Barriers to Basic School Teachers’ Implementation of Formative Assessment in the Cape Coast Metropolis of Ghana

1.1 The Ghanaian Educational Context

In Ghana, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA) in 2018, as mandated by the Ministry of Education, enacted a new National Pre-tertiary Education Curriculum framework that emphasizes the constructivist approach to learning. This was done to revolutionize teaching and learning as well as augment educational outcomes under the Education Strategic Plan (ESP 2018–2030). These developments are anticipated to contribute to the goals of the ESP and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 4) by aggrandizing learning outcomes, particularly at the pre-tertiary level. The revision was carried out to achieve a national goal of moving the country’s educational system of preparing students to pass external examinations towards developing character, fostering values, and producing literate, confident, and involved citizens capable of critical thinking. The present curriculum supplants continuous assessment with School-Based Assessment with an emphasis on Class Assessment Tasks to make assessment encyclopaedic.

This new curriculum necessitates that schools (grades 1–12) move from an accentuation on summative evaluation to the formative, a way of thinking that grasps the need to use many sources of information about learning, which will direct pedagogical decisions and bolster every student’s learning orientation. This curriculum framework further requires that classrooms be changed from teacher-focused to conducive environments that give chances to utilize dialogic learning and instructing approaches (MoE, 2018). This supports Stiggins’ (2005) assertion that the aim and style of assessment must alter when the goal of schools changes from ranking pupils to ensuring that all learn to set standards. This has called for effective practice of formative assessment in schools, particularly at the basic level. This implies that classrooms should be student-focused, where students are effectively involved in the learning procedure because teachers embrace fitting ways to planning and classroom practice.

One valid question that readily comes to mind is whether teachers, particularly at the basic level, effectively implement formative assessment strategies in the classroom in line with the new curriculum. Several studies (Akyina & Oduro-Okyireh, 2019; Chen, Zhang, & Li, 2021; Enu, 2021; Ochour, Opoku-Afriyie, & Eshun, 2022) have indicated that there is a significant gap between what the curriculum mandates and what happens in the classroom. Enu (2021) pointed out that there are no adequate measures to ensure its effective integration into the classroom setting in Ghana. This discrepancy has profound consequences for students’ growth and development, as they are expected to become critical thinkers and problem solvers who can contribute meaningfully to their communities and the nation at large. Thus, urgent steps need to be taken to bridge this gap and ensure that formative assessment practices are integrated effectively into classroom instruction to enhance student learning outcomes.

1.2 Literature Review

Studies on the relevance and contribution of formative assessment to classroom teaching and learning have uncovered that the practice of formative assessment doubles the pace of students’ learning, and students’ achievement is concomitant with their teachers’ ability to use formative assessment effectively in their classrooms (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Dunn & Mulvenon, 2009; Looney, Cumming, van Der Kleij, & Harris, 2018; Missett et al., 2014; Stiggins, 2009; Wiliam, 2007). Additionally, Gloria, Sudarmin, Wiyanto, and Indriyanti (2018) established that a well-designed formative assessment has a significant and favourable impact on learners’ motivation and accomplishment, problem-solving skills, independent and creative thinking, learning perseverance, listening with understanding, and empathy. Formative assessment fosters self-learning and provides productive feedback on students’ learning outcomes, thereby significantly influencing students’ motivation and achievement (Dix, 2017). Looney et al. (2018) concluded that through formative assessment, teachers develop an in-depth understanding of the cognitive gaps in students’ learning and aid them in finding new methods for effective teaching, thereby minimizing learning gaps.

Black et al. (2002) and Marshall and Drummond (2006) have noted that successful integration of formative assessment into the teaching and learning activity cannot be attained by compelling teachers to adopt formative assessment strategies. It is indispensable that collaborators such as policymakers, headteachers, and administrators incentivize teachers to ameliorate their formative assessment practices. Researchers are therefore encouraged to develop motives and uncover factors that influence the practice of formative assessment in classrooms and then encourage collaborators to support motives and minify or obviate hinders to facilitate teachers’ formative assessment practices (Izci, 2016). Although teachers may have positive perceptions of the usefulness of formative assessment (Asare, 2020; Crichton & McDaid, 2016; Ho, 2014; Noori, Shafie, Mashwania, & Tareen, 2017; Ochour et al., 2022), other researchers have also documented that a significant number of them for various reasons do not practice formative assessment (Akom, 2010; Alotaibi, 2011, 2019; Bezabih, Yigzaw, & Garad, 2019; Hui, Brown, & Chan, 2017; Izci, 2016; Quyen & Khairani, 2017; Yan & Brown, 2021). According to educators, these factors cause a disconnect between the theory and practice of formative assessment in the classroom. This results in many unexploited prospects to enhance student learning.

