How to Assess

Student Performance

in Science

Going Beyond

Multiple-Choice Tests

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
How to Assess Student Performance in Science: How To

Going Beyond Multiple-Choice Tests

How to Assess Student Performance in Science:

Going Beyond Multiple-Choice Tests

A Resource Manual for Teachers

by

Wendy McColskey and

Rita O’Sullivan
The content of this publication does not

necessarily reflect the views or policies of

the Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, U.S. Department of Education,

nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

This document was produced with funding

from the Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, U.S. Department of Education,

under contract no. RP91002010.

Associated with the

School of Education,

University of North Carolina

at Greensboro

2000, Revised

1997, Reprinted

1995, Revised

Edited by

Charles Ahearn, Director of

Communications and Publications, SERVE

Donna Nalley, Senior Editor, SERVE

Designed by

Richard Emond, Graphic Designer, SERVE
T A B L E TAB

Acknowledgments Table of Contents

Chapter 1 :

Current Views on Assessment

Introduction

Purpose of this Manual

What is “Good” Assessment?

Self-Assessment

Sample Assessment

Chapter 2 :

Desired Student Outcomes in

Science—What Do We Want Students

to Be Able to Do?

Articulating Outcomes

Examples of Science Education

Outcomes for Students

Sample Course Objectives Matrix

(Sixth Grade)

Chapter 3 :

Student Assessment Methods—What

are Methods of Assessing Student

Performance That Go Beyond

Multiple-Choice Tests?

Methods for Assessing Students—

Performance-based Assessments

Observing Students

Science Activity Observation Form

Asking Students

Looking at Students’ Work

Conceptual Understanding

Application and Creative Writing

Science Process Skills

Divergent Thinking

Chapter 4 :

Rubrics and Grading

Rubrics

Grading

Chapter 5 :

Getting Started

Appendix :

Reform in Curriculum and Instruction

About SERVE

Ordering Information

Order Form

i

1

1

1

2

3

5

7

8

10

12

13

13

14

15

17

22

25

26

25

27

37

41

37

45

47

53

54

57
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This manual resulted from an R&D field experience that involved working

with science teachers to develop performance assessments for a science curriculum reform project. The participation of these schools and teachers was invaluable to the development of this manual.

Conway Middle School, Horry School District, Conway, South Carolina

Josephine Dozier Alberta Sampson

Lesia Hughes Dancey Spivey

Helen McCormick Gil Stefanides

Mary Miller Jazmin Vega-Cortes

Graham Middle School, Alamance County School District, Graham, North Carolina

Sam Fowler Nancy Smith

Rosemarie Gavasto Patsy Smith

Greene County Middle School, Greene County School District,

Snow Hill, North Carolina

Lorraine Brann Becky Holleman

Lori Braxton Brenda Shirley

Susan Harrel Candace Turk

Performance assessments developed by the teachers listed above were piloted in

schools participating in the North Carolina Project for Reform in Science Education, a national science curriculum reform project initiated by the National Science

Teachers Association and funded by the National Science Foundation. Thus, these

teachers provided another sounding board for us as we experimented with student

assessment methods in a “live” curriculum reform setting.

Participating schools and teachers from the North Carolina Project for Reform in

Science Education included the following:

A.G. Cox Middle School, Pitt County School District, Greenville, North Carolina

Rita Elliot Terry Hardin

Hanes Middle School, Winston-Salem/Forsyth County School District,

Winston-Salem, North Carolina

Greg Bitting Gordon Knight

Joneice Carroll Barbara Massey

Barbara Hendrix

Acknowledgments

i
Noble Middle School, Virgo Middle School, New Hanover County School District,

Wilmington, North Carolina

Ann Bradshaw Mary Jessup

Beth Bruton Sandy Klein

Northeast Middle School, Guilford County School District,

Greensboro, North Carolina

Cindi Fields Sherri Smith

Adele Hollerman Katherine Watlington

Gay Sartin

Piedmont Open Middle School, Charlotte-Mecklenburg County School District,

Charlotte, North Carolina

Amy Donnelly Stacy Owens

Valley Springs Middle School, Buncombe County School District,

Asheville, North Carolina

Martha Brookshire Steven Kirstein

Joel Kelley

We also appreciate reviews of the publication provided by the following:

James Altschuld Helen McCormick

Keith Beamon Dianne Meiggs

Lorraine Brann Bruce Middleton

Angelo Collins Jerry Natkin

Paula Egleson Larry Rainey

Rita Elliot Joe Ryan

Joe Follman Dennis Silas

Barbara Foster Nancy Smith

Terri Hardin Bill Spooner

Susan Henry Helen Weaver

Glenda Johnson Wayne Welch

ii
1

Introduction

Educational systems promote student

growth in a variety of dimensions.

Traditional dimensions have been

the basics (reading, writing, basic math

computations, and basic content knowledge). Basic content knowledge can be

effectively assessed with multiple-choice

and completion tests. However, with “educational reform” has come more concern

with higher-order cognitive dimensions

(problem-solving, creativity), social dimensions (communication skills, ability to work

in groups) and other dimensions (life-long

learning). While they are objective and

efficient, traditional measures may not

serve these kinds of goals as well.

The purpose of this manual is to encourage discussions among science teachers

about desired student outcomes in science

and assessments appropriate to those

outcomes. Multiple-choice tests have their

place, but so do portfolios, observations,

performance tests, student interviews, and

exhibitions. Once teachers are clear on

what they hope to accomplish with their

students, choosing appropriate assessment

methods follows.

According to Wiggins (1992), the true issue

being debated is not whether some assessment methods are superior to others, but

rather what is worth assessing. The debate

about assessment is a “value” debate. What

goals or outcomes do we value for students, and how do we best assess their

progress toward these ends?

It is important to remember that you are

making choices about assessment right

now. These choices may be constrained by

what you have always done, what others

think you should do, what you understand

According to one of the authentic

assessment “experts”: “I think

what’s going on is something more

radical than rethinking testing. What

we’re really doing is rethinking our

purposes.” (Wiggins, 1992, p. 37)

Current Views on Assessment

Chapter 1

about assessment, or what you feel

students expect you to do, but they are

choices nonetheless. This manual is designed to provide you with the support you

and other teachers at your school need to

begin a process of defining the outcomes

you value for students in science and developing assessment practices that encourage

student progress toward desired ends.

Purpose of This Manual

This publication is designed to helpyou do the following:

1. Consider the variety of possible student

outcomes in science, and select those

that are most important for students.

2. Reflect on and choose appropriate ways

to assess student performance on

important outcomes. There are three

major ways teachers have of assessing

how students have changed relative to

the goals of instruction: they can observe students, ask students questions,

and look at their work. The assessment

methods discussed in this manual are

shown below.
2

3. Develop appropriate criteria for

judging student work, and consider

the alternatives to the teacher as sole

judge of student work (i.e., using peers,

professionals from the community, and

student self-assessment).

4. Reflect on grading practices and how

information from a variety of assessment

methods might be incorporated into a

composite picture of achievement.

5. Consider ways to get you and your

school started in changing practices.

This publication is not intended as a text

but as a self-study resource. That is, it is

not something to be read and then shelved.

Rather, we hope you will interact with it,

respond to the questions posed, and use

the manual as an opportunity to reflect

on your assessment practices. We suggest that you work through the manual

Observe Students Using

• Informal observations

• Structured observations

• Narratives

Ask Students Questions Using

• Interviews

• Self-assessment

Evaluate Their Work Using

• Open-ended questions

• Performance tests

• Journals

• Exhibitions and culminating

demonstrations

• Portfolios

with at least one other teacher, if possible,

because of the valuable sharing of ideas

that would result.

Other laboratory products on alternative

assessment that might be helpful include

1. A database and catalogue of alternative

assessments in math and science

2. A toolkit for professional developers on

alternative assessment

More information and an order form are in

the back of the manual.

What is “Good” Assessment?

Scenario: The teacher teaches a unit on soil

formation and then gives a unit test with

multiple-choice, short-answer, and matching

items to assess students’ retention of the

information. Students are told about the test

one week in advance and bring no resource

materials with them to the test. Students’ tests

are scored and returned and form the basis of

the six weeks’ grade.

Traditionally, the goal of most

subject area courses has been for

students to be able to recognize or

recall important facts, concepts, or relationships that have been explained to them.

Frequently used assessment methods

(multiple-choice, matching, short-answer)

measure progress toward this goal.

How and what we test sends a clear message about what is valued. Traditionally, we

have almost exclusively valued students’

success at retaining and bringing forth a

sample of the information they have retained. When a teacher emphasizes factual

knowledge on a test, students conclude that

remembering facts is the goal. When stu-
3

SSelf-Assessment elf

The first step in changing science education assessment is to have a clear understanding of your current practices. Please answer the following questions and discuss them

with another teacher.

Self-Assessment Questionnaire

1. List below, in your own terms, the four most important student outcomes that

resulted from your science instruction last year. That is, what could students do well

at the end of the year that they could not do well at the beginning of your instruction?

a. 

b. 

c. 

d. 

2. Which of the following kinds of work did you require of students?

 Listen to lectures  Talk with scientists

 Take tests on text/lectures  Solve problems in a team setting

 Take end-of-chapter tests  Maintain journals of data collected

 Design experiments  Do hands-on investigations

 Read textbooks  Make presentations to the class

 Other: 

3. In your science classes, on a typical day, how often were most students engaged

and challenged by their work?

 All the time  Somewhat often (less than half the time)

 Very often (more than half the time)  Almost never

 Often (about half the time)

4. Think about the assessment methods represented by the grades in your gradebook.

What might students infer about the purpose of science instruction from your

choices about what is graded?
4

dents are not given an opportunity to retest

or improve their work, they may conclude

that improvement is not valued. If higherorder thinking, problem-solving, and critical

thinking are to be valued, then classroom

assessments need to lend value to them.

Proponents of assessment reform argue

that past assessment practices are inadequate. Fundamental problems with previous testing practices include a) narrowness

of scope b) limited expectations of students

c) overemphasis on memorizing facts d)

lack of student ownership in the learning

process and e) lack of incentives for student improvement in their work. In other

words, both the “what” and the “how” of

student assessment need to be changed.

According to Wiggins (1989), “authentic

assessment” means that

• Tests should involve real-life tasks,

performances, or challenges that replicate the problems faced by a scientist,

historian, or expert in a particular field;

thus, they are complex tasks rather than

drills, worksheets, or isolated questions.

• Students should understand up-front

the criteria on which their work will be

judged and be able to apply the criteria

to their work.

• Students should be asked to demonstrate their control over the essential

knowledge being taught by actually

using the information in a way that

reveals their level of understanding.

(High Success Network, 1992)

Others argue that assessments should

• Require students to perform tasks that

include the highest skill levels of problem-finding and solving to include roleplaying, “real-life” simulations, investigations, major projects, and creative

depictions.

• Use power verbs (such as research,

analyze, evaluate, and depict) to

reinforce that the student is demonstrating what he or she can do with

information.

• Allow for student creativity in their

products or responses.

• Allow students to be involved in creating the criteria against which their

performance will be judged.

• Include audiences in addition to the

teacher to validate and judge student

performances (e.g., scientists, other

students).

 (High Success Network, 1992)

In summary, assessment reforms argue

strongly that the work we have asked

students to do in the past (drills,

worksheets, fact-level questions and answers, multiple-choice, and short-answer

tests) does not challenge and involve them,

does not encourage creative, quality work,

and does not provide them with experience

in using and applying information and skills

in a “real-world“ way.

