This study belongs to the research tradition Participatory Action Research (PAR) in the form of a Research Circle. The task was to describe and analyse the process and content of knowledge development within a Research Circle. The participants in this circle were nine teacher who work at komvux, and teach adult students in subject such as SFI, SVA and English. In this circle with participating teachers, issues of individually adapted teaching in adult education have been in focus. In this circle, empirical data has been highlighted by having the participants tell life stories and in group interviews about the individualized teaching. In an interaction between the participants´ experiences of individually adapted teaching and previous research in this area, we in the circle developed methods for individually adapted teaching in adult education. The participants tried these methods in their teaching. The methods that were developed for individually adapted teaching were both broadly and comprehensive designed, which was positive because then the teacher can adapt the teaching methods to each student group and individual adult student. The result indicate that the individually adapted teaching needs to be designed based on individual teaching, one to one teaching between teacher and adult student. Then the adult student can receive individual support in their studies and receive tasks that are individually adapted to the student´s ability to study. It is also important that the teaching is designed based on relational teaching, were the adult student both meets the teacher and other students during the course of study. This means different working methods in teaching that are individually adapted based on relational teaching. Relational teaching is especially important in language teaching. It has also been highlighted methods for individually adapted teaching based on digital teaching which is both based on individual teaching and relational teaching. This digital teaching is based on different working methods that are highlighted in this study. 

In the wake of declining student performance and interest in science education, efforts to improve the quality of science teaching have intensified, including physics education. A recurring proposal to improve physics teaching is the use of formative assessment. Policy reforms tend to view the implementation of formative assessment as easy, but studies indicate that integrating these strategies into teachers’ practices can be challenging.  

Using a phenomenological approach and hermeneutic reflections, the present study explores the opportunities and challenges that teachers’ and students’ experience when implementing formative assessments in the physics classroom. For example, teachers may encounter resistance from their students and colleagues with different expectations of physics teaching, limiting teachers’ opportunities to ‘break free’ from established traditions. However, the study also highlights opportunities for physics teachers to evolve by taking risks and embracing formative assessment as an overarching learning assessment approach.  

Furthermore, the present study confirms the results of previous research indicating that students may see assessment rubrics in a positive light as their use can clarify teachers’ expectations and reduce uncertainty in this regard. However, the results of the present study also show that students may approach rubrics only as mechanical and strategic tools to obtain their desired grades, which risks conveying the message to students that physics knowledge is quantitative in nature. The students’ experiences also demonstrated that the use of rubrics could cause stress and anxiety, limiting the formative potential of rubrics. 

The results of the study are discussed in relation to the support that teachers and students need in implementing formative assessment and rubric use, and they have implications for teachers’ assessment literacy, including their ability to implement formative assessments in relation to different purposes of physics teaching. One conclusion is that teachers’ and students’ lived experiences of formative assessment and rubric use need to be understood in relation to the wider context of their lifeworlds, which is marked by an increased focus on performance and results. This is crucial so that teachers and students would not be portrayed as the problems when investments in formative assessment do not meet expectations.