Several studies on factors that influence teachers’ integration of formative assessment into the teaching-learning process have been documented by other researchers in other jurisdictions; however, to the best of the researchers’ knowledge, the same cannot be said of the Ghanaian context. To begin with, in Walani’s (2009) study in the Solomon Islands, findings revealed no current policy on formative assessment in the schools the sampled teachers were teaching. Teachers indicated large class sizes, heavy workloads, school culture (examination-oriented), educational policies, lack of school facilities, teachers’ attitudes, and commitment to formative assessment as the barriers to the effective integration of formative assessment in the classroom. Also, Israel’s (2005) work in South Africa also found that teachers experienced difficulties in implementing formative assessment. These difficulties were associated with high workloads and insufficient professional development. This situation supports the discovery by Zalia (2007), who established that most teachers in Tanzania have inadequate skills and knowledge in formative assessment. In Polizzi, Jaggernauth, Ray, Callahan, and Rushton (2015) study, teachers stated that a lack of professional training in assessment makes them compromise inquiry-based learning in formative assessment.

Similarly, Kibga’s (2004) study on the role of practical assessment in teaching and learning in Tanzania uncovered that the majority of science teachers faced challenges implementing formative assessment. The impediments outlined were lack of knowledge, inadequate teaching and learning resources, high workload, and large class sizes. In Saudi Arabia, Alotaibi’s (2011) work on assessment practices in primary schools in science classes outlined the following: larger class sizes, anxiety among students to get higher grades rather than improving their performances, mixed abilities in the classroom, and ambiguity in the guidelines, as factors that hinder teachers from adopting formative assessment. Again, in 2019, Alotaibi’s study on teachers’ perception of factors that influence the adoption of the formative assessment revealed class size, workload, and availability of assessment materials as barriers that hinder teachers’ practice of formative assessment in the classroom. Likewise, Al-Wassia, Hamed, Al-Wassia, Alafari, and Jamjoom (2015) study on the cultural challenges to implementing formative assessment in the same country revealed workload and time constraints.

In China, Chen et al. (2021) found that at the meso-level, there was inadequate support, ineffective dissemination, and insufficient training. At the micro-level, instructors had limited assessment capabilities, there were large class sizes, and students were resistant. Moreover, Osaki, Hosea, and Ottevanger (2004) found that the majority of teachers experience difficulty in how to practice formative assessment with regard to practical work. This was attributed to a lack of proper teacher preparation and professional development programs for in-service and pre-service teachers. Ni Chroinin and Cosgrave (2012) disclosed the difficulties of teachers in including formative assessment and pointed out constraints such as the insufficient amount of time for planning formative assessment practices and difficulties in choosing the assessment strategies suitable for various students’ abilities.

According to classroom assessment researchers, certain important demographic factors influence teachers’ views on obstacles to implementing formative assessment in their classrooms. These factors include gender (Alotaibi, 2019) and grade level (Fulmer et al., 2015; Hussain, Shaheen, Ahmad, & Islam, 2019). For instance, in Alotaibi’s study, results revealed that female teachers were slightly more receptive to the factors that inhibit the adoption of formative assessment than male teachers. The perceptional differences between male and female teachers were statistically significant. Hussain et al. (2019) also discovered no statistically significant difference in the mean scores of public and private secondary school teachers’ classroom assessment challenges. Since different study samples and geographical locations can reveal similar or different results, there is the need to explore factors that inhibit teachers’ adoption of formative assessment as well as gender and grade-level differences in the Ghanaian context.

A review of literature in the Ghanaian context regarding factors that inhibit public basic teachers’ (i.e., primary and junior high) implementation of formative assessment is limited. Some of the few studies conducted on this phenomenon have concentrated on mathematics college teachers (Enu, 2021) and university lectures (Ankomah & Oduro, 2004). Again, these studies adopted the qualitative approach; however, this present study utilized the quantitative approach to explore the factors that influence teachers’ adoption of formative assessment. Against this backdrop and Izci’s (2016) recommendation, this study seeks to identify the potential resource-related factors that may affect basic school teachers’ likelihood of adopting formative assessment in their classrooms. In addition, the study seeks to investigate gender and grade-level differences as well as their interaction effect concerning these factors. Owing to the relevance of basic education in providing a strong foundation for lifelong learning (Davis, Ntow, & Beccles, 2022) as well as building blocks for higher education, unearthing resource-related impediments to the practice of formative assessment from teachers’ viewpoint would first and foremost, aid policymakers; the Ministry of Education and its affiliate agencies such as NaCCA, Ghana Education Service, school administrators, headteachers, and researchers to provide the necessary support system or measures which would necessitate the development of capacity building workshops to improve teachers use of formative assessment to enhance teaching and learning in the classroom. Furthermore, findings from this study would contribute circumstantial data on the impediments to formative assessment practice in both local and international literature.