What is a “real-world” task? A few examples of generic kinds of tasks that have

students using information in ways that go

beyond just recalling or recognizing correct

information include the following:

• Leading a group to closure on an issue

• Collecting, analyzing, and interpreting

data about the success of a program,

product, or event
5

sample

• Researching both sides of a controversy

and reporting it objectively

• Developing criteria for rating the

quality of a product, proposal, or

recommendation

Such tasks are recognizable as part of

many adult work environments.

A key point to remember as you go through

this manual is that assessing students

involves gathering information about what

they know, can do, or are like. If throughout

12 years of school, students are assessed

only on passive, non-creative work

Sample Assessment

Assignment:

Research with your team the value and uses of whales across time and cultures. Analyze and evaluate the practical uses vs. environmental protection issues, and develop

support for both. Choose a position, and be prepared to justify and present your position to the class in a convincing manner.

Assessment Methods:

1. Research quality will be assessed through teacher observation of teamwork and

teacher review of a team journal of completed group work.

Teams are not allowed to proceed with developing their presentations until they can

show they have adequately researched the topic.

2. Oral presentation skills will be assessed by peers and teachers using a checklist.

Source: Adapted from High Success Network training materials; Outcome-Based Education Summer

Conference, Charlotte, NC, 1992; High Success Network, P.O. Box 1630, Eagle, CO 81631.

(worksheets, multiple-choice tests), how

likely is it that they will become problemsolvers, creative producers, effective communicators, and self-directed learners as

adults?

Educational objectives (curriculum goals),

the design of learning experiences (instruction), and student evaluation or assessment

are considered the three legs of the educational process. Chapter 2 deals with identifying science education objectives. Chapters 3 and 4 deal with student assessment

methods. Additional information on science

curriculum and instruction reform can be

found in the appendix.
6
7

Desired Student Outcomes in Science—What Do

Chapter 2

We Want Students to Be Able to Do?

Educational goals provide the framework for assessing student progress.

The goals a teacher has for his or her

class have clear implications for assessment. Without a clear vision or articulation

of what is to be accomplished in the time

you have with your students, how do you

know what to assess? Assessments communicate to students what is important.

Consider these statements from a recent

publication by the National Center for

Improving Science Education:

If only new vocabulary is tested,

there is an implicit message that

science is mostly a matter of memorizing new terms.

If only factual knowledge is tested, the

message may be that science is a static

body of facts, principles, and procedures

to be mastered and recalled on demand.

If tests call for the students to engage in

active exploration and reflection, to pose

new questions and solve new problems,

the message can be that science is a

mode of disciplined inquiry, applied

specialized knowledge, investigative

procedures, and rules of evidence for

understanding both the natural world

and the technologies through which

humans have shaped that world to

their ends.

(Loucks-Horsley, 1990)

You might have different levels of goals or

purposes that guide your work with students. For example, some outcomes for

students cut across all levels and courses.

Possible outcomes are that students will

become

• Self-directed learners

• Quality producers and performers

• Goal-setters and pursuers

• Effective communicators

• Collaborative community contributors

• Creative and complex thinkers

• Innovative problem-solvers

Such a list gives some structure and direction to assessment across all content and

subject areas. Teachers can design work

and experiences for students with these

kinds of outcomes for the student in mind.

However, teachers also have science goals

or outcomes for students as shown in the

following section. The science goals teachers choose for their students give more

immediate direction for what they are trying

to accomplish with their science instruction.

Key point: The assessments you

use must reflect your purposes,

and the purposes of your instruction must be made known to the

students.
8

Outcomes Articulating Outcomes

At this point, please take a few minutes to reflect on what you feel are important objectives for science instruction. It would be helpful to discuss your responses with other

science teachers.

1. How would you rank order the NAEP goals of conceptual understanding, scientific

investigation, practical reasoning, knowledge of the nature of science, and an

understanding of how technologies develop for the level of science you teach?

2. Review the list of sample science outcomes shown on the next pages. The list is

intended only as a starting point for brainstorming. Reword, reorganize, and add to

the list as needed. Then, think about the four most important science outcomes that

you have in mind for students, and enter those below under “Most Important Student

Outcomes.” You will likely revise these often before you are happy with them, but this

is the information that is critical to discuss with other teachers, with students, and

with parents so that everyone knows what you are aiming for with your instruction.

Most Important Student Outcomes in Science

In the space below, enter what you believe to be the most important outcomes for your

students.

1. Outcome:

2. Outcome:

3. Outcome:

4. Outcome:
9

The National Assessment of Educational

Progress develops and administers science

tests to a national sample of students on a

regular basis to provide a picture of student

capabilities in science. These tests are

based on a conceptualization of the important goals in science.

The following information is taken from the

National Assessment Governing Board’s

Science Framework for the 1994 National

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP

Science Consensus Project, 1992). The 1994

NAEP assessment includes the following

categories of student outcomes:

1. Conceptual understanding, with stress

on the connections among disciplines

and students’ organization of factual

knowledge

2. Scientific investigations: acquiring new

information, planning appropriate

investigations, using a variety of scientific tools, and communicating the

results of the investigations

3. Practical reasoning: analyzing a problem, planning appropriate approaches,

and evaluating results

4. Nature of science/technology: including

knowledge of the nature of science (i.e.,

that scientists invent explanations to fit

observations, but that these explanations may change with new evidence)

and an understanding of how technologies are designed and developed

The sample outcomes listed are statements

about the intended results of science instruction. They contain action verbs (process

objectives) that have students performing or

behaving in some way (demonstrate, summarize, explore). A syllabus that lists topics to be

covered by a course is an implicit statement

that the objective of the course is to “know”

some things about the areas listed. However,

just knowing things is no longer an adequate

goal for students. It is important to communicate to students what they are expected to

be able to do with the content.

One tool that helps teachers sharpen their

thinking about this mix of content and

process objectives is a matrix such as the

one shown on page 12. (It is similar in

concept to a test specifications matrix—a

tool used by test developers to ensure that

test items are written in numbers proportionate to each cell’s importance.) The

behaviors or outcomes expected of students are listed on the side. The content

areas considered essential for students to

understand are listed across the top. A

course objectives matrix is a way to identify

and communicate critical course outcomes

to students. A publication by the National

Science Teachers Association, The Content

Core: A Guide for Curriculum Designers, lays

out a suggested scope and sequence of

science content in grades six through 12

that might be helpful in thinking through

the essential content at your grade level.

In the matrix shown, verbs such as explain

and apply (4 & 5) specify the level of content

understanding to be gained. (Other examples

of thinking verbs are synthesize, categorize,

identify errors, analyze, summarize, and

compare and contrast.) Science process skills

(1, 2, & 3) are also listed as course objectives. The sixth objective (“work cooperatively to investigate problems”) means that

students will be expected to learn to problem-solve in a team setting. By maintaining

a journal and portfolio (7), students become

competent at reflecting on their learning and

evaluating the quality of their work.

Before you go on to the next chapter, you

may want to spend some time experimenting with a matrix that describes your science course objectives, perhaps building on

the four “most important” science outcomes previously identified.
10

Outcomes Examples of Science Education

Outcomes for Students

Conceptual Understanding

Students will be able to do the following:

1. Organize and express in their own words important science ideas.

2. Demonstrate the acquisition of a meaningful knowledge base.

3. Successfully exchange ideas and information with other students.

4. Read, comprehend, discuss, and evaluate information in science articles.

5. Generate, research, and report on questions of interest.

Scientific Investigations

Students will be able to do the following:

1. Demonstrate the use of science process skills (classifying, developing a research

question, making predictions, collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data).

2. Demonstrate the use of laboratory skills.

3. Generate a hypothesis and design an experiment to test that hypothesis.

4. Determine if measurements are reliable and valid.

5. Make judgments about the adequacy of evidence supporting a hypothesis.

6. Develop alternative interpretations and look at data in more than one way.
11

Practical Reasoning

Students will be able to do the following:

1. Work successfully through a complex problem with a group of other students.

Nature of Science and Technology

Students will be able to do the following:

1. Identify and summarize examples of how explanations of scientific phenomena

have changed over time as new evidence emerged.

2. Demonstrate an understanding of the difference between correlation and causality.

3. Discuss the interaction of scientific knowledge and values as they relate to

problems we face.

4. Summarize the review role of scientific organizations in avoiding bias and

maintaining quality in published research.

5. Explore the advantages and disadvantages involved in the design and development

of technologies.

6. Summarize examples of how scientific knowledge has been applied to the design of

technologies.
12

Water

Cycle

Objectives

Direction Soil

Essential Course Areas Studied

Sun’s

Apparent

Movement

Biomes Students

Will:

Sample Course Objectives Matrix Matrix (Grade 6)

Use simple

instruments

and collect

measurements

Make

observations

and predictions

Collect, record,

and interpret

data

Explain

relationships,

concepts,

principles,

theories, etc.

Apply

information to

new situations

Work

cooperatively

to investigate

problems

Maintain a

journal and

portfolio

Note: Matrix was adapted from those developed as a part of the North Carolina Project for Reform in

Science Education, College of Education, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina.
13

Student Assessment Methods—What are Methods

Chapter 3

of Assessing Student Peformance That

Go Beyond Multiple-Choice Tests?

Although many people equate

assessment with testing, in reality,

assessment involves far more than

merely giving tests (Hopkins, Stanley, &

Hopkins, 1990). That distinction is critical to

understanding the array of methods presented in this chapter. To assess students is

to collect information about their performance. It is an integral part of the teaching

and learning process. The goal of education

is to produce or facilitate changes in learners. How does one know if students are

becoming competent and knowledgeable?

Numbers are often useful in assessment

because they can be communicated and

interpreted efficiently, but not all useful

information about how and what students

are learning is quantitative. In fact, many

argue that there has been an overdependence on quantitative test information and

an underutilization of more subjective

methods involving teacher observation and

judgment. Grading, promoting, and placement into special education or remedial

instruction are important educational

decisions that should be based on a variety

of assessment methods. “Let us not fall into

the trap of asking whether we should use

teacher judgments or test scores. Faced by

complex problems of assessment and

evaluation of student growth and the

factors that influence it, we cannot reject

any promising resource. Various sorts of

information complement each other”

(Hopkins, Stanley, & Hopkins, 1990, p. 8).

This section walks you through ways to

gather information about students. For

example, a teacher might be interested in

what students understand about mapping

and direction. Multiple-choice items might

include the following:

1. What direction are you traveling when

you drive from New York to California?

a) east

b) north

c) west

d) south

2. The sun sets in the ________________.

a) east

b) north

c) west

d) south

A performance-based assessment, by

contrast, would ask students to construct a

map of their neighborhood or find their way

from one part of the school to another

using a compass. Performance-based

assessments provide students with an

opportunity to demonstrate what they

know, rather than just recognizing or

recalling the right answer.

Teachers assess students’ performance by

observing them at work, asking them

questions, and/or reviewing their work. In

this section, each method of assessment

listed below will be described and

examples provided.

Methods for Assessing

Students—Performance-Based

Assessments

1. Observing Students

• Informal observations
14

• Structured observations

• Narratives

2. Asking Students

• Interviews

• Self-assessments

3. Looking at Students’ Work

• Open-ended questions

• Performance tests/tasks

• Journals

• Exhibitions/projects/culminating

demonstrations

• Portfolios

When a teacher decides that a

performance-based assessment

is the most appropriate way to

assess student progress relative to an

instructional goal, a decision must also be

made as to how the student response will

be judged. The term “rubric” refers to

guidelines for judging responses. Rubrics

and grading are discussed in Chapter 4.

