SWOT analysis on policies on formative assessment in CE in Belgium
Prepared by: The team active citizenship/AGSO
Designed by: Socialiniu projektu institutas, Lithuania
The context of Belgium / Flanders/ Antwerp / ALICE teacher’s schools
“AG Stedelijk Onderwijs Antwerpen” (AgSO) is the public authority centre for the Municipal Education of Antwerp. The Municipal Education includes 116 schools on 172 locations spread over Antwerp. The network holds 71 primary schools and secondary schools. It can count on more than 6.600 employees and 57.000 learners in the fields of preschool and primary education, secondary education, special education, adult education and part-time art education. The municipal education of Antwerp is founded in 1819 with the ambition to offer accessible and qualitative education for everyone. The situation is no different today, as the city's diversity is reflected in our diverse school population. We can count on 165 nationalities among our entire student population.
One of the strategic priorities of AgSO for the next 6 years is to stimulate active citizenship among all our learners and employees. We have developed a unique approach that provides a clear framework and accompanying competence model for our schools. Our participating ALiCE schools/teachers were very enthusiastic to explore and research how citizenship education connects to formative assessment.
SWOT analysis regarding policies on formative assessment in citizenship education in Belgium / Flanders / Antwerp / ALiCE teacher’s schools.
Strengths
What aspects of the current policies on formative assessment in citizenship education do you consider as strengths?
The city education of Antwerp has a detailed competence model on citizenship education. Within this model learning lines are presented which show growth in citizenship education from maternel school to the end of secondary education. This emphasizes a formative approach regarding citizenship education.
Furthermore, educational support teams have written policy guidelines regarding assessment. Formative assessment and the enhancement of the feedback cycle are embedded in these guidelines that will be expected of the schools within the city education of Antwerp. The learning platform of ALiCE has a place in these documents of assessment, offering schools inspiration and suggestions connected to policy guidelines.
Are there specific features or components of the policies that have been effective in promoting formative assessment practices in citizenship education?
The implementation of a growth mindset and the formative ways of assessment that come with it, have been experienced effective by teachers who joined the ALiCE-project. However, a lot of teachers and schools can still use more (concrete) inspiration and dissemination. Teachers and educational supporters who joined the ALiCE-project are working out a translation of the input and impact of the ALiCE-project to inspire other schools.
How have these strengths positively impacted the overall quality of citizenship education?
Approaching assessment in a formative way has positively impacted citizenship education and ownership of learning trajectories. Teachers and pupils have a stronger view on growth. This approach however has also challenged like how to connect this formative approach to grading or marking. (weaknesses, threats).
Weaknesses
What are the main weaknesses or limitations in the existing policies regarding formative assessment in citizenship education?
On policy level we have a clear view on the tipping point where formative assessment flows over in summative assessment. Sadly, this is not always clear for teachers on the field. Therefor we’ve organized a learning community on assessment of citizenship education where the expertise and materials of ALiCE can be an inspiration.
Another weakness that we’ve noticed concerns the whole school approach. Several of our teachers that are passionate about citizenship education and formative assessment stress out the importance of an approach that is embedded in the whole team. In reality this is rather difficult and this democratic and growth approach leads sometimes to resistance of several teachers who prefer a rather fixed and/or ‘undemocratic’ approach. This leads to inconsistencies in the education of students.
Are there any gaps or areas where the policies could be improved to enhance formative assessment practices?
The gap resides mainly in the translation of the theory on formative assessment to the practice in the classroom. We want to address this weakness by offering examples on formative assessment and citizenship education within the ALiCE learning platform.
Have these weaknesses had any adverse effects on the effectiveness of citizenship education?
In schools where some teachers emphasize the importance of citizenship education and formative assessment, but other teachers have a more negative stance against this new approach, it is difficult to organize citizenship education or formative assessment in an effective way. If teachers don’t acknowledge the transversal character of CE, they won’t address shared responsibilities regarding the matter. It also shows the importance of clear policy guidelines and of qualitative educational support to enhance the practice of a school as a whole.
Opportunities
What opportunities exist that could be leveraged to enhance formative assessment in citizenship education?
- Implement ideas of ALiCE in educational policies and offer the learning platform as a source of good practice and inspiration.
- Creating a sustainable school philosophy on formative assessment and citizenship education.
- New research opportunities. (KdG, Oslomet and AGSO will write a new article inspired on ALiCE)
- Create qualitative alignment between formative and summative assessment.
Are there emerging trends or innovations in education that could be incorporated into the policies to improve formative assessment practices?
The new developments regarding AI and new digital technologies offer opportunities to enhance, engage, extend classrooms. We’ve touched these new trends shortly in the second training sessions in Palermo. These developments can be researched more exhaustively.
How can partnerships or collaborations with external organizations or experts contribute to strengthening these policies?
First, regarding the new digital developments, a stronger cooperation is needed between educational supports/policy makers and IT. Here we want to address this cooperation on national level but also on European level.
Second, to deepen the knowledge and expertise regarding citizenship education and formative assessment, we have a strong cooperation with the universities in Antwerp but also with our European partners. An example here is the cooperation between KdG, AGSO and Oslomet who are writing a new article at the moment on the assessment of values.
Threats
What factors or challenges pose threats to the successful implementation of formative assessment policies in citizenship education?
- How to make a qualitative connection between formative and summative assessment in schools?
- Difficulties with implementing a ‘whole school approach’. How to create collective objectives?
- Creating learning lines that connect to each educational reality and local context remains a difficult exercise.
Are there any legal or regulatory changes on the horizon, that may negatively impact these policies?
There are surely threats on legal and national level. An example is a rising disinterest in citizenship education. The current ministry of education made the decision not to participate in the ICCS which aims to assess citizenship education in several countries. This leads to a gap in knowledge of the educational practice of the past years.
How can these threats be mitigated or addressed to ensure the continued effectiveness of formative assessment in citizenship education?
We address these issues through spending a lot of attention on dissemination. Spreading the knowledge and practices of the ALiCE-project. An example of this is the workshop we’ve organized at ‘Teachup 2030’ where we’ve spoken with governmental advisors and could count on a lot of enthusiasm. We just need to keep lobbying and ‘fighting the good fight’.