Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice

ISSN: 0969-594X (Print) 1465-329X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/caie20

Large-scale implementation of Assessment for

Learning

Therese N. Hopfenbeck & Gordon Stobart

To cite this article: Therese N. Hopfenbeck & Gordon Stobart (2015) Large-scale implementation
of Assessment for Learning, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22:1, 1-2, DOI:
10.1080/0969594X.2014.1001566

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.1001566

Published online: 30 Jan 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3182

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=caie20
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 2015
Vol. 22, No. 1, 1–2, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.1001566

EDITORIAL
Large-scale implementation of Assessment for Learning

The publication of Black and Wiliam’s (1998) ‘Assessment and classroom learning’
in this journal and their widely disseminated pamphlet ‘Inside the black box: raising
standards through classroom assessment’ initiated an international implementation of
what is now generally known as Assessment for Learning. Its take-up has been
described as a ‘research epidemic’ which in a relatively few years has ‘feverishly
spread into every discipline and professional field’ (Steiner-Khamsi, 2004, p. 2).
This is reflected in the range of contributors to this issue in which large-scale initia-
tives from eight different counties are reported.
A recent review of the state of the field (Baird, Hopfenbeck, Newton, Stobart,
& Steen-Utheim, 2014) found 907 peer-reviewed articles and 481 conference pro-
ceedings on Assessment for Learning and formative assessment. Fewer than 10 of
these studies could be described as large-scale, the vast majority being case studies
in one or two schools, with relatively few students. However, Assessment for
Learning has been taken up widely at national and regional levels though we have
as yet relatively little evidence of how successful these policies have been. This
Special Issue is therefore a timely attempt to draw together research that has looked
at large-scale implementation, either in the form of national policy or involving rel-
atively large numbers of schools and teachers.
In looking at the implementation of Assessment for Learning policies at the
national level, we become aware of the importance of the social and educational
contexts into which they are being introduced. A common theme here is the impact
of summative assessment and accountability measures on the implementation of
Assessment for Learning. In the opening article, María Teresa Flórez Petour uses
her case study of assessment policy to demonstrate how the complex interaction of
systems, ideologies and history impacts on the take-up and implementation of
Assessment for Learning in Chile.
Given this complexity how do we implement Assessment for Learning practices
on a large scale, given many schools and teachers may be conscripts rather than
enthusiastic volunteers? It is not simply a question of making clear what Assess-
ment for Learning involves, we need mechanisms for supporting its introduction.
This raises questions about how assessment reform can be more effectively
implemented. Several of the large-scale initiatives adopt an explicit model of imple-
mentation. The studies from Sweden (Jonsson, Holmgren and Lundahl), Canada
(DeLuca, Klinger, Piper and Woods), the USA (Wylie and Lyon) and Scotland
(Hayward) utilise a variety of implementation models drawn from research. In the
case of Norway (Hopfenbeck, Tolo and Flórez Petour), the dissemination model, a
four-year rolling programme of working from the policy centre with volunteer
groups, is less theoretically explicit but relies on continuous adaptation. The study
of a national initiative in Trinidad and Tobago (De Lisle) demonstrates how the

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

2 Editorial

lack of a clear dissemination strategy can undermine the intended formative

assessment policy.
Evaluations of large-scale projects inevitably involve compromises in what can
be studied and in what depth. The focus in most of these articles is mainly on the
perceptions by educators of the impact of the programme. While this is a limitation,
the findings provide a rich picture of what teachers and learners adopt and what
they may resist – and how this varies from culture to culture.
The articles are presented in a sequence which begins with national policies
(Chile; Scotland; Norway; Singapore; Trinidad and Tobago) and then looks at
large-scale regional interventions (Sweden; Canada; the USA).
Paul Black concludes this Special Issue with a commentary on these articles
and reflections on the development of Assessment for Learning. We are most grate-
ful to Paul for doing this – that having started the ball rolling in 1998 he is willing
to reflect on developments since then and to offer his thoughts on where research
and practice need to be going now.

Changes to the Editorial Board

Jo-Anne Baird has finished her six years as Lead Editor of the journal. During her
time, she has overseen important changes to the journal including the move to four
issues a year and the introduction of the ScholarOne system of review and
publication. Our thanks to Jo-Anne for all her work and we are pleased she will be
continuing as an Executive Editor for the journal.

References
Baird, J., Hopfenbeck, T. N., Newton, P., Stobart, G., & Steen-Utheim, A. T. (2014). State
of the field review: Assessment and learning. Report for the Norwegian Knowledge Cen-
tre for Education. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/r8zTcG
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Educa-
tion: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 5, 7–74.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (Ed.). (2004). The global politics of educational borrowing and lending.
New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Therese N. Hopfenbeck
Oxford University Centre for Educational Assessment, Oxford, UK

Gordon Stobart
UCL Institute of Education, London, UK