Observing Students

Informal Observations

Teachers are constantly observingstudents and making assessments

about their performance that, in turn,

influence future instruction. These are

informal observations. With informal

observations, teachers are observing with

no predetermined focus, and the choices of

whom to observe are not formalized.

Through such observations, teachers might,

for example, become aware of students in

their classes who are able to work independently and those who require a great deal

of guidance. Informal assessments are

often the basis for information provided to

parents (e.g., Kevin seems to enjoy learning; Collin works well independently).

Structured Observations

Occasionally, more formal observations are needed. Formal observations have a specified focus and sample

behavior to be observed systematically.

Some goals or objectives can only be

assessed by observation. For example, it is

difficult to imagine how a teacher would

assess students’ team problem-solving

skills or success at independent lab work

without observing them. Although informal

observations occur daily, occasionally

teachers may want to record information

from their observations on a form. The

form might be structured as a matrix of

those being observed by the behaviors

of interest.

For example, if a school has recently set up

a science activity lab where students can

individually engage in hands-on science

activities, teachers may want to evaluate

students’ progress by seeing how the

students increase their ability to stay on

task and work independently with the

materials in the lab. Teachers might develop a structured observation form for the

lab as shown in the Science Activity

Observation Form.

The information collected by the Observation Form could be used in a number of

ways. Formal observations often allow

teachers to profit from new information

that may challenge some of their opinions

about students. For example, before looking at the data, a teacher might have

guessed that Mai would have difficulty

staying on task. After the September observations, the teacher realized that Mai

functioned well independently; Alice,

Juanita, and George needed assistance to

use the materials appropriately.
15

Science Activity Observation Form Form

Teacher: Date Observed:

Time observations began: Time observations were completed:

Hands-on science activity (describe briefly):

Directions: List the students to be observed in the spaces provided. Plan to observe

those students during a 10-15-minute individual hands-on science activity. Observe

each student, and put a check in the box if he or she is on task. After you have observed

each student on your list once, go back starting with student No. 1, make a second

round of observations, and continue until the activity ends. After the observation ends,

check either “none,” “some,” or “much” under the level of assistance each student

needed to complete the activity.

Assistance

needed

1. _______________________________________________________

2. _______________________________________________________

3. _______________________________________________________

4. _______________________________________________________

5. _______________________________________________________

Student’s Name

Working to complete

assignment/on task











None Some Much
16

Summary Science Activity F

Observation Form

orm

Teacher: ROSE

Observation Dates: 1. Sept. 12 2. Jan. 23 3. May 5

Number of Times Observed Working to Complete Assignment

Student’s Name September January May

1. Alice 1 2 3

2. Mai 4 5 4

3. Juanita 2 3 4

4. Michael 4 4 5

5. George 2 4 5

TOTAL 13 18 21
17

Data collected over time can be useful for

showing gains. The sample form on page

16 shows a general pattern of improvement

over time on independent lab work. This

information may be used to demonstrate

the benefits of the lab. It may also be used

to show which and how many children

need improvement. Finally, teachers might

use it as a way to give students feedback

about how they are improving.

Narratives

Progress on some instructional objectives can be tracked best through

narrative records of observed behavior. A

narrative is a written record. Such narratives are particularly appropriate for complex behaviors, such as group interactions,

which cannot be described effectively with

a checklist. For example, a teacher might

observe and describe a cooperative teamlearning activity. The observation would

begin with a purpose, such as to see how

students on a team contributed to completing an activity. An example of such a

narrative appears on page 19.

The teacher would begin the assignment,

explaining what the students needed to do.

In this example, students have been asked

to work in pre-assigned groups of four to

explore how they might measure wind.

Rather than facilitating the activity, the

teacher has informed the class that she will

only be observing.

The narrative is the teacher’s written record

of how the children worked together to

solve the problem. Overall, it provides

evidence about how each of the students

contributed to the problem-solving activity

and about the individual styles of the

students (e.g., Crystal appears to be a

natural leader and very task oriented). The

teacher could use this information to set

goals for individual students or structure

group membership in the future. Future

observations could be focused on those

groups experiencing difficulties. The results

could be provided to these groups with

comments on how to improve their functioning. Over time, a series of these narratives might demonstrate how students

changed the way they worked as a team.

Asking Students

I

n the last section on observing students,

several examples were provided of how

teachers collect information about

student behavior. A second method of

collecting information about students

involves the analysis of replies that students give in interviews and on self-report

questionnaires.

Interviews involve face-to-face verbal

exchanges between the teacher and student. In self-report questionnaires, students

respond to written questions and statements. The focus of the interviews or selfassessment questionnaires may be on a

cognitive event such as what students

understand about a particular topic, how

they feel (e.g., what do they like and dislike

about working in groups?), or how they

report they behave (e.g., do they talk about

science topics at home or read science

books in their free time?).

Interviews

Although individual interviews withstudents are time-consuming and

difficult to manage in a classroom setting,

there are several reasons why they are

worth trying.

1. For those students who seem to be

having trouble with a particular concept

or skill as demonstrated on their tests,

interviews may be a way of further

assessing their functioning relative to

the instructional objective. A series of
18

probing questions can be developed that

would be useful in deciding how to help

students improve their performance.

2. If a new unit is being developed,

interviewing a sample of students of

different abilities about their prior

knowledge on the topic should allow

the teacher to assess students’

readiness to learn the new topic.

Instruction could then be designed to

target their entry level of knowledge.

3. Interviews can send a message to

students that a teacher cares about

what they think or understand. Rapport

is encouraged, and student motivation

may be increased.

4. Interviews allow students who have

difficulty with written tests to express

what they understand in a context that

may be less threatening and anxietyproducing. On the flip side, students

who do well on written tests may have

difficulty communicating their

responses to questions verbally and

may need practice.

5. Interviews provide teachers the

opportunity to probe and ask follow-up

questions in ways that challenge

students to think beyond their current

level of understanding and to organize

their knowledge in more systematic

ways. Thus, follow-up questions can be

individualized such that students are

pushed as far as their level of

understanding permits.

6. One of the goals mentioned in Chapter

2 is that students will be able to

communicate effectively as a result of

their K-12 experience. If science

teachers adopt this goal, interviews are

clearly an assessment method of

choice. That is, students should not only

be assessed with written tests but also

should be asked to express what they

know verbally.

Interviews can vary in their degree of

structure. In unstructured interviews, the

contents and order of the questions vary

with the student and are responsive to each

student’s answers. In semi-structured

interviews, there may be some themes

identified to structure the interviews, but

questions within those themes may be

phrased differently for different students. In

structured interviews, teachers ask students

to respond to the same set of questions.

Using Information from Interviews

The way that information from interviews is used depends on the context

or purpose of the interview. Some

examples follow.

1. If a new unit is being developed, and

the teacher is interviewing a small

sample of students on their ability to

explain and relate the concepts of

adaptation and natural selection, tape

recording the interviews might be

helpful. The teacher could listen to the

tape at a later time and look for

misconceptions in student responses.

2. If the purpose of the interview is to

assess students’ progress on an

objective having to do with accurately

communicating scientific principles, a

series of rating scales could be

developed to describe poor, average,

and good performance on a variety of

dimensions (e.g., organization,

Daily teacher/student dialogue which

occurs during instruction can be

seen as a series of unstructured

interviews used by teachers to assess

students’ competence relative to

instructional objectives.
19

Group Narrative Observation:

Group Problem-Solving

Observer: VIOLET Time: 1:20 to 1:30 p.m. Date: Sept. 12

Purpose(s) of the Observation

To be able to describe to students how their behaviors contributed to or detracted from

the group’s efforts to solve the problem. One of the goals for the year is the development of group problem-solving skills. This assessment approach documents student

functioning relative to this goal.

Narrative

Crystal reminded the group that they needed to choose a recorder. Ramon volunteered

to be the recorder and write things down if they told him what to write. Jack said, “What

are we supposed to do?” Anita looked at the worksheet and began reading aloud the

directions of the activity sheet. Jack started blowing in the air and talking about wind.

Crystal told Jack to stop playing. He looked at his sheet for a moment and then started

blowing again.

The first section on the activity sheet asked the students to identify the different properties of wind. Crystal told Ramon to write down “the way it blows.” Anita offered, “how

fast it goes.” The next section asked the students to find a way to measure one of the

properties they had identified. Crystal said that they should build a weather vane;

Ramon and Anita agreed. Jack didn’t say anything. He was busy drawing a sailboat.

Crystal sent Jack off to the side of the room to get materials to build the weather vane.

Jack returned with the materials and immediately started to put them together. Crystal

went to the side of the room to get the things Jack forgot. Each of the children began

building their own weather vanes. Jack wanted everyone in the group to see his when

he blew on it. The other children began blowing on theirs. After a few minutes, Crystal

decided that Jack’s weather vane was the best.
20

ExamOral Exam:

The Three Phases of Water

Student’s Name:__________________________________ Date:_______________________

Scoring Key Points

1. 1 point for each phase What are the three phases of water?

identified correctly

(ice, water, steam)

2 0 = Incorrect Describe each of the three phases.

1 = Partially correct

2 = Satisfactory a. Ice:

b. Liquid:

c. Steam:

3. 0 = Incorrect What happens when water goes from

1 = Partially correct one phase to the other?

2 = Satisfactory

a. Ice to Liquid:

b. Liquid to Ice:

c. Liquid to Steam:

d. Steam to Liquid:

4. Is there anything you do not understand

about water phases?

Enter Total Points (max. 17)
21

Suggestions for Interviews

1. Use samples of the class for

interviews when you can rather

than all students.

2. Keep the tone of the

interviews positive and

constructive. Try not to give

verbal cues or facial

expressions that can be

interpreted as meaning that an

answer is silly or that an error

has been made.

3. Let students respond without

interruptions, and give them

time to think before they

respond.

4. Try to keep interviews short,

and focus on important

questions.

coherence, and completeness of

responses). Students could be asked to

rate their own performance using these

rating scales, and then the teacher

might share his or her ratings with

the student.

3. Interview responses can also be graded

as an oral test. Structured interviews

may give those who have poor literacy

skills a chance to succeed. In addition,

this assessment method provides the

teacher with assurance that students

have understood the questions. (Written

exams assume students understand the

questions asked.)

Some teachers also report that students

take oral tests more seriously because they

are more personal expressions of competence than a written test. Students may

prepare more carefully if they know they

must stand before a teacher and answer

questions individually.

An example of a set of structured interview

questions and a grading rubric are shown

on page 20. The same set of questions is

asked of all students. Student responses to

the questions are recorded by the teacher,

and point values are entered on the form as

the student responds to each question.

The results could be used in a number of

ways. Students who had less than 17 points

could be assigned a peer who had received

17 points, and the peer could work on the

questions with the student until he or she

was ready to retake the exam. The second

administration could result in a score

entered in the gradebook.

Self-Assessment Questionnaires

Each assessment tool has its advantagesand disadvantages and serves some

purposes better than others. Student selfassessment questionnaires might be helpful

in determining how students perceive their

knowledge, skills, or the quality of their

work, the concerns they have about their

progress, their prior level of experience with

a topic or skill, their feelings about the

class, or their interest in science as a career.

When used appropriately, self-assessments

actively involve students in reflecting on

their learning process and emphasize the

importance of students’ awareness about

what they know and what they need to

know. The sample form on page 23 presents a science self-assessment questionnaire that a teacher might give to students

at the beginning of the year to better understand their science background and interests. In administering the questionnaire, the

teacher might show the students each of

the instruments listed in Question 4 (page

23) so that students who knew how to use
22

the instrument but had forgotten the name

could respond.

