5 misunderstandings about case study research

This website may not work correctly because your browser is out of date. Please update your browser .

• Five misunderstandings about case-study research

Resource link

This article, written by Bent Flyvbjerg (Aalborg University, Denmark) examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research.

The misunderstandings are (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias towards verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies.

The article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.

• The conventional wisdom about case-study research
• The role of cases in human learning
• Cases as "Black Swans"
• Strategies for case selection
• Do case studies contain a subjective bias?
• The irreducible quality of good case narratives

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006)  Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research . Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://flyvbjerg.plan.aau.dk/Publications2006/0604FIVEMISPUBL2006.pdf

Back to top

© 2022 BetterEvaluation. All right reserved.

Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research

B. Flyvbjerg

Apr 1, 2006

Influential Citations

Quality indicators

Qualitative Inquiry

Key Takeaway : Case-study research can contribute to scientific development and strengthen social science by addressing common misconceptions.

This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. This article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research

• Author & abstract
• 6 Citations
• Related works & more

Corrections

• Bent Flyvbjerg

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research

Summary  ( 4 min read), 1. introduction.

• The research presented here is a descriptive case study based on their experience of delivering a postgraduate module in Information Systems Design to students of their MSc courses in Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems Management.
• For a number of years this module has been taught in block mode over five full days.
• Over the years the profile of students on the courses has changed from predominantly working adults to predominantly full time international students.
• This paper will explain the nature of “scaffolded” teaching as the authors have applied it in their “Information Systems Development” module.
• The paper is concluded with a brief description of their plans for further research in this area.

2. USE OF SCAFFOLDING IN TEACHING

• The term “scaffolding” was introduced by Bruner (1966) to describe a framework of supportive elements added to a teaching programme to help students develop a deeper understanding of a subject.
• The approach encourages support for various learning styles and learning experiences (Salend, 2001; Kame’enui et al., 2002; Kirk et al, 2006;) by “actively diagnosing student needs and understandings, providing tailored assistance and specific feedback” (Larkin, 2002, p.30).
• This can be difficult with a diverse group of students such as the ones the authors have been teaching some of whom have a background in Computer Science whilst others have a background in Business Studies.
• The Information Systems Design module discussed in this paper is based around the application of the Unified Modelling Language (UML) throughout the development lifecycle from requirements analysis to implementation.
• Before this the authors will comment on the basic methodology they have been following.

3. METHODOLOGY

• The work reported here is an action research project aimed at improving educational delivery on one module.
• In a typical action research project the researcher will occupy two roles: one as the proponent of an educational theory and the other as a user of that theory.
• The development of teaching materials to document the framework.
• The blogs are visible to other students as well as the tutors.
• Observing the progress of the module week-by-week in a number of ways including a range of ongoing student feedback mechanisms.

4. THE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

• The development framework the authors have followed in teaching this module is based on their earlier research into the design of a multi-method framework (Salahat et al, 2009).
• Initially the authors present a number of complete case studies following the steps implied above then ask students to work on related case studies for their coursework.
• If the authors focus on the “Print Class List” Use Case they might develop the following user interface in which the user enters a Module Code along with details of everyone who should be attending the peer tutorials for that module.
• The authors would develop a diagram like this for every use case then develop a domain model consistent with all of these diagrams.

5. PATTERNS IN THE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

• An important part of their research has been to identify specific issues that cause difficulties for students then provide specific, detailed guidance of how to ameliorate these difficulties.
• Patterns have been widely used in information systems design over the last ten years.
• The approach has its roots in architecture specifically the work of Alexander (1979).
• Patterns are usually described by templates which specify the style and structure of a pattern description.
• The following example relates to a common problem in domain modeling where students represent a manyto-many relationship between two objects when the relationship would be better represented by a third object.
• A high level Use Case Diagram (such as the one presented above) is fine for a, "mile high", view of the computer systems behaviour.
• For many stakeholders, such as sponsors and managers, this will be enough.
• As designers however the authors need to open these up and define them in detail.
• The authors know what the system presents to the various ITALICS Volume 11 Issue 1 June 2012 - ISSN: 1473-7507 users (or actors), they need to define in fine detail the, "how", of that interaction; until they have done this they cannot begin to develop a sequence diagram.
• Using a set format for the Use Cases makes the collection and organisation straightforward.
• The following format for a Use Case Pro-forma is suggested:.
• In specifying the primary path the authors assume that nothing will go wrong during any of these steps.
• The way in which this is done is specified in another pattern.
• The above are examples of two patterns the authors use in teaching.
• The authors have specified many more patterns related to commonly occurring problems.
• An adjoining room contains patterns for translating the conceptual models (more specifically the “consensus primary task model”) into a Use Case Model with detailed documentation of each use case.
• This will involve ensuring that the use case primary path maps across to the messages being passed on the sequence diagram.
• They are descriptive, not prescriptive (unlike most development methods).
• The authors can now store details of date and dosage for each prescription as attributes of the new “prescription” class.
• Prescription might be linked to Doctor to identify the individual doctor who made each prescription.
• The idea is that patterns such as this can be used to guide students away from common problems and into good practice.
• The authors have tried to identify these common problems by looking for recurring mistakes in coursework.
• For example students found the transition from Use Case Models to Sequence Diagrams difficult so the authors provided the following pattern and discussed it in class.