3.1 Design and Participants

The study employed a descriptive cross-sectional survey design since the study is primarily a survey of resource-related factors that affect basic teachers’ implementation of formative assessment. A sample of 300 teachers from a target population of 1,006 public Primary (grades 1–6) and Junior High (grades 7–9) school teachers from the six circuits in the Cape Coast Metropolis was obtained for the study through a multistage sampling procedure. Using cluster sampling in the first stage, the schools were divided into six clusters (i.e., Cape Coast, Aboom, Bakaano, Ola, Pedu/Abura, and Efutu). In the second stage, 61 schools were selected randomly from the six clusters using simple random sampling. Proportional stratified sampling was used to ensure an equal representation of gender in each circuit. Finally, 300 teachers were selected from the chosen schools using simple random sampling. It is worth noting that teachers in special schools were excluded from the study. There were more female teachers, 189 (63%; M = 17.54, SD = 4.58) than their male counterparts, 111 (37%; M = 17.79, SD = 3.92). Regarding grade level, the majority (159) represented Junior High teachers (53%), while 141 (47%) represented Primary teachers. Regarding teaching experience, 165 (55%) teachers had more than 11 years of experience, followed by 84 (28%) teachers with 6–10 years of experience and 51 (17%) teachers with not more than 5 years of experience (Asare, 2020).

7.1 Resource-Related Factors Affecting Basic Teachers’ Effective Implementation of Formative Assessment Strategies

In answering this research question, a midpoint (mean score) of 2.5 was calculated from the responses, and a mean of mean values was computed (Anane & Adu-Mensah, 2019; Edjah, Ankomah, Domey, & Laryea, 2020). The mean scores ranged from 1 to 4; thus, a mean score of 2.5 and above was considered a barrier, while a mean score below 2.5 was not regarded as a barrier to the practice of formative assessment.

As depicted in Table 2, respondents, in general, attested that resource-related factors (mean of mean values = 2.52, SD = 0.83) were significant trammel to the practice of formative assessment. Specifically, basic teachers reported time that is contact hours with students (M = 2.64, SD = 0.82), workload (M = 2.59, SD = 0.82), overcrowded curriculum (M = 2.67, SD = 0.85), class size (M = 2.56, SD = 0.91), and the number of lessons (M = 2.50, SD = 0.80) as contributing resource-related barriers to the effective practice of formative assessment in the classroom.

8.1 There Are No Statistically Significant Gender and Grade-Level Differences as Well as Their Interaction Effect With Respect to These Factors

A two-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis with the aid of SPSS V. 23. For large samples (i.e., 200 and above), Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2018), Denis (2016), Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson (2019), Pallant (2016), and Tabachnick and Fidell (2013, 2019) endorse examining the shape of the distribution (e.g., using a histogram and Q–Q plots) for normality. Hence, a visual inspection of the normal probability plots (normal Q–Q plots) and the shape of the histograms for the two independent groups showed that both distributions were approximately normal. As recommended by Hair et al. (2019) and Pituch and Stevens (2016), the skewness and kurtosis values were between the range of −1 and +1, indicating that the distributions were reasonably normal. A preliminary analysis using Levene’s test was conducted to test the assumption of homogeneity of variance. Levene’s test showed that the variances of the groups were equal, F (3, 296) = 1.761, p = 0.155.

As depicted in Table 3, the interaction effect was not statistically significant, F (1, 296) = 0.602, p = 0.438, indicating that there was no combined effect of grade level and gender on the resource-related factors that inhibit basic teachers’ formative assessment practices in the classroom. Moreover, the main effect of grade level was not statistically significant, F (1, 296) = 1.517, p = 0.219. A comparison of the mean values (Table 4) revealed that Junior High teachers (M = 18.01, SD = 4.26) were slightly more receptive to the factors than Primary teachers (M = 17.21, SD = 4.41). A probable justification is that at the Junior High level, teachers prepare their pupils for the national Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) and therefore become examination conscious to the detriment of effective teaching and learning. This is due to teachers’ accountability and schools’ reputation, which are heavily influenced by students’ performance in public examinations. Again, the main effect of gender was not statistically significant, F (1, 296) = 0.095, p = 0.758.