The teacher could use the assessment

results in several ways. First, the teacher

may want to summarize the frequency of

responses to the interest question (Question

1) as a baseline for comparison to the endof-year level of interest. Summarizing the

responses to the instrument item (Question

4) in a frequency chart (instruments by

number of students who had used each and

could describe each) could assist the

teacher in judging how much remediation

was needed. If cooperative learning skills

were to be a focus for the year, the names

of students who indicated dislikes about

working in a team (Question 5) could be

listed and notes kept about any difficulties

they had as teamwork was initiated.

Students can be asked to evaluate their

understanding of concepts at any point in

the instructional process. Yager and

Kellerman (1992) note that a teacher might

list the topics to be covered over a period of

time (e.g., carbohydrates, concentration,

starch, glucose, digestion). They suggest

that students could be asked to rate each

concept using the following key:

1 = I have never heard of it.

2 = I have heard of it but do not

understand it.

3 = I think I understand it partially.

4 = I know and understand it.

5 = I can explain it to a friend.

Such an approach to assessing students’

understanding is less threatening than a

pre-test and can give students a sense of

the different levels of knowing, if used

frequently in a class situation. Results of

student ratings of each concept could be

tabulated as a class activity.

Looking at Students’ Work

An Overview

Multiple-choice and completion

items are not included in this

manual as there are many

sources that can be tapped for guidance on

how to write these kinds of items

(Gronlund & Linn, 1990; Hopkins, Stanley &

Hopkins, 1990; Payne, 1992). Rather, our

emphasis is on open-ended questions,

performance tasks, journals, exhibitions,

and portfolios. The development and

administration of test questions, items, or

tasks starts with finding the most appropriate assessment option, given the relevant

instructional objectives. Each method has

its place.

Keep in Mind in Constructing

Tests That

• Course objectives should guide

the decisions about what is

assessed.

• The mix of content (what

topics) and process (what kind

or level of performance) must

be considered.

• Item development takes time

and is not easy.

• Multiple-choice, completion,

open-ended, and performance

items are appropriate for

different purposes.
23

Science Skills Self-Assessment Self

Directions: Read the questions and statements below, and answer as best you can.

There are no right and wrong answers.

1. How would you rate your interest in science right now?

 Very High  High  Medium  Low  Very Low

2. What did you like the most about science last year?

3. What did you like the least?

4. Put a check by each instrument you have used. Beside each instrument, describe

briefly what it does.

 Microscope

 Weight scale

 Thermometer

 Weather vane

 Ruler

 Barometer

 Compass

 Rain gauge

5. What do you like or dislike about working with a team of students?
24

Completion items (e.g., The first man on

the moon was _________) are direct, minimize the effect of guessing, and are good

ways of assessing factual knowledge.

However, they are limited in their ability to

tap students’ in-depth understanding or

reasoning about a problem.

Multiple-choice items can be used flexibly to tap into a variety of complex problem

situations and can ask students questions

using all levels of thinking (application,

analysis, etc.). They can be scored reliably

and administered efficiently to cover a wide

range of material. However, they are difficult to write well, and they do not require

students to construct or frame a response.

Open-ended and performance task

items fit well with the current emphasis on

developing students into effective communicators, quality producers, and active,

complex thinkers because they call for

students to perform or construct a response.

Open-Ended Questions

Rather than having students select aresponse, open-ended questions ask

students to produce a response. This

approach is appropriate for assessing

student performance on more complex

cognitive outcomes. The length of the

response could vary considerably given the

age of the student, the question(s) asked,

and the time provided to complete the

question(s).

Some examples of generic starting points

for open-ended questions that relate to

higher-order, cognitive objectives are

provided below (Gronlund & Linn, 1990):

• Explain a cause-effect relationship.

• Describe an application of a principle.

• Formulate a hypothesis or a conclusion.

• Describe the limitations of the data.

• Explain a method or procedure.

• Integrate learnings in different areas.

• Create or design something (i.e., an

experiment).

• Evaluate the worth of an idea.

Some examples of open-ended questions

that address students’ skill at applying

information and making judgments follow.

• “Would you weigh more or less on the

moon? On the sun? Explain.” (Assesses

the ability to apply a rule or principle in

a specified situation.)

• “Why may too frequent reliance on

penicillin for the treatment of minor

ailments eventually result in its

diminished effectiveness against major

invasion of body tissues by infectious

bacteria?” (Assesses understanding of

cause and effect.)

• “Is nature or nurture more influential in

determining human behavior? Why?”

(Assesses skill at supporting decisions

for or against.)

• “What questions should a scientist ask

in order to determine why more

smokers than nonsmokers develop lung

cancer?” (Assesses skill at formulating

new questions.) (Payne, 1992, p. 174)

It should be noted that if an application has

been taught explicitly, and the answer is

provided from memory by the student,

rather than representing the presentation of

a new situation, the objective assessed is

factual recall, not application.

Open-ended questions can assess a variety

of instructional goals such as conceptual

understanding, application of knowledge
25

Concept Conceptual Understanding

1) How would life and the conditions on earth be different if all bacteria and fungi

became extinct? Explain the changes that might occur, and give as much detail

as possible. (Grade 8)

2) Using the weather map shown above, make a forecast for the weather in North

Carolina for the next day. Explain why you made the forecast. (Grade 4)

Source: Open-response released items (1991-1992). Kentucky Instructional Results Information System.

Kentucky Department of Education. Division of Curriculum, Assessment, and Accountability, Capital Plaza

Tower, Frankfort, KY 40601

Application and Creative Writing

1) If the earth stopped rotating on its axis, how might our weather change? Be

imaginative, speculative, and specific.

2) You are returning from your interstellar journey where you were in charge of soil

analysis. It is your responsibility to write up a description of the biome(s) you found

on your planet. Include information about the living and non-living components of

the biome. Be sure to note food webs, food chains, altitude, rainfall, soil types,

latitude, and any other important information.

Source: Robin Freedman (October, 1992). “Writing, Student Portfolios, and Authentic Assessment.” In The

Watershed, a quarterly publication by the California Assessment Program. California Department of Education, P.O. Box 944272, Sacramento, CA 94244-2720.

Legend:

Rain

Flurries

Snow

Cold Front

Warm Front

Stationary front
26

Skills

1) Katie believes that students who do between four and ten hours of homework per

week make better grades than students who do not do homework or who do more

than 10 hours of homework per week. To test this hypothesis, she is writing a

survey that she will give to students at her school. (Grade 8)

• What questions should Katie include in her survey?

• Describe the scientific procedure Katie should use.

• Describe what Katie should do with the responses to her survey to find if her

hypothesis is correct.

2) You are a state scientist. You are asked to develop an experiment to determine

whether discharge from a factory is endangering Kentucky Lake. (Grade 12)

• Identify several possible consequences of the discharge.

• Choose one of the consequences. Design an experiment to investigate whether

the consequence is actually occurring and if it is caused by the discharge.

Describe how you would investigate, the kinds of data you would collect, and

what you would do with your data.

3) The number of kernels that do not pop during microwave cooking varies with

different brands of microwave popcorn. Design an investigation to determine which

of three brands of microwave popcorn pops best. Be certain to describe each of the

following: (Grade 12)

• Everything you will do in your investigation

• The kinds of data you will collect

• How you will analyze the data to determine which brand of popcorn pops best

Source: Open-response released items (1991-1992). Kentucky Instructional Results Information System.

Kentucky Department of Education. Division of Curriculum, Assessment, and Accountability, Capital Plaza

Tower, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

Science Process Skills
27

Creativity or divergent thinking is an important part of scientific thinking. For example,

the generation of research questions and hypotheses and the development of plans of

actions require an ability to posit multiple, original approaches. Tasks that engage

students’ creativity have no right answer. Open-ended questions can be developed that

ask for multiple responses.

Students might be given sample situations that relate to the unit under study, such as

the following:

• “Suppose we lived in a world without insects.”

• “Suppose there was no more disease in the world.”

Students might then be asked to 1) write as many questions as they can that will help

them understand the situation, 2) list as many possible causes as they can for the

situation, and 3) list as many possibilities as they can for what might happen in the

future as a result of what is taking place in the situation. The number and quality of the

responses are indicators of creativity. The quality of each response might be assessed

as I(irrelevant), P(pertinent), and U(unique).

Source: Assessment Ideas for Science in Six Domains (1992). Robert E. Yager amd Lawrence R. Kellerman

(Eds.). Science Education Center. Van Allen Hall, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242

Divergent Thinking

via creative writing, the use of science

process skills, and divergent thinking skills.

Some examples are shown on pages 25-27.

Making Sense of Students’

Responses

I

f open-ended questions are to be included on a test that will be graded, it is

important for teachers to prepare students

for the expectations held for them by

communicating how their responses will be

judged. After many years of multiple-choice

testing, some students may have difficulty

with open-ended questions. Their responses may be short, somewhat incoherent, and not well-developed. It may be

difficult to judge their understanding of

the concept because of weak communication skills.

At first, students may need more than one

chance at expressing their understanding of

essential concepts. Perhaps on the first

administration of open-ended questions on a

topic, the teacher could pick the best student

responses and ask the class to critique other

student responses in terms of whether or not

they met this standard. No grades would be

given until the second or third administration

or until it was clear that students had ample

opportunities to understand the quality of

responses expected of them.
28

Rubric

0 Incomprehensible/ inaccurate

explanation

1 Provides partially accurate

explanation

2 Provides accurate explanation

but not well-written

3 Provides very well-written and

accurate explanation

Total possible points: 12

1. Why do we use the term “the sun’s

apparent motion”?

2. If we agree that the sun is not really

moving across the sky, what is

happening to make it look that way?

3. At 9:00 a.m., a shadow is west of a

tree; at 4 p.m. it is east of the tree.

Explain why this happens.

4. Why do people in North Carolina see

the sunrise before people in

California?

Source: Rita Elliot, A.G. Cox Middle School, Pitt County Schools, Winterville, N.C.

Open-Ended Questions about the Apparent

Motion of the Sun

Grading open-ended questions involves

interpreting the quality of the response in

terms of some criterion. In the example

shown above, the criteria are the scientific

accuracy of the explanation or description

provided and the coherence of the response. Both criteria are included in a

single scale. Distinguishing between a 2

(accurate but not well-written) and 3

(accurate and well-written) may help to

impress upon students the importance of

structuring their responses so that they are

coherent to a reader.

Several suggestions for rating open-ended

questions are offered.

1. Articulate the outcomes that will be

assessed by open-ended questions. For

example, the instructional objective

assessed by the questions might be

“students will be able to explain

phenomena relevant to the earth/sun

system.”

2. As part of choosing or developing

questions to administer, answer the

questions yourself to better clarify your

expectations regarding an ideal student

response. Determine in advance the

elements you expect in a complete

answer.
29

3. Develop a rating scale or point system

to use with the questions. More

information about rating scales and

checklists is found in Chapter 4.

4. Read over a sampling of answers before

grading them, and get some idea of the

range of responses to each question. It

may be helpful to sort the responses to

a question into piles based on the rating

scale being used before assigning a

final scale value to the response.

Another use of students’ responses to

open-ended questions is to analyze their

responses for misconceptions or problems

they are having in understanding a concept. Rather than grading responses, responses can be grouped into categories of

similar kinds of answers so that future

instruction can respond to the kinds of

errors being made.

