Without doubt, everyday assessment and responses to student performance are central facets of school quality and an important field of innovations in school. The development of a “new” and formative performance resp. assessment culture, which is suitable for initiating and supporting the acquisition and development of both subject-specific and interdisciplinary/generic competences of students (e.g. self-regulated learning, social competences), seems to be a necessary condition for the development of teaching and learning in general (cf. MfSW NRW 2009; Beutel et al. 2017; Wiliam 2018). In this context, the term “culture” refers to a fundamental change of assessment practice that is not limited to a selective use of some additional or alternative diagnostic instruments by only a few teachers (cf. Jürgens & Diekmann 2006; Box 2019, 42/143). According to Sacher (2014, 264) the development of a new resp. formative performance and assessment culture in schools will only succeed, if it is based on a jointly formulated assessment concept in which the teaching staff fixes objectives, guiding principles and concrete agreements on assessment practice. Such an assessment concept – Sacher points out – must be implemented, regularly evaluated, discussed, and revised as an essential part of the school program. In which way, to what extent and how successful individual schools undertake efforts regarding the requested change and development of performance and assessment culture(s) (cf. e.g. Winter 2012) has hardly been empirically investigated (in Germany). Most of the findings on performance and assessment culture and associated innovations relate to schools that can be described as “extraordinary”. Extraordinary in the sense that they, for example, have been nominated for the (nationwide) German School Award (cf. Porsch et al. 2014, Beutel & Pant 2020) or have a special pedagogical profile (e.g. Montessori, cf. Diekmann 2018). There are almost no empirical findings that give a broader impression of focal points, achievements, or school form/grade specific characteristics of the change in performance/assessment culture at “ordinary” schools. One exception are the findings obtained in the context of an external evaluation (“Qualitätsanalyse”) of schools in North Rhine-Westphalia (federal state of Germany). During this evaluation, various methods were used to gain a comprehensive impression of the work and quality of schools. Among other things, classroom observations were conducted, and so-called school portfolios were reviewed. The school portfolios contained various documents specific to individual schools, such as school programs. A mandatory component of the school portfolios were the performance concepts developed by the individual schools. In summary the performance resp. assessment concepts schools had to submit during the evaluation are characterized as unsatisfying and in need of development (cf. MfSW NRW 2009, 34). Unfortunately, this conclusion is not really explained in detail. Regarding specific differences between school types and levels, only a few findings are reported. For example, it is pointed out that the performance/ assessment concepts at secondary schools are comparatively subject-specific (compared to the performance/ assessment concepts at primary schools). In contrast, performance/assessment concepts at primary schools apparently prove to be more elaborate about the formative use of individual diagnostics. (cf. MfSW NRW 2016, 30-32). The following questions arise from this:
Research question 1: How are performance/assessment concepts designed in terms of scope and content? Are there any school level/form-specific priorities or features?
Research question 2: Are performance/assessment concepts embedded in a whole school approach of school development?

To gain fundamental insights into the questions raised above, we conducted an explorative content analysis of diverse documents dealing with performance and assessment which we found on homepages of each 100 randomly selected primary schools and secondary schools in North Rhine-Westphalia. In addition to the texts explicitly designated as performance/assessment concepts, we have also incorporated texts and text passages that deal, for example, with grading practice in various subjects. After we downloaded the documents from the schools’ homepages from January to May 2022, we developed, tested, and revised the category system for content analysis. The categories we used were derived both from the material resp. performance/assessment concepts itself and from academic discussion (cf. e.g. Bohl 2018) and guidelines given by the Educational Administration (cf. QUA-LiS NRW 2011). Statements in performance/assessment concepts resp. performance/assessment related information that could be assigned to the following (superordinate) categories were coded and counted: general and subject-specific principles and objectives of (performance) assessment; quality criteria for (performance) assessment; forms and instruments of (performance) assessment; concretization and implementation of legal requirements; performance/assessment concept in the context of school and teaching development; innovations; evaluation and revision. Analyses of variance and T-tests were used to examine whether there are significant school-level and school-form-specific differences. One advantage of document analysis is that this method is much less prone to the phenomenon of social desirability than, for example, a written survey or an interview. One of its disadvantages, however, is that the origin and authorship of the analyzed material cannot always be traced, for example. Therefore, it is usually recommended to combine different methods of data collection. This is what we intend to do in the next step. Based on the findings of our document analyses, we plan to conduct in-depth interviews with school administrators and written surveys of teachers.