6. PROPOSED MODULE FRAMEWORK

• In light of the above discussion the authors have been able to propose the following guidelines for developing a scaffolded module in this area: 1. Design a portfolio-based assessment that can be completed step-by-step and is aligned to patterns used in teaching.
• The pattern then becomes part of the explanation of what is required and is clearly linked to the feedback grid.
• Provide formative in-class surveys that encourage students to reflect on their understanding of key patterns.
• The feedback mechanisms lead to dynamically updating and refreshing the module content.

7.1 Pre-course Questionnaire

• Thirty eight students joined the Information Systems Design module in 2011.
• Some experience of modelling but not with the UML.
• Whilst studying their module these students were also studying advanced software development modules in areas such as, “internet application development”.
• Most of them had heard of SSM but were not aware of the literature on multimethodology.
• The module finished in December 2011 and the student’s feedback has been generally positive.

7.2 Reflective essays

• For the final part of the coursework portfolio students were asked to write a reflective essay including a discussion on how the module reinforced (or otherwise) their appreciation of the techniques and processes employed in undertaking a development project.
• How the knowledge and skills taught on the module relates to their previous experience as a student and/or employee.
• If students considered them to be too vague, too timeconsuming or unhelpful for any other reason the authors needed them to report this.
• I feel confident now that I can apply the techniques the authors have looked at on a real project.
• They seemed to regard modelling as high-level programming.

7.3 Analysis of the common mistakes in the class work

• An analysis of the coursework submitted by the students revealed a number of common mistakes.
• A list of common errors would include the following: Failure to use domain-specific terminology as presented in case study materials.
• Inconsistencies between sequence diagram and class diagram.
• Operations not supported by attributes or relationships.

7.4 In-class surveys

• The authors used frequent in-class surveys to evaluate student satisfaction on a week-by-week basis.
• The majority of the students (approximately 60%) claimed no prior experience of developing business models but after completing the module, 86% said they felt confident with the use of Soft Systems techniques.
• I think I would have become confused if I had to do all the work at the end.
• It helps to chunk up the work with patterns.
• The authors focus on ways in which the authors could develop pattern-based teaching materials did lead us to spend more time looking at the students’ work than they might otherwise have done.

8. FURTHER WORK

• The authors are developing a website for this and similar modules.
• This will comprise the collection of patterns the authors have used with hyperlinks between related patterns.
• A number of students have used their pattern language in their dissertation so the authors are also building up a repository of relevant case study materials.
• For example on a project management module the authors consider a case study related to the activities of their own department.
• Absence because of illness, injuries, professional training, holidays or weather, also known as Forces.
• Provide online or paper handbook of instructions for specified routine tasks of each member’s duties.
• Urgent work should be picked up by another member of staff as soon as possible.

Discussion:

• There should be online or paper handbook of instructions for specified routine tasks of each member’s duties that would help in the period of their absences.
• Online or paper instructions must be left behind by staff on leave especially during busy times e.g.
• May to September, in order to assist replacement/duty staff.
• This will help duty staff in covering absentee’s jobs.
• The authors also use design patterns as discussed in Gamma et al (1995) in all of their software engineering modules.