Performance Tests/Tasks

Although many achievement objectives

can be assessed with paper-and-pencil

tests, there are other objectives which are

more appropriately assessed by having

students actually demonstrate their competence. In some situations, given the purpose

of the assessment (e.g., licensing people to

drive cars), a performance test is a necessity. That is, it would be unthinkable to

license people to drive on the strength of a

written test on driving rules. Likewise in

science instruction, there may be some

skills (science investigation skills, for example) which are most appropriately assessed by having the student perform tasks

rather than take a paper-and-pencil test.

Although science teachers may make

extensive use of hands-on and lab activities

for instruction, they may not make effective

use of performance tasks for assessment. If

students are expected to be competent at

measurement using different instruments

or at using lab equipment such as microscopes, a performance test makes more

sense than a multiple-choice test. For

example, middle school students might be

given the following materials:

Equipment

100 ml graduated cylinder (clear plastic)

balance (and mass units, if necessary)

tray or spill pan

calculator

liter of water

metric ruler

Materials

glass marble

piece of wood dowel

small piece of plastic rod

aluminum rivet

a lead weight

five pennies (use all five at one time)

Students would be instructed to use the

equipment and materials to make the

necessary measurements to calculate the

density of each material. The questions

shown on page 30 are samples taken from

the performance task section of the Kentucky Instructional Results Information

System.

Conceptual understanding can also be

assessed with performance tasks. Paperand-pencil tests may be used effectively to

assess conceptual understanding of a topic

(such as electricity), but students might be

more engaged by and learn more from a

performance assessment. For example,

suppose a teacher has been working for the

past month on electricity. Students have

talked and read about electricity, performed

experiments, and kept a journal record of

what they have learned. The teacher decides that the end-of-unit test should be a

graded performance task. An example of

such a task (taken from the California

statewide testing program field test) is

shown on page 31. If science classes are to

be about doing science rather than just
30

Performance Test—Density of T

Solids (Grade 8) est

1. Using the equipment and materials provided, make the necessary measurements to

calculate the density of each material. Be sure to record and label the unit of

measurement used for each density. Use the chart below to record your information.

Density = Mass/Volume

Test Item Mass Volume Density (and unit

of measurement)

Glass Marble

Wood Dowel

Piece of Plastic Rod

Aluminum Rivet

Lead Weight

Five Pennies

(use all five at one time)

2. Rank order your six materials from LEAST DENSE (1) to MOST DENSE (6) in the

chart below.

Material

1. (Least Dense)

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. (Most Dense)
31

“BAG A” Items Conducts

Electricity

Does Not Conduct

Electricity

Continued, next page

Plastic Spoon

Steel Washer

String

Penny

Nail

Rubber Band

3. Display the density of the materials in a graph showing mass and volume.

4. Describe how you determined the volume of the lead weight and wooden dowel.

5. Based on what you have learned about the density of these six materials, which

would you use to build a boat? Explain why.

Source: Kentucky Instructional Results Information System, Kentucky Department of Education, Division of

Curriculum Assessment and Accountability, Capital Plaza Tower, Frankfort, KY 40601.

Performance Test–Electricity (Grade 6)

Test questions to students: You are a scientist working for a large computer

company. Your assignment is to investigate electricity.

1. Make an electrical circuit using all the items on the table (battery, wire, light bulb,

switch).

2. Quickly draw a simple picture of

your circuit in the space below.

3. Did you build a complete circuit?

Yes_____ No______

4. Explain how you know.

5. Open “Bag A.” Use the clip and lead to make an electrical tester. Test each of the

items in “Bag A” with your circuit. Place an X on the chart under the appropriate

column to show what happened when each item was tested.

6. How are the items that conduct electricity alike?

7. How are the items that do not conduct electricity alike?

8. Examine the item in “Bag B.” Do you think it will conduct electricity? Why or why not?
32

reading about science, then the use of

performance tasks represents a better

match to instructional objectives.

If the teacher is grading this performance

task, he or she may choose to use a rating

scale such as shown above. It is important

to note that scoring guidelines such as this

cannot be developed in the abstract. It

takes careful analysis of many student

responses to the test to derive descriptive

categories that accurately capture their

performance levels.

Once the scoring guidelines are developed,

rather than scoring each question separately, the teacher looks at the pattern of

responses across the questions and assigns

a number or letter grade based on the best

match to the descriptive categories. A

complete/incomplete scoring guideline

would reduce the descriptive categories

down to two: one which described acceptable performance across the questions and

one for unacceptable levels of performance.

Depending on the purpose of the assessment, there are many different ways to

judge how well students performed on the

task. However, it is critical to be clear on

the elements or features of a desired,

strong response.

Draft Scoring Rubric

The following draft rubric was developed to assist in scoring student responses to the

Grade 6 Performance Field Test in science.

4 = Gives complete and acceptable answers to all questions; provides acceptable

rationale; includes a complete and accurate diagram of a circuit with supporting

evidence; demonstrates understanding of the concept of electricity and

conductivity; may use descriptive terms (conductor, flow, current, etc.).

3 = Gives fairly complete and acceptable answers to most questions; provides good

answers, but rationale may be vague; includes a complete diagram of a circuit;

shows understanding of the concept of electricity and conductivity; responds to

Questions 4 or 8 in an acceptable manner.

2 = Several incomplete or unsatisfactory answers; rationale is very limited; shows some

understanding of the concept of electricity but not conductivity; diagram of a circuit

may be missing or incomplete.

1 = Very little response (diagram only or few answers); partial answers to a small

number of questions; no rationale; does not include a diagram of a circuit; contains

at least one correct answer other than Question 3.

Source: California Assessment Program. Science Performance Field Test, Grade 6, 1990. California State

Department of Education, Sacramento, CA 95814.
33

Journals

Open-ended questions and performance

tasks are ways to assess student

learning at a particular point in the instructional process. Journals are dynamic assessment approaches that promote communication between the teacher and

student, allow students to reflect on what

they are learning, and foster students’

active involvement in classroom activities.

Consider a middle school science classroom where there is no formal textbook

used. Rather, science instruction consists of

daily hands-on activities and teacherstudent dialogue about a question (e.g.,

“How do soil types differ?”). Students might

use journals to process information from

hands-on investigations.

First, students might be asked to write a

response to a question that addresses their

current understanding about the question

under study. Then, they might write their

prediction about what might happen in a

particular situation; enter data from observations; develop conclusions; and reflect on

the main idea of the activity. These daily

journal entries become a record of their

class experiences. Teachers refer students

back to journal pages that contain their

work on certain topics in reviewing for

tests and in making connections between

topics. (The program described is the North

Carolina Project for Reform in Science

Education, a National Science Teachers

Association Scope, Sequence, and Coordination project.)

Journals could also be used to assess

attitudes toward science, if positive attitudes were an instructional goal. Students

could write their thoughts or feelings about

class events. Journal assignments might be

structured for younger students, with more

choice options added for older students.

This use of journals as an expressive outlet

for students is best seen as a two-way

communication. That is, if the teacher does

not respond to, probe, challenge, or ask for

elaborations about the entries submitted,

the full benefit of the journals will not be

realized.

The way journals are graded depends on

the purpose of the journal and the age of

the students. The act of keeping a journal

can be considered as an objective in itself

if a teacher believes that students need to

structure, take charge of, or feel ownership of their own learning. The criterion

for success on this objective might be the

completion of the assigned journal entries

or pages, not necessarily the quality of

the entries. In this scenario, rather than

grading the content of the journal, students are awarded points in a grading

period if they have a completed notebook

of journal entries. In the middle school

program just described, teachers weight

the journal as one-fourth of the grade for

a grading period.

Exhibitions, Projects, and

Culminating Demonstrations

Complex, “real-life” tasks or challengesare a type of assessment commonly

called “authentic assessment” or “culminating demonstrations” to reinforce that they

are assessments that bring a unit together.

“Culminating demonstrations” are tasks

that are worked on over a 6-week period,

or in the case of graduation exhibitions,

over a year-long period. They have

multiple steps (plan, research, design,

implement, etc.) and multiple criteria can

be used to judge them. Such complex,

“real-life” tasks are experiences that

develop students into problem-solvers,

effective thinkers, quality producers, and

self-directed learners. Students may be

asked to structure an approach to a problem, investigate alternatives, produce a

response, and justify approaches taken.

More often than not the tasks are assigned
34

to teams of students, as that is how many

“real-world” problems are tackled. Students may be asked to play a “real-life” role

(see sample above) where they are charged

with acting as an investigative reporter.

Authentic assessments are similar in

concept to a senior-level college research

project, master’s thesis, or dissertation. A

dissertation, for example, is an assessment

in the sense that a committee must agree

that the work is of acceptable quality for

the student to be awarded a degree. Such a

research project is also instructional in the

sense that the student is becoming an

expert in both content and research skills in

the process of completing the task. The

professor reviews and provides feedback

(assessment information) about needed

changes at many points along the way.

Thus, the line between instruction and

assessment becomes blurred.

Some suggestions for developing authentic tasks adapted from Davey and

Rindone (1990) from the Connecticut

State Department of Education are

1. Start with an issue, idea, scenario, or

problem, and test it by asking how

important it is; how engaging would

students find it; how relevant to “real

life” it is; and what content areas will

be learned in the context of the project.

Sample Authentic Assessment

You are an investigative reporter researching how a country’s culture and history have

contributed to views regarding certain endangered species. Your team’s job is to decide

what history tells you about the development of your country’s views about the whale.

(Each team has been assigned a different country.) You are to write a newspaper article

reporting your information.

1. Identify all the possible historical influences you want to investigate.

2. In your team, identify both pro and con views, and look at both practical and

environmental protection issues.

3. Prepare your article in such a way that it reports both information and pro and con

points of view.

4. Present your draft to the editors (another team) before you send it to the copy editor

and print shop.

Source: High Success Network Training Materials. Outcome Based Education Summer Conference, Charlotte,

NC, 1992. High Success Network, P.O. Box 1630, Eagle, CO 81631.
35

2. Begin to define the task more fully by

asking what knowledge, competencies,

or dispositions students will have to use

to complete such a task (i.e., what

instructional objectives are served?).

Revise and elaborate on the task as

needed until you are satisfied with both

the purposes or objectives and the task

structure itself.

3. Consider the context. What should be

the medium for the product (oral, written, computer, debate)? Should the task

include group activities? Should experts

from the community be brought in?

4. Consider the administration of the task.

What do students need to know before

the task is given them? What difficulties

might they encounter? How will

assistance be provided?

5. Consider how students’ work on the

task will be assessed. Will there be a

checklist for work processes to guide

students in the process of completing

the task? What are the important

features of a successful product (e.g.,

communicated conclusions in a clear

and organized way, using visuals)? Who

might assess student performance other

than the teacher (e.g., community

professionals, other students)?

6. Have colleagues and perhaps students

review the task and the criteria for

judging success. Revise as needed.

Portfolios

Portfolios refer to the process of assessing student progress by collecting

examples of student classwork (Wolf et al.,

1992). Physically, it is a container of evidence of a student’s achievements, competencies, or skills. It is a purposeful collection in the sense that the collection is

meant to tell a story about achievement or

growth in a particular area. If multiplechoice and completion items are at one end

of the assessment continuum representing

very brief, quantitative, one-shot records of

student achievement, then portfolios are at

the other end, representing complex,

qualitative, and progressive pictures of

student accomplishments.

Why use portfolios? Although portfolios in

art and writing are very common and

familiar, math and science teachers are

also beginning to employ portfolios as ways

to collect, organize, reflect on, and display

completed work (Hamm & Adams, 1991).

Portfolios might best be considered as a

tool to promote communication between

the teacher and student about student

understandings, strengths, weaknesses,

progress, and self-reflections. Portfolios can

bind teachers and students together in very

personal and supportive ways.

