Assessment for learning - Why the theory needs the practice

Assessment for Learning is a pedagogical practice with anticipated gains of increased student motivation, mastery and autonomy as learners develop their capacity to monitor and plan their own learning progress. Assessment for Learning (AfL) differs from Assessment of learning in its timing, occurring within the regular flow of learning rather than end point, in its purpose of improving student learning rather than summative grading and in the ownership of the learning where the student voice is heard in judging quality. Since Black and Wiliam (1998) highlighted the achievement gains that AfL practices seem to bring to all learners in classrooms, it has become part of current educational policy discourse in Australia, yet teacher adoption of the practices is not a straightforward implementation of techniques within an existing classroom repertoire. As can be seen from the following meta-analysis, recent research highlights a more complex interrelationship between teacher and student beliefs about learning and assessment, and the social and cultural interactions in and contexts of the classroom. More research is needed from a sociocultural perspective that allows meaning to emerge from practice. Before another policy push, we need to understand better the many factors within the assessment relationship. We need to hear from teachers and students through long-term AfL case studies both to inform AfL theory and to shed light on the complexities of pedagogical change for enhancing learner autonomy.

Business cycle dynamics with duration dependence and leading indicators

Durland and McCurdy [Durland, J.M., McCurdy, T.H., 1994. Duration-dependent transitions in a Markov model of US GNP growth. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 12, 279–288] investigated the issue of duration dependence in US business cycle phases using a Markov regime-switching approach, introduced by Hamilton [Hamilton, J., 1989. A new approach to the analysis of time series and the business cycle. Econometrica 57, 357–384] and extended to the case of variable transition parameters by Filardo [Filardo, A.J., 1994. Business cycle phases and their transitional dynamics. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 12, 299–308]. In Durland and McCurdy’s model duration alone was used as an explanatory variable of the transition probabilities. They found that recessions were duration dependent whilst expansions were not. In this paper, we explicitly incorporate the widely-accepted US business cycle phase change dates as determined by the NBER, and use a state-dependent multinomial Logit modelling framework. The model incorporates both duration and movements in two leading indexes – one designed to have a short lead (SLI) and the other designed to have a longer lead (LLI) – as potential explanatory variables. We find that doing so suggests that current duration is not only a significant determinant of transition out of recessions, but that there is some evidence that it is also weakly significant in the case of expansions. Furthermore, we find that SLI has more informational content for the termination of recessions whilst LLI does so for expansions.