Sammenlign metoder

	Think-Aloud Protocol in Education	Formative Assessment
Fagfelt	Education	Education
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Opprinnelsesår	1993	1998
Opphavsperson	K. Anders Ericsson & Herbert Simon; educational application by Leighton and others	Scriven (term); Bloom; Black & Wiliam (modern synthesis)
Type	Verbal-report method for eliciting cognitive processes during tasks	Instructional process using evidence of learning to adapt teaching and feedback
Opprinnelig kilde	Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data (Revised ed.). MIT Press. ISBN: 9780262550239	Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.
Alias	Verbal Protocol Analysis in Education, Cognitive Labs, Talk-Aloud Method, Concurrent Verbal Reporting	Assessment for Learning, Classroom Formative Assessment, Feedback-Based Assessment, Embedded Formative Assessment
Relaterte	4	4
Sammendrag	The think-aloud protocol is a method for making cognition visible by having people verbalize their thoughts while performing a task. In education it is the primary tool for studying response processes — how students actually read, reason about, and answer test items and learning tasks. Grounded in Ericsson and Simon's theory of verbal reports as data, it provides the response-process evidence that modern validity frameworks require, revealing whether items measure the intended thinking, and exposing strategies, misconceptions, and construct-irrelevant difficulties.	Formative assessment, or assessment for learning, is the practice of gathering evidence of student understanding during instruction and using it immediately to adjust teaching and to give feedback that moves learning forward. Unlike summative assessment, which measures learning after the fact for grading or accountability, formative assessment is woven into the teaching cycle. Synthesized influentially by Black and Wiliam, it is defined not by the type of instrument but by whether the resulting evidence actually changes subsequent instruction and learning.