The use of portfolios, like any assessment

method, starts with a consideration of

purposes. What objectives do you have for

students that are best assessed by a portfolio, and what is the portfolio supposed to

demonstrate (Collins, 1992)? Some examples of purposes are shown below.

1. If the ability to design experiments were

an objective for students, a portfolio

might be used to show progress in this

ability over the year by including work

on different assignments. Or, if the

portfolio were to be used to better

understand how students go about

designing an experiment, it could

contain all activities, drafts, and

revisions leading up to the final design

with reflections from the students about

their thinking at different stages in

developing the design.

2. If improving creative writing around

science content knowledge were an

important instructional goal, a portfolio

might showcase a student’s favorite
36

pieces. Parents could help the students

reflect on and choose their best pieces.

3. If a goal of instruction is that students

will read, summarize, and evaluate

information in newspaper articles on

science topics, the portfolio might

represent evidence of their increasingly

sophisticated efforts at critiquing these

articles.

4. Portfolios could be used as evidence of

basic content knowledge. Students

could be asked to keep all test papers in

a portfolio and write a reflection piece

after each test on how they could

improve their responses.

5. Portfolios could be individualized such

that students display work showing

their particular strength or progress in a

weaker area rather than having the

portfolio be the same for all students.

There is no formula or single right way to

do portfolios. Rather, designing a portfolio

project represents a series of decisions.

Some of the design questions to be answered after the instructional objective has

been determined are listed below (Collins,

1992).

1. For what purpose will the portfolio be

used (student self-reflection, a grade, a

narrative report on student progress,

parent conferences, promotion to the

next grade)?

2. How often will the portfolio be reviewed

and by whom?

3. Which portfolio pieces of work are

required, and which are selected by

students?

4. Will work be produced alone, or can it

be a group portfolio?

5. Where will the portfolio be kept?

6. How much work should be included?

Like any of the other methods of looking at

student work, portfolios involve the development of criteria for judging good work.

Student progress relative to a certain

instructional objective might be evaluated

by developing criteria for individual pieces,

for the portfolio as a whole, or for students’

written reflections on work in the portfolio

(Arter & Spandel, 1992). Criteria for a

whole portfolio might be the quality or

variety of pieces included, the quality and

depth of self-reflection included, or the

growth in performance as indicated by the

products. Students’ self-reflections about

pieces might be evaluated on thoroughness, support of statements made by describing specific aspects of the work, and

how well ideas are synthesized (Arter &

Spandel, 1992).
37

Rubrics and Grading

Chapter 4

Multiple-choice items can be scored

objectively. The student is offered

a fixed number of options, and

the option selected is compared to a scoring key. Given the scoring key, any teacher

would score the items in the same manner.

Performance-based methods (open-ended

questions, performance tests, journals,

exhibitions, and portfolios) depend to a

greater extent on teacher judgment of a

response.

The term “rubric,” rather than “scoring key,”

is used to refer to the guidelines laid out for

judging student work on performancebased tasks. There are at least five ways to

arrange the criteria against which the

student’s work will be judged.

1. Point system. A point system assigns

points for certain features of the

student’s response. Open-ended

questions are often scored with this

approach because points can reflect

partial as well as full credit for a

response.

For example, if third-grade students were

given the appropriate measuring equipment

and asked to find out if stirring makes any

difference in how fast sugar cubes and

loose sugar dissolve (NAEP, 1986), the point

system (adapted from the NAEP example)

might look like this:

4 points if the response states that both

types of sugar dissolve faster

when stirred, but loose sugar

still dissolves faster than cubes

3 points if the response indicates that

stirring made a difference but

doesn’t describe the relative

difference (that loose sugar still

dissolves faster)

2 points if the response describes the

relative speed (loose dissolves

faster) but not the effects of

stirring or if the response just

describes what happens (stirring

makes the sugar fall apart)

1 point for incorrect responses

0 points for no response

Typically, essay questions require longer

and more complex responses from students. If an essay question is to be scored

with a point system, the features of a

successful response should be identified

prior to grading the essay and given numerical values representing their value

relative to each other. That is, some features of the answer might be worth more

than others (e.g., perhaps each reason

provided for a phenomenon is worth two

points, and the quality of the overall organization of the response is worth one point).

The student’s score is the sum of the point

values for each feature identified by the

teacher as present in his or her response.

2. Checklists. A checklist can be used to

indicate that a student has effectively

Just as assessment methods are

selected based on their

appropriateness for the particular

goals the teacher has in mind for

students, so it goes with developing

rubrics. There is no one right rubric

to use. Rubrics should communicate

to students the criteria for their

performance.
38

completed the steps involved in a task

or demonstration. Checklists may be

applied to written work (e.g., journals)

or observable behavior.

Suppose students are asked to do an

experiment to find out whether loose sugar

dissolves faster or slower than sugar cubes

(NAEP, 1986). Students are observed individually, and a checklist is used for the

following behaviors:

___ 1. Loose sugar tested

___ 2. Sugar cubes tested

___ 3. Measurement of water and sugar

were problematic

___ 4. Measurements made effectively

___ 5. Had problems timing how fast sugar

dissolved

___ 6. Effectively timed how fast the sugar

dissolved

___ 7. Final answer consistent with

evidence

The information might be used to diagnose

students’ strengths and weaknesses relative to different aspects of conducting the

experiment.

Checklists are also effective in getting

students to check their own work. For

example, prior to turning in journals to the

teacher, students could be given a checklist

with all the assignments to be included. Or

the journal could be reviewed and the

checklist completed by another student.

3. Analytic rating scales. Rating scales

describe performance along a continuum. Analytic rating scales are used

to separately describe a product or

performance on multiple dimensions.

For example, in a writing task, the

dimensions or criteria that might be

rated are organization, mechanics, and

creativity. Each important dimension of

the task performance is rated on a two

(e.g., “acceptable,” “not acceptable”) or

more (e.g., “inadequate,” “partially

satisfactory,” “satisfactory,”

“exemplary”) point scale.

For example, if students were asked to write

a letter to someone from a different time

period, such as ancient Egypt, on how

measurement has changed over the years,

the science teacher might rate students’

work from 1 to 4 in terms of knowledge of

measurement demonstrated. The English

teacher might be asked to rate the same

work using two dimensions: mechanics and

organization, with a 1-to-4 rating given on

each dimension. Thus, students would

receive diagnostic feedback from two teachers (science and English) on three dimensions (knowledge of measurement, mechanics, organization) of their performance.

The strength of analytic rating scales is that

they offer diagnostic information to the

student about the strengths and weak-

“If the teacher’s task is to sample

achievement and estimate the extent

of each student’s mastery of the

target, then it is clear that the

teacher must possess a crystal clear

vision of the target and a clear sense

of how to assess its various

dimensions in a dependable

manner.” (Stiggins, 1991, p. 33)
39

1. Correctly state the problem, and identify the

information needed to solve it and the steps

needed to arrive at a solution

2. Produce reasonable estimates of data values

not identified but needed for the solution

3. Apply concepts and formulas related to

motion (velocity, acceleration, average

speed)

4. Make accurate conversions as needed to

solve the problem

5. Communicate conclusions clearly, using

examples as needed

Source: Adapted from Davey & Rindone (1990). “Anatomy of a Performance Task.” Presented at the

American Educational Research Association meeting, Boston, MA., from materials developed by the Bureau

of Evaluation and Student Assessment, Connecticut State Department of Education.

Sample Analytic Scale

R a t i n g s

Task Criteria Exceeds Meets Approaches Goal Not

Goals Goals Goal Yet Met

  

  

  

  

  

nesses of their performance on a variety of

dimensions so that they can better target

the areas of their performance that need to

be improved. The dimensions chosen and

the descriptive categories used for the

rating scales need to be chosen so that they

communicate to students what is important

to do well.

There are many different ways to label

scale points. One approach to labeling

scale points is to describe levels of goal

attainment on the dimension identified

(Davey & Rindone, 1990). For example,

suppose a physics problem-solving task

was presented to students. A rating sheet,

as shown above, might be used to provide

feedback to students.

4. Focused holistic rating scales. Rather

than assigning separate scores for each

important aspect of task performance,

focused holistic ratings consider all the

criteria simultaneously and result in a

single summary rating or grade. This

approach may be most appropriate

when the purpose is to provide students

with an overall index of their performance on a task or product.

For example, if high school students were

asked to conduct a comprehensive interdisciplinary investigation on some practical

problem presented to them, a focused

holistic rating scale might be used. The

student must demonstrate the following to

receive an “A”:
40

1. Give clear responses that show understanding of the scientific concepts and

ideas addressed.

2. Use scientific processes and tools to

gather, record, and organize appropriate data in a logical fashion.

3. Write strong supporting conclusions

based on evidence collected.

4. Emphasize any additional data that

is needed.

At the other extreme, an “F” response might

be one in which the student does not

demonstrate any understanding of the

problem or concept; has data that are

missing, inappropriate, or incomplete; and

makes no attempt to state or complete

conclusions.

The rubric shown for the performance test

on page 31 is another example of a focused

holistic approach to grading student responses. If the performance test on electricity represented an end-of-unit test, a focused holistic scale such as the one shown

can be used to easily translate student

responses into a grade.

5. Holistic. With holistic scoring, no

specific rating criteria are identified.

Instead, model responses are selected

that represent numbers on the scale to

be used. Student responses are compared to the model responses and are

given a number corresponding to the

model response they are most like.

In developing rubrics for student work,

some teachers (High Success Network

training materials, 1992) are finding the

following helpful:

1. Provide examples to students of work

that reflects the different points on a

rubric. For example, if essay questions

are to be evaluated on the degree to

which conclusions are justified, provide

examples of a “weak” justification as

well as an “exemplary” justification.

2. Once students have developed an

understanding of rubrics, involve them

in brainstorming rubrics for work to be

done so that they experience some

ownership over the judging process.

3. For student work that is to be graded,

be clear on the rubrics or criteria with

students before they begin the task.

4. Try providing students with sample

rubrics that they can use to assess their

own work or that of peers.

Grading

The purposes of grading systems are

twofold (Stiggins, 1991). First, they

are a way of communicating to

students, parents, and other decision

makers something about the student’s

It is important to keep in mind that

the development of focused holistic

scales can be time-consuming. An

accurate description of different

levels of performance on a task

requires the careful analysis of many

student responses.
41

achievement status. Second, they are

intended as motivators (e.g., to impress

upon students that the work is important

and worth their attention).

Grading students’ achievement status

involves the teacher in a series of decisions. In A Practical Guide for Developing

Sound Grading Practices, Stiggins (1991)

describes some of the decisions that must

be made if a single grade is to be given

over an assessment period.

Q: What criteria should be considered in

determining a report card grade?

A: A grade over a grading period is usually

considered as a composite measure of

student achievement on the objectives

of the instruction, rather than a

measure of student interest, attitude, or

personality.

Q: As a measure of achievement, what and

how much grading data should be

gathered?

A: For the grade to be a valid measure of

achievement in a subject or course,

there must be a sufficient sampling of

student performance on the critical

subject or course objectives (or targets)

to provide a fair and reliable

assessment of the student’s

achievement status.

The teacher must be the judge, but at one

extreme, using only one measure (e.g., a

one-hour, paper-and-pencil exam) to determine a report card grade clearly is not a

sufficient sample of student performance. At

the other extreme, assessing student performance daily would not provide students with

the time needed to develop competencies

and skills preparatory to being assessed.

Chapter 2 asked that you identify four

critical science outcomes held for students.

