Abstract
Noss, Goldstein & Hoyles raise questions relating to the validity of the Graded Assessment in Mathematics (GAIM) project, on psychological, educational and technical grounds. This paper argues, with reference to relevant research, that even those concerns expressed which are theoretically justifiable are not serious in practice and are thus unlikely to outweigh the positive benefits of the scheme. In particular there would seem to be no necessary contradiction between the use of levels as part of a definition of a descriptive framework for mathematical achievement and the results of existing research on developmental hierarchies of mathematics learning. The importance of linking summative and formative assessment is also urged.

This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit: