Between Support and Selection: Antinomies of Classroom Assessment and Pre-Service Teachers’ Beliefs

Basic data for this talk

Information about the event

Abstract

Performance assessment is a core aspect of school-based learning, shaped by the tension between supportive and selective purposes. Teachers’ beliefs about “good” assessment strongly influence how they navigate these competing demands. While prior research has identified distinct assessment-related belief types among in-service teachers, little is known about such beliefs during teacher education. Using a newly developed questionnaire, we surveyed about 700 pre-service teachers (Bachelor’s and Master’s programs) at the University of Münster (Germany) regarding their assessment beliefs and conceptions of "good" assessment. Results show strong overall endorsement of formative purposes, with only minor differences between Bachelor’s and Master’s students. Hierarchical cluster analysis revealed distinct belief patterns, ranging from selective or disciplinary orientations to formative support with varying views on external differentiation. These findings highlight the complexity of assessment beliefs early in teacher education and underscore the importance of reflecting on professional beliefs to foster openness, adaptability, and learner-centered assessment practices. Introduction Assessment and evaluation are central to school-based learning, shaping students’ educational trajectories. Classroom assessment is often characterized by competing purposes: supporting individual learning versus enabling selection and certification. This tension, described as an antinomy of performance assessment, requires teachers to balance contradictory demands in everyday practice (Helsper, 2012; Jürgens & Lissmann, 2015). Teachers’ approaches to these antinomies are strongly influenced by their professional beliefs about what constitutes “good” assessment. Such beliefs serve as interpretative frameworks guiding instructional and assessment decisions (Fives & Buehl, 2012; Xu & Brown, 2016). Previous research has identified distinct assessment-related belief types among in-service teachers, for example regarding formative versus selective orientations (Streckeisen et al., 2007). However, little is known about the development and differentiation of these beliefs during teacher education. Understanding pre-service teachers’ beliefs is particularly relevant for promoting “open” assessment practices, i.e., approaches that are formative, adaptive, and responsive to diverse learners. Opening up assessment is not only about introducing new methods or tools but also about addressing the underlying belief structures that shape teachers’ decisions. Research questions RQ1: What assessment-related beliefs do pre-service teachers hold regarding the formative and selective purposes of classroom assessment? RQ2: Can distinct belief patterns be identified among pre-service teachers that reflect different ways of addressing the antinomies of performance assessment? Method We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of about 700 pre-service teachers in Bachelor’s and Master’s programs at the University of Münster. Data were collected at the start of the semester in compulsory lectures and selected seminars. Assessment beliefs were measured using a newly developed questionnaire. Twenty-five items captured five belief orientations derived from Streckeisen et al. (2007): (1) selection of high achievers, (2) discipline through grading, (3) tension between support and selection, (4) emphasis on formative support, and (5) support combined with trust in structural differentiation. Items were rated on a four-point Likert scale. Factor analysis confirmed the five-scale structure (α = .70–.80). Descriptive analyses examined the overall weighting of assessment purposes. Group comparisons (t-tests) explored differences between Bachelor’s and Master’s students. Hierarchical cluster analysis identified distinct belief patterns based on the five subscales. Results Pre-service teachers strongly endorsed the formative support function (M = 3.5/4), while the other scales—selection, discipline, tension, and structural differentiation—showed lower means (2.2–2.6), with discipline receiving the lowest agreement. Differences between Bachelor’s and Master’s students were minimal; only attitudes toward external differentiation differed slightly (ΔM ≈ 0.2, p < .01). No differences emerged regarding cluster membership. Cluster analysis revealed five distinct belief patterns, broadly aligning with Streckeisen et al.’s typology. All clusters shared relatively high endorsement of formative support (M = 3.3–3.7). Cluster 1 (“selection of high achievers”) and Cluster 2 (“discipline”) combined strong selective/disciplinary beliefs with low concern for protecting students from failure. Cluster 3 (“tension type”) emphasized balancing support with protection against excessive demands, showing the highest scores on the tension scale (M = 3.0). Cluster 4 (“formative support”) prioritized formative functions and rejected external differentiation (M = 1.6). Cluster 5 (“structural differentiation trust”) resembled Cluster 4 but showed a more positive view of external differentiation (M = 2.7). Cluster sizes were: 5 (29.4%), 1 (23.9%), 3 (18.0%), 2 (17.1%), and 4 (11.6%). Discussion Our findings demonstrate that pre-service teachers largely endorse the formative purpose of assessment, providing a foundation for learner-centered, adaptive practices. Yet the coexistence of distinct belief patterns highlights the complexity of assessment beliefs early in teacher education. This diversity suggests that “opening up assessment” involves more than methodological innovations; it requires addressing the underlying beliefs that guide teachers’ assessment decisions. Minimal differences between Bachelor’s and Master’s students suggest these beliefs are relatively stable during initial studies, underlining the potential significance of teacher induction phases for shaping assessment-related beliefs. Aligning with the conference theme, our study emphasizes that fostering openness in assessment requires integrating reflection on professional beliefs within teacher education. By addressing these belief patterns, teacher education can support future teachers’ agency and responsiveness to diverse learners and contexts, enabling formative, adaptive, and equitable assessment practices. Helsper, W. (2023). Antinomien des Lehrerhandelns in modernisierten pädagogischen Kulturen. In A. Combe & W. Helsper (Eds.), Pädagogische Professionalität. Untersuchungen zum Typus pädagogischen Handelns (10. Auflage, pp. 521–569). Suhrkamp. Jürgens, E., & Lissmann, U. (2015). Pädagogische Diagnostik. Grundlagen und Methoden der Leistungsbeurteilung in der Schule. Beltz. Streckeisen, U., Hänzi, D., & Hungerbühler, A. (2007). Fördern und Auslesen. Deutungsmuster von Lehrpersonen zu einem beruflichen Dilemma. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162.

Speakers from the University of Münster

Diekmann, Marius	Professur für Schultheorie/Schulforschung (Prof. Gruehn)
Gruehn, Sabine	Professur für Schultheorie/Schulforschung (Prof. Gruehn)
Wensing, Pia Johanna	Professur für Schultheorie/Schulforschung (Prof. Gruehn)