Organizational culture consists of the values, beliefs, and worldview that shape individuals’ behavioral patterns within an organization and is expressed through shared language, symbols, norms, and established guidelines (Teasley, 2017). Schools are organizations that share educational goals defined externally by the community or government authorities (Berman et al., 2019). However, each school has its own organizational culture which defines how members go about achieving these goals. The school’s assessment culture is part of its general organizational culture, reflecting attitudes and beliefs concerning autonomy, transparency, and partnership. It includes the reasons and the goals for doing assessments and the climate in which these assessments are carried out, which in turn will influence how assessment is perceived.

School organizational assessment culture may be seen as a continuum ranging between a summative-measurement culture on one end, and a formative-assessment culture on the other end. Summative-measurement culture is referred to as “assessment of learning” (Earl & Katz, 2006), focusing on decision-making, accountability, and demonstration of authority. Quantitative methodologies and external measures are generally employed to collect information. In contrast, formative-assessment culture emphasizes growth, development, and improvement (“assessment for learning”) (Earl & Katz, 2006). It is anchored in an interpretive, critical perspective and espouses a pluralistic and individualistic concept of reality requiring information reflecting multiple perspectives that is interpreted through dialogue and collaboration (e.g., Shepard, 2000). Assessment is incorporated into school life as a crucial mechanism for promoting organizational learning for the advancement of educational goals (Torres & Preskill, 2001; Wendy & Wenyan, 2013).

The study focuses on teacher assessment in relation to school organizational assessment culture. One aim was to investigate whether teachers’ perceptions of their school’s organizational assessment culture is congruent with their perceptions of teacher assessment at their school. A second aim was to examine the degree to which exposure to different school organizational assessment cultures is related to teachers’ ideas concerning the components of an ideal formative teacher assessment model in line with views that professional development of teachers should be the primary aim of teacher assessment (e.g., Flores & Derrington, 2017). Understanding how the school’s organizational assessment culture is related to teachers’ perceptions and opinions regarding teacher assessment, can be useful to both school administrators and educational authorities interested in strengthening the use of teacher assessment for the purpose of achieving educational goals.

The study was conducted in Israel where formal teacher assessment was mandated beginning in 2010 as part of a wage agreement between the Ministry of Education and the elementary school teachers’ union. The agreement transferred teacher assessment for administrative decisions from external inspectors to school principals and strongly promoted the implementation of routine formative teacher assessment. The intention was to improve the quality of instruction in schools and to foster teachers’ professional identity. Principals participated in in-service training to prepare them for their task and acquaint them with procedures and rubrics which had been developed to define criteria and levels of expected performance.

Only teacher assessment results for administrative decisions are reported to the Ministry of Education, which is the final authority for awarding licensure and approving salary advancement, meaning that only summative teacher assessment is monitored. Thus, it is not surprising to learn that research in Israel has shown that schools greatly differ in the manner and extent to which formative teacher assessment is conducted, and that principals’ leadership styles (Nashef, 2023), their assessment training, experience, and perceptions of the benefits of teacher evaluation (Fresko & Levy-Feldman, 2023) are all related to this variation.

Data were collected from 1,029 elementary school teachers by a questionnaire that addressed the following variables: 1) Background information regarding both the respondents and the schools where they teach. 2) Teachers' perceptions of their schools’ organizational assessment culture. A scale was prepared that focuses on the organizational assessment culture from the viewpoint of formative assessment, i.e., an organizational learning culture that stresses the use of assessment information, feedback, and dialogue to advance educational processes. 3) Teachers' perceptions of four aspects of teacher assessment at their schools. Two variables related to the assessment process: the extent to which it is conducted for formative purposes and the climate in which it is done. Another two variables addressed perceptions of the impact of the assessment process: its contribution to school functioning and its negative impact. 4) Teachers' views regarding an ideal formative teacher assessment model. Three general components were addressed in assessing teachers’ vision of an effective formative teacher assessment model: criteria to be used, sources of information or testimony for the assessment, and participants to be involved in the process. The content of the items for each area were selected based on existing options relevant to the Israeli context. Administration of the questionnaire began after receiving approval by the ethics committee of the Office of the Chief Scientist at the Ministry of Education. Initially, the research questionnaire was distributed to teachers with the assistance of the supervisor responsible for teaching and administrative personnel at the Ministry of Education and was administered electronically using Google Forms. Questionnaires were received anonymously from 831 elementary school teachers. In addition, the questionnaire was administered by the researchers in printed form to teachers studying for M.Ed. degrees at two teacher education colleges. An additional 198 questionnaires were added to the sample in this way (105 from one college and 93 from the other).

Findings revealed that teachers who reported a strong formative assessment culture in their schools more often indicated that teacher assessment is conducted to promote teacher development, that the climate surrounding teacher assessment is open and transparent, that it contributes to improved school functioning, and that its negative influences are relatively few, compared to teachers in weak formative assessment culture schools. Differences were consistently large regarding assessment climate, contribution, and use of teacher assessment for professional development, while quite small regarding negative effects, suggesting that other factors (i.e., school size) may be relevant. When relating to their views of an ideal formative teacher assessment model, teachers in strong formative assessment culture schools attributed greater importance to the inclusion of all types of assessment criteria, the use of observations, recommendations, and teaching products as testimony, and the required participation of the school principal in the process, as compared to teachers in schools with weak formative assessment cultures. Despite the differences between groups, all teachers appeared to share a general view with respect to the important components of an ideal formative teacher assessment model. Both groups attributed greatest importance to what should be assessed (criteria), attributing secondary importance to how assessment should be conducted. Both groups rated the use of observations and recommendations higher than the use of teaching products, and both valued the participation of the school principal. The differences in the strength of their responses may be interpreted as an expression of the confidence they have in their opinions. Exposure of teachers to a strong formative assessment culture appears to result in a stronger and more confident vision of an ideal formative teacher assessment model. School principals are responsible for defining school organizational culture and need to be made aware of its implications for school improvement through teacher assessment.

Berman, A. I., Feuer, M. J., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2019). What use is educational assessment? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 683, 8–21. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning and assessment of learning. Western Northern Canadian Protocol Assessment Document. 4.3 Rethinking assessment with purpose in mind Full Document.doc (education.sa.gov.au) Flores, M. A., & Derrington, M.L. (2017). School principals’ views of teacher evaluation policy: lessons learned from two empirical studies. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(4), 416-431. Fresko, B. & Levy-Feldman, I. (2023). Principals’ implementation of teacher evaluation and its relationship to intended purpose, perceived benefits, training, and background variables. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 30(1), 18-32. Nashef, M. (2023). The relationship between teachers’ perceptions of the principal’s leadership style and their perceptions of the teacher evaluation process and its influence on the educational work at school. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Beit Berl Academic College, Israel [Hebrew] Shepard, L.A. (2000). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp.1066-1101). American Education Research Association. TECH517.pdf (cresst.org) Teasley, M.L. (2017). Organizational culture and schools: A call for leadership and collaboration. Children & Schools, 39(1), 3-6. Torres, R. T., & Preskill, H. (2001). Evaluation and organizational learning: Past, present, and future. The American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 387-395. Wendy, P. H., & Wenyan, C. (2013). Teacher evaluation as an approach to organizational learning: A case study of Taiwan. In E Hau-Fai Law & C. Li (eds.), Curriculum innovations in changing societies: Chinese perspectives from Hong Kong Taiwan and Mainland China (pp. 431-447). Sense.