9. CONCLUSION

• This paper has reviewed their experience of delivering an Information Systems Development module to a postgraduate, largely international, group of students.
• The authors have described their presentation of the module as a, “scaffolded”, approach.
• The scaffolding in question has been built around a novel systems development framework presented in the form of a pattern language.
• This basic structure has been fleshed out with a number of feedback mechanisms (including in-class surveys, feedback questionnaires, focus group discussions and reflective essays) and a sympathetic assessment strategy.
• The authors have concluded that the approach yielded significant benefits for the one module discussed here but might also have wider applicability.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Figures ( 1 )

Content maybe subject to  copyright     Report

3,620  citations

1,336  citations

1,165  citations

1,102  citations

1,096  citations

22,208  citations

19,485  citations

14,683  citations

13,552  citations

11,379  citations

Related Papers (5)

Frequently asked questions (8), q1. what are the contributions in this paper.

Dk providing details, and the authors will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.  

Q2. What is the way to help students in professional programs?

beyond using the case method and other experiential methods for teaching, the best that teachers can do for students in professional programs is to help them achieve real practical experience; for example, via placement arrangements, internships, summer jobs, and the like.  

Q3. What is the advantage of case studies?

The advantage of the case study is that it can “close in” on real-life situations and test views directly in relation to phenomena as they unfold in practice.  

Q4. What was the role of the case study in the work of Darwin, Marx, and Freu?

Carefully chosen experiments, cases, and experience were also critical to the development of the physics of Newton, Einstein, and Bohr, just as the case study occupied a central place in the works of Darwin, Marx, and Freud.  

Q5. What are the common misunderstandings about case study research?

This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies.  

Q6. What is the balance of the view of the case study in trying to generalize?

The balanced view of the role of the case study in attempting to generalize by testing hypotheses has been formulated by Eckstein (1975):Comparative and case studies are alternative means to the end of testing theories, choices between which must be largely governed by arbitrary or practical, rather than logical, considerations [italics added].  

Q7. What is the view that one cannot generalize on the basis of a single case?

The view that one cannot generalize on the basis of a single case is usually considered to be devastating to the case study as a scientific method.  

Q8. Why did Nietzsche want the Aalborg case study to be particularly dense?

I wanted the Aalborg case study to be particularly dense because The authorwished to test the thesis that the most interesting phenomena in politics and planning, and those of most general import, would be found in the most minute and most concrete of details.  

Ask Copilot

Related papers

Contributing institutions

Help | Advanced Search

Quantitative Finance > General Finance

Title: five misunderstandings about case-study research.

Abstract: This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (1) Theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (2) One cannot generalize from a single case, therefore the single case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (3) The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, while other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (4) The case study contains a bias toward verification; and (5) It is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. The article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and that a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of more good case studies.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Five Misunderstandings about Case Study Research, Corrected

2012, In Maggi Savin-Baden and Claire Howell Major, eds., Qualitative Research: The Essential Guide to Theory and Practice, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 165-166

Bent Flyvbjerg is author of Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again, which explains the importance of the ‘power of example’ and of narrative, that is, of case study research, to the health and impact of social science in the academy and society. The following five misunderstandings about the case study systematically undermine the credibility and use of the method. The five misunderstandings constitute the conventional view, or orthodoxy, of the case study. As can be seen, theory, reliability, and validity are at issue: in other words, the very status of the case study as a research method. The five misunderstandings are corrected one by one in order to clear the ground for a use of case study research in the social sciences that is based on understanding instead of misunderstanding.

Related Papers

Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 219-245

Bent Flyvbjerg

This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. This article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.

IOSR Journals publish within 3 days

Abstract: A Case Study is one of the most popular and widely used methods in social research. Though case studies primarily involve qualitative research techniques, they can also make use of quantitative methods, thus, providing a fascinating turf for the interplay of both qualitative and quantitative methods in carrying out a social research. This paper is an attempt to study and examine the primary attributes of a case-study method and its potential for generating authoritative knowledge. Some of the major dimensions of a case study being reviewed and dealt with in this paper include –a) the debates surrounding the enunciation of precise definitions and key characteristics of a case study method b) the types of researches where case studies can be most aptly employed c) the relative utility and merits/demerits of case studies vis-à-vis other methods of qualitative research d) the issues of reliability and validity of a case study method and e) the seemingly unending debate surrounding the role of a case study in effecting broader generalizations and its future promise. Keywords: case study protocol, generalization, reliability, replication, research design.