These outcomes are targets for the instruction provided. Traditional and more performance-based methods are used to assess

student progress toward these goals. All of

the assessment methods described in

Chapter 3 represent legitimate ways of

assessing achievement status, but they

must be matched carefully with desired

outcomes for students.

Q: How are individual grades or scores

combined into a single grade at the end

of a grading period?

A: Performance-based assessments can be

readily incorporated into any grading

system. Suppose you had the following

five goals in mind for students. Students

will be able to

• Demonstrate knowledge of electricity

• Understand and use science process

skills

• Write creatively on a topic in a way that

demonstrates knowledge of electricity

• Maintain a journal of daily

investigations

• Work with a group on an extended

project or problem-solving exercise

having to do with electricity

Given these five instructional objectives,

student assessment data as shown on page

42 might be used to arrive at a report card

grade. The first column, “Maximum Points,”

reflects the rubrics designed for each

assessment.

In the sample on page 42, demonstrating

knowledge represents 37 percent (100/270)

of the total grade; science process skills,

maintaining a journal, and completion of

an extended group project each represent

19 percent (50/270); and creative writing

represents six percent (20/270). The proportion of the total grade accounted for by
42

individual assessments should communicate the relative importance of different

desired outcomes (that is, more important

outcomes carry more weight).

The weighting system used in deriving

report card grades should be related to

course objectives and explained to students

so that they know their goals. In the example above, students might be informed

at the beginning of the grading period of

the five instructional objectives and the

assessments to be used. The number of

points needed for the different grade symbols used could also be communicated.

In such a point system, it is also important to

stay flexible so as not to penalize students

for poor quality assessments. For example, if

students were told that 245 or more points

constituted an A, but no students earned this

many points due to a few poorly worded

items on one test, some adjustment to the

point system would have to be made.

Sample Grading Period

Weighting System

Student A:

1a. Paper-and-pencil test on electricity 50 40 1 40/50

1b. Performance test on electricity 25 20 2 40/50

2. Weekly lab assignments

on science process skills

(5 assignments X 10 pts. each) 50 45 1 45/50

3. Two creative writing tasks

(10 pts. each) 20 20 1 20/20

4. Journal 50 50 1 50/50

5. Extended group project 50 45 1 45/50

Totals 245 220 240/270

 Assessments of Five Maximum Points Weight Student A Score/

 Instructional Objectives Points Earned Maximum Score

Student achievement status on important

instructional objectives can be communicated in ways other than a single report

card grade in science. Some teachers find

that grades, although required by policy, are

not particularly helpful in conferencing with

students and parents about students’

performance on specific goals. Checklists,

analytic scales, and narratives can be used

in addition to grades or as alternative

means of reporting.

In one science curriculum reform project, a

teacher identified the instructional objectives

for the six-week grading period and rated

performance on the objectives on a five-point

scale (page 43) in hopes of better communicating with students and parents about

student progress. Some of the objectives

listed on page 43 under “Science Processes”

change during the year depending on the

particular content or skills emphasized

during a grading period. The form is being

used in addition to a traditional report card.
43

Sample Science Progress Report Report (Sixth Grade)

Name

Teacher Comments:

Family Comments:

Rating Scale: 5 - Superior 4 - Very Good 3 - Average 2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

Work Habits

______ Uses lab materials safely

______ Returns signed papers

______ Follows directions

______ Makes good use of time

______ Is punctual

Cooperative Skills

______ Works well with group members

______ Performs group role(s)

______ Respects rights of others

______ Accepts responsibility for behavior

______ Shows self-control in talking and

actions

Science Processes

______ Can orient a compass

______ Can collect and organize data

______ Can tell relationship between

shadows and the sun’s position

______ Can use the sun to determine

cardinal directions

______ Participates in family science

Keeping Journals

______ Keeps journal organized

______ Completes assignments

______ Expresses thoughts through

journal entries

Source: Terri Hardin, A.G. Cox Middle School, Pitt County Schools, Winterville, N.C.
44
45

Traditional practices in assessment

are based on beliefs about the

purpose of education that are being

publicly discussed and challenged. Assessment practices do not necessarily change

once people become aware of the need for

change. Change does not happen the day

after an afternoon of inservice training.

Generally, change is a slowly evolving

process that occurs through experience,

dialogue, and reflection.

Teachers need time to try new assessments, reflect on their success or failure,

and make revisions. Just as student learning is an individual process that is selfdirected and personally constructed, so is

teacher learning about assessment practices. Changing assessment practices is not

a simple, linear, lock-step process that all

teachers follow in a prescribed manner.

Rather, it is a process of becoming more

purposeful about

• Desired student outcomes in science

• The design of learning experiences in

support of these outcomes

• The use of assessment methods that

match well with desired outcomes

• The use of grading systems that reflect

student achievement on these

outcomes.

What are some contexts in which this more

purposeful thinking about student assessment might be developed?

Some districts have initiated district-wide

staff development efforts in assessment.

The literature on staff development suggests that a good staff development program is sustained over time. Teachers are

more likely to change in a collegial setting

with sustained administrative support

(Loucks-Horsley et al., 1990).

This kind of model might involve bringing

together a volunteer group of lead science

teachers from several schools who, with a

facilitator,

• Spend one day on an overview of

assessment (outcomes, methods,

rubrics) as provided in this publication

• Spend a day reflecting on science

education goals and beginning to

develop or adapt assessments to try out

(i.e., observation forms, interview

protocols, open-ended questions,

performance tests, journal criteria,

exhibition projects, portfolio tasks)

• Come together as a group on a regular

basis to share experiences, demonstrate

the assessments developed and the

student results obtained, continue to

develop or find new assessments, and

identify areas in which further

assistance or information is needed

The following year, the lead teachers could

start a similar process for interested science

teachers within their own schools.

Teachers, either individually or in informal

groups, could begin to reflect on their

assessment practices. Incorporating performance-based assessment into the classroom may be easier if experiences, concerns, and frustrations are shared with

colleagues. Sharing successful tasks and

methods with other teachers also increases

the number of assessments available.

There is no right place to start with assessment. There are many activities, depending

Getting Started

Chapter 5
46

on the prior experience, time constraints,

interest, and resources of the teacher(s)

involved, that represent jumping-off points

for changing or at least reflecting on assessment practices.

Listed below are some examples of activities that might get conversations started

about assessment practices.

1. Articulate one very important desired

student outcome (refer to Chapter 2).

For example, a teacher might be

interested in how well students can

develop and test hypotheses in the

content area under study. Review the

assessment methods in Chapter 3, and

choose an approach to assessing

students’ competence on this

dimension that you have not tried

before. Try the assessment approach to

see what you learn about student

performance and about the assessment

method you chose.

2. Experiment with a format for a course

syllabus that outlines for students the

major goals you have for their

performance and how their

performance on these goals will be

assessed and report card grades will be

derived.

3. Start a list of the advantages and

disadvantages of each of the

assessment methods described in

Chapter 3. What do you feel you need to

know from someone who has tried

each method before you go any further?

4. Develop a chart (see sample on p. 42)

showing how you combine assessment

data in obtaining student report card

grades. What kind of weighting system

are you using?

5. Analyze the tests you have used in the

past. Try to improve the items used

referring to the information provided in

Chapter 3 on open-ended questions and

performance tests or consider how you

might improve or make more explicit

the rubrics for the items.

6. Start a folder of assessment samples

from released state tests or item banks,

other teachers, district tests, or

published articles, and critique them for

your purposes.

7. Review the hands-on, experiential, or

lab activities you use with your

students. Identify the most essential

ones, and experiment with rubrics that

could be used to assess student

performance on these tasks.

The process of incorporating and using a

broader array of assessment methods can

sharpen teachers’ thinking about the

meaning of student success in science. It

can also result in improvements in the

quality of instruction teachers design for

students. Finally, if teachers are explicit and

purposeful about their goals, students are

more likely to evaluate the quality of their

own work.

The benefits of experimenting with a

variety of assessment methods lie as much

in the conversations they engender between teachers and students and among

teachers as they do in the information they

provide on student competence. Students

as well as teachers often become empowered as assessment becomes a dynamic,

interactive conversation about progress

through the use of interviews, journals,

exhibitions, and portfolios. Through these

assessment methods, teachers relate to

students more as a facilitator, coach, or

critic rather than as authority figures who

dispense all information and knowledge.
47

Reform in Curriculum and Instruction

Appendix

Welch (1979) characterized the

social forces leading to science

education reform of the 1960s as

scientists’ concern about outdated curricular materials, science manpower shortages,

and the threat of Soviet technological

supremacy. These forces set the stage for

massive federal support for science curriculum development.

For approximately 20 years, the National

Science Foundation supported extensive

curriculum development and teacher

inservice training programs in science

education. Their curricula differed from old

programs in its modernization of content,

its emphasis on flexibility and variety in

instructional tools, and the greater attention it gave to an overriding conceptual

scheme, students’ attitudes toward science,

and the nature of scientific inquiry or

hands-on student work.

In spite of all the support for curricular

change over this period, there were also

forces that were resistant to change.

• Many teachers were inadequately

prepared in science and math,

particularly at the elementary and junior

high levels, and were insecure about

making curricular changes.

• Concern in the 1970s focused more on

special remedial classes, the basic

skills, and mainstreaming than on

science.

Welch (1979), in summarizing the achievements of the curriculum reform of the 60s

and 70s, reported that

• Curricular alternatives were developed

and disseminated (PSSC, BSCC, SCIS).

• Content was modernized.

• New curricular materials emphasized

science processes and hands-on work.

• Science manpower needs were met.

The reform of the 1990s differs from the

earlier science curriculum reform in that it

is a subset of a much larger educational

reform movement fueled by a concern that

our students will not be internationally

competitive as adults. Changes are being

proposed across the curriculum, emphasizing higher-order thinking skills and problem-solving. In North Carolina, for example,

all public schools have been directed to

infuse critical thinking throughout the

North Carolina Course of Study.

The emphasis on science education in

previous decades that resulted in the

development of curriculum materials

provided a framework on which to build

current efforts. However, the current efforts

differ from prior curricular reform movements in that they are geared toward

scientific literacy for all students, not just

better science education for future scientists. This “science for all” goal is critical if

people are to have a basis for making

informed decisions about issues like

nuclear power, personal health, the environment, and reproduction (Loucks-Horsley

et al., 1990).

Several national science education reform

efforts follow.

With the support of the U.S. Department of

Education, the National Academy of Sciences (through the National Research

Council) initiated a major effort to develop

world-class standards for what students
48

should know and be able to do in science.

These standards, like those developed by

the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, will serve as guides for states,

districts, and schools. Standards will be

developed in the areas of curriculum,

teaching, and assessment to present a

vision of science education against which

schools, districts, and states can compare

themselves.

There have been at least two other significant efforts to develop some consensus on

student outcomes for science. Project 2061

is a reform effort of the American Association for the Advancement of Science

(AAAS). The project issued a report in 1989,

called Science for All Americans, that suggested the knowledge, skills, and attitudes

that students should have as a result of

their K-12 science instruction. The project

describes the outcomes expected of

17-year-olds. Teams of educators are

working on developing curriculum models

and more specific student outcome statements based on the AAAS publication.

 For more information, write to

Project 2061

1333 N Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20005

The National Science Teachers’ Association

has a reform effort that proposes dismantling the layer-cake organization of science

courses (biology, then chemistry, then

physics) in favor of courses that integrate

material from the different science disciplines so that all disciplines are taught

every year. In an effort to show how science content might be better organized to

promote scientific literacy for all students,

the NSTA published The Content Core: A

Guide for Curriculum Designers. This document suggests the topics that should be

covered in grades 6-12 and at what level

they might be covered.