Research question 1: The length of the performance/assessment concepts as well as the subject-specific parts varies considerably within the sample, ranging from 3 to 149 and from 0 to 139 pages (primary vs. secondary schools). Performance/assessment concepts at primary schools typically consist of an interdisciplinary and a subject-specific part. The latter is usually not included in the performance/assessment concepts of secondary schools but may be found in a separate document (subject-specific performance/assessment concept). Practically all of the performance/assessment concepts contain statements on quality criteria and principles of performance measurement, to which the respective school feels (particularly) committed, as well as statements on the concretization and implementation of legal requirements, which can be found in the School Act, in examination regulations or decrees. Research question 2: Just under half to two-thirds of the performance/assessment concepts (elementary vs. secondary schools) contain basic statements about their formation. Less frequent and less extensive are indications to the evaluation and revision of performance/assessment concepts. It is quite remarkable that - especially at primary schools - a connection to the individual school program/school profile is established only in exceptional cases. In contrast, innovations (e.g., use of new/formative instruments) are reported more frequently in the performance/assessment concepts of elementary schools compared to those of secondary schools. To put it simply, the performance/assessment concepts analyzed largely prove to be information about the existing practice of performance measurement and assessment, some of which is specific to the school level, as well as a concretization of binding, general requirements. As programs for innovation resp. the development and implementation of a "new" performance culture - as suggested by Sacher (2014, 264) – performance/assessment concepts seem to be (still?) little used. Examining the reasons of this finding is one of the purposes of our planned follow-up study.

S.-I. Beutel, K. Höhmann, H. A. Pant, M. Schratz (Hg.) (2017): Handbuch Gute Schule. Sechs Qualitätsbereiche für eine zukunftsweisende Praxis. 2. Auflage. Seelze: Kallmeyer. Beutel, S.-I.; Pant, H. A. (2020): Lernen ohne Noten. Alternative Konzepte der Leistungsbeurteilung. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Bohl, T. (2018): Ewige Baustelle? Von pädagogischer Innovation und diagnostischer Qualität. In: Lernende Schule 21 (84), 3-7. Box, Cathy (2019): Formative Assessment in United States Classrooms. Changing the Landscape of Teaching and Learning. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Diekmann, M. (2008): Wortgutachten, Zeugnisbriefe und Rasterzeugnisse. Zur Beurteilungspraxis an bayerischen Montessori-Schulen. In: Lernende Schule 21 (84), 30-34. Jürgens, E.; Diekmann, M. (2006): Lernleistungen von und mit Kindern erfassen und bewerten. In: P. Hanke (Hg.): Grundschule in Entwicklung. Herausforderungen und Perspektiven für die Grundschule heute. Münster: Waxmann, 206-229. Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (MfSW NRW) (2009): Qualitätsanalyse in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Impulse für die Weiterentwicklung von Schulen. Düsseldorf. Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (MfSW NRW) (2016): Qualitätsanalyse in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Landesbericht 2016. Düsseldorf. Qualitäts- und UnterstützungsAgentur – Landesinstitut für Schule (QUA-LiS NRW) (2011): Anlage 1.4 Checkliste – Leistungskonzept (Material Nr. 2955), verfügbar unter: schulentwicklung-nrw.de. Porsch, R.; Ruberg, C.; Testroet, I. (2014): Elemente einer Didaktik der Vielfalt. Die Bewerbungsportfolios der Schulen. In: S.-I.Beutel, W. Beutel (Hg.): Individuelle Lernbegleitung und Leistungsbeurteilung. Lernförderung und Schulqualität an Schulen des Deutschen Schulpreises. Schwalbach/Ts.: Wochenschau Verlag, 16-87. Sacher, W. (2014): Leistungen entwickeln, überprüfen und beurteilen. Bewährte und neue Wege für die Primar- und Sekundarstufe. 6., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Wiliam, D. (2018): Embedded Formative Assessment. Second Edition. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Winter, F. (2012): Leistungsbewertung. Eine neue Lernkultur braucht einen anderen Umgang mit den Schülerleistungen. 5., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.