Veritas: The Academic Journal of St Clements Education Group

Mohamed A Eno , abderrazak dammak

Case studies have been subjected to both positive attributes and negative criticisms. Accordingly, there has been a growing academic discussion and debate about the usability of the case study with regard to its reliability. It has been accused of being a less rigorous, undependable, and ungeneralizable research method. The condemnation has led scholars and professionals among the researcher community to raise viewpoints that represent different schools of thought. Each school demonstrated its perception regarding the debate, of course with some concern. Whereas a section of researchers or scholars encourages the method as a useful approach, the other emphasizes its argument based on, among other things, what they call ‘lack of reliability’ of the case study, particularly external validity – whether a study carried out in the approach could indeed be generalized.

Ali Haj Aghapour

Case-study as a qualitative research is a strongly debatable research strategy among all academicians and particularly practitioners. Therefore, in order to provide some upto-date insights into this controversial issue, the current paper seeks to investigate and document some aspects of case-study research. In fact, after reviewing some literatures in order to define, clarify and classify case-study research, the paper tries to consider and trade-off this qualitative strategy from different philosophical perspectives and approaches. Then, by relying on some recently outstanding papers and other highly recognized written resources, the paper gets into the appropriateness of casestudy including Generalizability, Validity, Construct validity, Internal validity and Reliability. Next, the role of case-study to build a social theory is investigated that leads to preset a step-bystep process to achieve this visionary goal. At the end, a brief comparison between case-study, as a common representative of qualitative research, and survey, an indicator of opposite view, is done. This paper contributes to research method’s development used by scholars looking to establish a case research by improving the level of understanding regarding the discussed issues. Index Terms- case-study appropriateness, case-study classification, case-study approaches.

Khullar Junior

Although case study methods remain a controversial approach to data collection, they are widely recognised in many social science studies especially when in-depth explanations of a social behaviour are sought after. This article, therefore, discusses several aspects of case studies as a research method. These include the design and categories of case studies and how their robustness can be achieved. It also explores on the advantages and disadvantages of case study as a research method.

Yana Spasova

The case study is a research method which generally falls into the broader category of qualitative research. It is largely employed by an array of social sciences such as psychology, anthropology, education and health studies and Science and Technology Studies (STS). Even though the subjects of research, or ‘cases’, may differ between disciplines, there are certain strengths, weaknesses and limitations to case studies that can be summarised to provide a general overview of the method. In my essay, I will explore the characteristics of the case study and link them to examples of the previously documented cases. I will focus mainly on the fields of anthropology and STS as two disciplines that have made case studies their main research tool. In doing so I aim to demonstrate the ways that case studies can be a useful tool in a social scientist’s arsenal.

Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics

Attilia Ruzzene

A. Biba Rebolj

Teachers College Record

Lesley Bartlett

In this research note, the authors show that the case study methodological literature does not reflect the divergent epistemologies that inform case studies or the iterative nature of non-positivist research. Authors then describe four ways to address existing limitations of the case study methods literature to create a more promising approach, which they call the comparative case study approach.

David Arellano-Gault

RELATED PAPERS

Peter Kochenburger

judith de niet

Joe Smeeton

Journal of Biotechnology

Mounzer Hammad

Folia medica Cracoviensia

Krzysztof Czarnocki

Pauline Martin

Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Vanessa Gonzalez

Revista Andina

Carlos Javier Solano Salinas

Handbook of Surface Plasmon Resonance

Wolfgang Knoll

7 Ciri Khas Kaum Nahdliyyin NU

Kakek G U R U Esde

Toxicology Letters

PROFRA. MA. AZUCENA CASTRO ESTRADA.

Tạp chí Nhi khoa

Eliane Abreu

Anna María Jónsdóttir

International Journal of Social Science Studies

Perspectivas da Educação Matemática

Gabriela Dutra Rodrigues Conrado

Environnement, Ingénierie & Développement

Guy MATEJKA

arXiv (Cornell University)

Leonardo Cosmai

Journal of Organic Chemistry

Greg Buchanan

Cerebral Cortex

Alev Erisir

Iranian Journal of Pathology

Alaa Hussein

Scientific Reports

Prof. Dr. Essam H . Houssein

Carlos Pedro Gonçalves

HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)

maarten schrama

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research

• Department of Sustainability and Planning

Research output : Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Access to Document

• 10.1177/1077800405284363
• BF Qualitative Inquiry 2006 vol 12 no 2 April pp 219-245 Final published version, 125 KB

Fingerprint

• Case Study Nursing and Health Professions 100%
• Knowledge Social Sciences 33%
• Moral Concepts Social Sciences 33%
• Scientific Development Social Sciences 16%
• Social Sciences Social Sciences 16%
• Scientific Discipline Social Sciences 16%
• Theory Building Social Sciences 16%
• Bias Social Sciences 16%

T1 - Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research

AU - Flyvbjerg, Bent

N2 - This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. This article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.

