The Interplay Between Student Evaluation and Instruction: Grading and Feedback in Mathematics Classrooms
Abstract
Teachers practices of student evaluation can be considered crucial to the implementation of embedded assessment systems. This article reports on two studies investigating these practices in detail. The first study examines teacher judgments about student achievement in terms of the grades awarded. It examines whether the grades awarded reflect two dimensions of students achievement as well as learning behavior. It also explores whether teachers grading is aligned with their instruction. In the second study, we analyze how teacher evaluation affects students subsequent learning processes. This study utilizes feedback given to students by the teacher within classroom interaction as an indicator for student evaluation, and investigates the impact of two types of feedback, evaluative and informational, on student learning and motivation. The results of Study 1 show that both the dimensions of student achievement as well as involvement were found to contribute substantially to students grades. Moreover, these contributions depended on teacher beliefs and instructional quality. The findings of Study 2 show that positive evaluative feedback in the classroom was associated with increased intrinsic motivation, whereas negative evaluative feedback was not related to motivation. Informational feedback was shown to foster motivation via emotional experience and cognitive processing. None of the feedback types examined had a significant impact on students achievement development. Finally, implications of the two studies for the implementation of embedded classroom assessment and the investigation of its effects are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A more constructivist teacher stance can enable formative assessment use.
“Birenbaum et al. (2011), Penuel et al. (2007), Rakoczy et al. (2008), and Sach (2013) found that a more constructivist teacher stance (e.g., students should become autonomous and are capable of learning on their own) can enable formative assessment use.”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Rakoczy et al. (2008)
Several studies pointed to the importance of involving students in AfL.
“Several studies pointed to the importance of involving students in AfL”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Rakoczy et al., 2008
Cites
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 27,815 · see citing works
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905 · see citing works
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882 · see citing works
Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory.
Ryan, R. M. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.450 · Cited by 2,721 · see citing works
Hox, J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2002) · doi:10.4324/9781410604118 · Cited by 2,419 · see citing works
The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543061002213 · Cited by 1,313 · see citing works
Feedback in Written Instruction
Kulhavy, R. W. (1977) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543047002211 · Cited by 571 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice
Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602 · Cited by 330 · see citing works
A. DePaolo, C., & Wilkinson, K. (2014) · Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Lifelong Learning · doi:10.28945/2057 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., & Harks, B.
- Affiliations
- DIPF | Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education (DE)
- Venue
- Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Hogrefe Publishing Group
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 216
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 111-124
- ISSN
- 0044-3409 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1898976137
- Cited by
- 76
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 18.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Zeitschrift für Psychologie (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Universität Zürich
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Keywords
- student assessment, embedded assessment, grading practices, teacher judgment, academic performance, learning behavior, teacher beliefs, teaching quality, classroom feedback, evaluative feedback, information feedback, intrinsic motivation, emotional experience, cognitive processes
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review