceptions of Using Formative Assessment Methods in the Classroom. MA Thesis , University of East Anglia. Bailey, B. (2000) The impact of mandated change on teachers. In: A. Hargreaves & N. Bascia (eds.) The Sharp Edge of Change. Teaching, Leading and the Realities of Re/'orm. London: Falmer Press. Bell,J.&Waters,S (2018) Doing your research project.Seventh edition. London, Open university Press. p.29. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2001) Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Available from : http://weaeducation.typepad.co.uk/files/blackbox-1.pdf [Accessed 11th July 2020]. Black, Paul and Wiliam, Dylan. (1998) 'Assessment and Classroom Learning'. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7 – 74. Black,P & William,D( 2009) Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational assessment, Evaluation and Accountability.21(1),5-31. Available from: https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/files/9119063/Black2009_Developing_the_theory_of_formative_assessment.pdf [Accessed 5th June 2020]. Clark,I. (2012)Formative Assessment: Assessment Is for Self-regulated Learning .Educ Psychol Rev. 24,205–249. Available at: DOI 10.1007/s10648-011-9191-6. [Accessed 20th August 2020]. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011) Research Methods in Education (7th Edition). London,Routledge Farmer, pp.289-290. Cowie, B & Bell,B. (1999) A Model of Formative Assessment in Science Education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 6(1), 101-116. Available at: DOI: 10.1080/09695949993026 [Accessed 10th June 2020] Fullan, M. (2007) The New Meaning of Educational Change. Fourth Edition. New York: Teachers College Press Kallio,H.,Pietila,A. M.,Johnson,M & Kangasniemi,M.(2016) Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing.72(12), 2954. Availableat:2965. doi: 10.1111/jan.13031/.[Accessed 11th June 2020]. National Academy of Education. I. Altynsarin, (2015) Methodological and Educational-methodological basis introduction to critical assessment system . MoES