AB - This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. This article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.

U2 - 10.1177/1077800405284363

DO - 10.1177/1077800405284363

M3 - Journal article

SN - 1077-8004

JO - Qualitative Inquiry

JF - Qualitative Inquiry

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Political typology quiz.

Notice: Beginning April 18th community groups will be temporarily unavailable for extended maintenance. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Where do you fit in the political typology?

Are you a faith and flag conservative progressive left or somewhere in between.

Take our quiz to find out which one of our nine political typology groups is your best match, compared with a nationally representative survey of more than 10,000 U.S. adults by Pew Research Center. You may find some of these questions are difficult to answer. That’s OK. In those cases, pick the answer that comes closest to your view, even if it isn’t exactly right.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

What Teachers Should Know About Integrating Formative Tests With Instruction

• Share article

Teachers need more support to move testing from a “necessary evil” to a classroom tool, experts say.

While summative tests—like unit quizzes or annual state assessments—are used for evaluation and accountability, research shows formative assessments—like puzzles, projects, and class error analyses—can help teachers and students identify misunderstandings and reflect on students’ progress as they’re learning.

While most teachers use at least some formative testing in daily classroom practice, experts at the American Educational Research Association conference here last week argued they need more support to integrate daily assessments with overall classroom instruction.

“We need to think about assessment more holistically,” said E. Caroline Wylie, a senior associate at the National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment and co-author of the National Academy of Education’s new report on assessment released last week. “Certainly we’ve got to be sharing learning goals for students, assessment, and learning in ways that are recognizable.”

For example, in one study, Dustin Van Orman, a STEM education research associate at Western Washington University, asked a national sample of more than 100 elementary student-teachers who participated in simulations of English, science, and math classes. The teachers were asked how much experience they had in using formative assessment, and then were asked to use information about students in the simulated classes to plan tasks and other formative assessments over three class periods.

About 1 in 5 of the preservice teachers had little to no prior training in formative assessment, and a third had experience only with formal testing, rather than informal assessment through tasks and activities. One preservice teacher reported that her mentor-teacher downplayed the usefulness of classroom assessment and “only likes to do assessment if it’s like something she kind of has to do.”

While a majority of preservice teachers in the study could identify tasks students should be able to do as they learn particular academic content, Van Orman and his colleagues found many student-teachers did not set learning goals with their students or set criteria for tests and tasks based on learning goals. Rather, tests and tasks often could be disconnected from overarching instructional goals. Teachers less experienced in assessment also tended to give more static feedback—praising or correcting students—but not providing information on which students were expected to act.

How to use formative tests effectively

“Assessment shouldn’t be dropped in from the sky, disconnected from student experience,” said Wylie, who was not part of the preservice teacher study. It’s also important for teachers to understand their own and students’ cultural backgrounds when designing assessments, she noted.

Van Orman and Erin Riley-Lepo, a visiting assistant professor at the College of New Jersey, have been working with researchers, teachers, and principals to develop a framework for teachers’ own assessment literacy.

To effectively use formative testing in class, they recommended:

• Teachers and students develop a shared understanding of the goal of tests.
• Assessments focus on what students are learning in ways that the students can recognize, so that they can understand their own progress.
• Students should engage in self- and peer-assessments, to help take ownership of their learning.
• Assessments should make students’ thinking visible to both the teacher and students, to correct misconceptions and build on students’ strengths.
• Assessments should directly inform teachers’ instruction.

Building better classroom assessment practice also requires support from principals and district leaders.

“We talk about teachers, but the reality is, teachers are embedded in schools and districts with particular approaches and constraints on their assessment that may or may not be—and often is not—supportive of active and focused assessments,” Wylie said.

For example, Wylie noted that in the last four months, she and her research team repeatedly had to cancel professional development for teachers because the principals could not secure enough substitute teachers to cover their classes.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In