For more information on SS&C or a copy of

The Content Core, write to

SS&C c/o National Science

Teachers’ Association

1724 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20009

Many states already have standard courseof-study guides listing desired outcomes for

students at different levels of science

instruction. In the past, many of these state

curriculum guides have focused on students’ obtaining knowledge of discrete bits

of information such as

• Knowing about human body systems

and their functions

• Knowing about the structure of atoms

and molecules

However, states are currently developing

new curriculum frameworks that emphasize skills needed in the process of doing

science in addition to content knowledge.

For example, Alabama, Florida, Georgia,

Mississippi, North Carolina, and South

Carolina all had plans to publish new or

revised science curriculum frameworks by

1994. SERVE received a grant to develop a

Regional Mathematics and Science Consortium. Through this grant, SERVE keeps the

region informed of exemplary science and

math curriculum frameworks through a

collaborative effort among all Regional

Educational Laboratories to collect, analyze, and synthesize state frameworks for

math and science.

How Should Science Be Taught?

I

f science is not about the memorization

of facts but a problem-solving process

through which we work to understand

problems, how can science education be

changed to reflect the problem-solving

process?
49

In Windows into Science Classrooms, Tobin,

Kahle, and Fraser (1990) note the following:

If an instructional activity is to be

consistent with the nature of science, it

must engage students in attempting to

generate answers to questions, rather

than merely illustrating what is

pronounced by assertion to be true in a

textbook. When laboratory activities or

demonstrations are used to illustrate

the validity of what is known, the

emphasis is placed disproportionately

on what we think we know rather than

on how we know it. In such situations,

students are deprived of opportunities

to think, predict, analyze, and discuss;

that is, they are deprived of opportunities to do science.

For a teacher to instruct in the

processes of science rather than about

the established facts of science, a

fundamental shift in activities and

priorities is required. The teacher must

move from conducting an exercise to

illustrate what is asserted to be the

correct answer by the textbook, to

assigning problem-solving exercises

during which students are asked to

consider specific questions by testing a

particular hypothesis or alternative

hypotheses. (p. 151)

According to these authors, science classes

are often characterized by rote learning and

recall of memorized information. They

suggest that in order to move toward the

development of problem-solving skills in

their students, teachers must incorporate

rigor, relevance, and representative structure as elements of their teaching.

Rigor

Arigorous science classroom shouldhave instructional objectives built

around higher-order processes (problemsolve, predict, observe, analyze) and not

just the ability to memorize facts. The

amount of work completed and the difficulty of the work posed to students are

issues in developing rigorous science

instruction. Work for students should be

designed to give them experience in the

processes of science (recalling and imagining, classifying and generalizing, comparing and evaluating, analyzing and synthesizing, deducing and inferring). Finally, if

higher-order cognitive objectives are

targeted and students are given work that

goes beyond rote memorization, then

methods of student evaluation and grading

must be consistent and go beyond direct

recall of information.

Relevance

Regarding the information that is presented in classrooms, Tobin, Kahle,

and Fraser (1990) suggest it is critical to

think about why information is taught and,

in particular, its relevance to students’

lives. For example, should a unit on vertebrates concentrate on having students

learn the names of the bones in the body

or understand the biology and epidemiology of AIDS?

Representative Structure

Some have characterized this issue as

the selection of fewer topics taught well.

Tobin, Kahle, and Fraser (1990) argue that

the goal of instruction should be to help

students come to terms with the major

organizing ideas of a discipline and why the

idea or theme (such as evolution) occupies

the place it does within the discipline.

Currently, numerous curriculum reform

projects are trying to articulate and implement new visions for science teaching.
50
51

References

References

Arter, J.A. & Spandel, V. (1992) Using portfolios of student work in instruction and

assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, (Spring), 36-44. (Also

available from Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 101 S.W. Main Street, Suite

500, Portland, OR 97204, is a ”Portfolio bibliography.”)

Blumberg, F., Epstein, M., McDonald, W., & Mullis, I. (1986). National Assessment of

Educational Progress: A pilot study of higher-order thinking skills assessment

techniques in science and mathematics. Final Report Part II. Pilot tested tasks.

Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Brandt, R. (1992). On performance assessment: A conversation with Grant Wiggins.

Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 35-37.

Collins, A. (1992). Portfolios: Questions for design. Science Scope, 15 (6), 25-27.

Davey, B. & Rindone, D.A. (1990). Anatomy of a performance task. Presented at the

American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Boston, Mass.

Freedman, R.L. (1992) Writing, student portfolios , and authentic assessment. Science

Portfolio: The Watershed, 1 (1), 8-9. (Also see Connections: Science by Writing. Paradise,

CA: Serin House Publishers).

Gronlund, N.E. & Linn, R.L. (1990) Measurement and evaluation in teaching (5th ed.) New

York: Macmillan.

Haertel, E. & Calfee, R. (1983). School achievement: Thinking about what to test. Journal of

Educational Measurement, 20 (2), 119-132.

Hamm, M. & Adams, D. (1991) Portfolio. The Science Teacher, 58 (5), 18-21.

High Success Network Training Materials provided at the Outcome Based Education

Summer Conference, Charlotte, NC (1992). (Available from the High Success Network,

P.O. Box 1630, Eagle, CO 81631.)

Hopkins, K.D., Stanley, J.C. & Hopkins, B. R. (1990) Educational and psychological

measurement and evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Brooks, J., Carlson, M., Kuerbis, P., Marsh, D., Padilla, M., Pratt, H., &

Smith, K. (1990). Developing and supporting teachers for science education in the middle

years. Andover, MA: The National Center for Improving Science Education, The

Network.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Kapitan, R., Carlson, M., Kuerbis, P., Clark, R., Nelle, G., Sachse, T., &

Walton, E. (1990). Elementary school science for the 90’s. Andover, MA: The National

Center for Improving Science Education, The Network.

Meyer, C. (1992). What’s the difference between authentic and performance assessment?

Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 39.
52

NAEP: A pilot study of higher order thinking skills assessment techniques in science and

mathematics (1986) Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

NAEP: Learning by Doing (1987). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Payne, D.A. (1992). Measuring and evaluating educational outcomes. New York: Macmillan.

Raizen, S., Baron, J.B., Champagne, A.B., Haertel, E., Mullis, I.V.S., & Oakes, J. (1990).

Assessment in science education: The middle years. Andover, MA: The National Center for

Improving Science Education, The Network.

Science Framework for 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress: NAEP Science

Consensus Project (1992). Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.

Sizer, T.R. (1984). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston:

Houghton, Mifflin. (For information on the Coalition of Essential Schools, contact

Brown University, One Devol Square, Providence, RI 02912.)

Spady, W.G. (1988). Organizing for results; The basis of authentic restructuring and reform.

Educational Leadership, 46 (2), 4-8.

Stiggins, R.J. (1991). A practical guide for developing sound grading practices. (Available from

the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 101 S.W. Main Street, Portland, OR

97204.)

Tobin, K., Kahle, J., & Fraser, B. (1990). Windows into science classrooms. Bristol, PA: Falmer

Press.

Welch, W. (1979). Twenty years of science curriculum development: A look back. In Review

of Research in Education, Berliner, D. (Ed.). Washington, DC: AERA.

Wiggins, G. (1989). A true test: toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta

Kappan, 70 (9), 703-713.

Wiggins, G. (1992). On performance assessment: a conversation with Grant Wiggins.

Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 35-37.

Wolf, D.P., LeMahieu, P.G., & Eresh, J. (1992). Good measure: Assessment as a tool for

educational reform. Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 8-13.

Yager, R.E. & Kellerman, L.R. (1992). Assessment ideas for science in six domains. (Available

from the Science Education Center, Van Allen Hall, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA

52242.)
53

About the SERVE Organization SERVE

www.serve.org

SERVE Main Office P.O. Box 5367 Greensboro, NC 27435 / 336-334-3211 / 800-755-3277 / Fax 336-334-3268

John R. Sanders, Ed.D., Executive Director

SERVE, directed by Dr. John R. Sanders, is an education organization with the mission to promote and

support the continuous improvement of educational opportunities for all learners in the Southeast. The

organization’s commitment to continuous improvement is manifest in a cycle that begins with research

and best practice. Building on theory and craft knowledge, SERVE staff develop tools and processes designed to

assist practitioners, to refine the organization’s delivery of technical assistance to schools and educational

agencies, and, ultimately, to raise the level of student achievement in the region. Evaluation of the impact of

these activities combined with input from affected stakeholders expands SERVE’s knowledge base and directs

future research.

This critical research-to-practice cycle is supported by an experienced staff strategically located throughout the

region. This staff is highly skilled in providing needs assessment services, conducting applied research in schools,

and developing processes, products, and programs that inform educators and increase student achievement. In

the last three years, SERVE staff has provided technical assistance and training to more than 18,000 teachers and

administrators across the region and partnered with over 170 southeastern schools on research and development

projects.

SERVE is governed by a board of directors that includes the governors, chief state school officers, educators,

legislators, and private sector leaders from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South

Carolina.

At SERVE’s core is the Regional Educational Laboratory program. Funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s

Office of Educational Research and Improvement, SERVE is one of ten organizations providing services of the

Regional Educational Laboratory program to all 50 states and territories. These Laboratories form a knowledge

network, building a bank of information and resources shared nationally and disseminated regionally to improve

student achievement locally. Besides the Lab, SERVE is the lead agency in the Eisenhower Mathematics and

Science Consortium for the Southeast and the Southeast and Islands Regional Technology in Education Consortium. SERVE also administers a subcontract for the Region IV Comprehensive Center and has additional funding

from the Department to provide services in migrant education and to operate the National Center for Homeless

Education.

Based on these funded efforts, SERVE has developed a portfolio of programs and initiatives that provides a

spectrum of resources, services, and products for responding to local, regional, and national needs. Program

areas include Assessment, Accountability, and Standards; Children, Families, and Communities; Education Policy;

Improvement of Science and Mathematics Education; Initiative on Teachers and Teaching; School Development

and Reform; and Technology in Learning.

SERVE’s National Specialty Area is Early Childhood Education, and the staff of SERVE’s Program for Children,

Families, and Communities has developed the expertise and the ability to provide leadership and support to the

early childhood community nationwide for children from birth to age eight.

In addition to the program areas, the SERVE Evaluation Department supports the evaluation activities of the

major grants and contracts and provides evaluation services to state and local education agencies in the region.

The Technology Support Group provides SERVE staff and their constituents with systems, technical assistance,

and software applications. Through its Communications and Publications Department, SERVE publishes a variety

of studies, training materials, policy briefs, and program products. Through its programmatic, technology support,

evaluation, and publishing activities, SERVE also provides contracted staff development and technical assistance

in many areas of expertise to assist education agencies in achieving their school improvement goals.

SERVE’s main office is at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, with major staff groups located in

Tallahassee, Florida, and Atlanta, Georgia. Unique among the ten Regional Educational Laboratories, SERVE

maintains policy analysts at the state education agencies of each of the states in its region. These analysts act as

SERVE’s primary liaisons to the state departments of education, providing research-based policy services to statelevel education policymakers and informing SERVE about key educational issues and legislation.

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

RDSPS

How To Assess

Student Performance

in Science

Going Beyond Multiple-Choice Tests

This manual is designed to encourage discussions among science teachers about

desired student outcomes in science and

assessments appropriate to those outcomes. How To Assess Student Performance

in Science provides science teachers with

practical information on ways to use alternative assessment methods in the classroom, including examples of assessment

methods, rubrics, and grading methods.