What are the Effects of Self-Assessment Preparation in a Middle School Science Classroom?

1. What are the Effects of Self-Assessment Preparation in a Middle School Science Classroom? Sara E. Severance Mapleton Expeditionary School of the Arts, Thornton, CO University of Colorado, Boulder, CO Streamline to Mastery Professional Development Program

2. PER at Colorado Grad Students: Stephanie Barr Kara Gray Lauren Kost-Smith (PhD May 11) May Lee Mike Ross Ben Spike • Ben Van Dusen • Bethany Wilcox Teachers / Partners / Staff: • Shelly Belleau • Jackie Elser, • Trish Loeblein • Susan M. Nicholson-Dykstra • Sara Severence • Emily Quinty • Mindy Gratny, Kate Kidder • John Blanco, Sam Reid • Chris Malley, Jon Olson • Oliver Nix, Nina Zabolotnaya Faculty: Melissa Dancy Michael Dubson Noah Finkelstein Valerie Otero Kathy Perkins Steven Pollock Carl Wieman (on leave) Postdocs/ Scientists: Charles Baily Danny Caballero Stephanie Chasteen Julia Chamberlain Kelly Lancaster Laurel Mayhew Emily Moore Ariel Paul Rachel Pepper Noah Podolefsky Benjamin Zwickl

3. Benefitsof Self-Assessment • Students become better critical thinkers [1] • Students can direct their own learning more effectively [1] • Students can monitor their own progress [3] D. Nunan. The Learner Centered Curriculum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988 3. M. Harris, “Self-Assessment of Language Learning in Formal Settings,” ELT Journal. 51: (1997)

4. Previous Studies • Multiple studies done at the university level showed that students who engaged in self-assessment practices: • scored higher on assignments [5] • showed higher conceptual gains [6] • produced marks that were closer to their professor’s marks over time [7] 5. B. McDonald, “Improving Learning through Meta Assessment,” Active Learning in High Education. 11: 119-129 (2010) 6. E. Etkina, “College Physics Students Epistemological Self-Reflection and its Relationship to Conceptual Learning,” American Journal of Physics. 70: 1249-1259(2002) 7. Y.Chen, “Learning to Self-Assess Oran Performance in English: A Longitudinal Case Study,” Language Teaching Research. 12: 235-262(2008)

5. Hypotheses • Students who can accurately self-assess will score higher on final assessments than students who cannot accurately self-assess. • Students who participate in the self-assessment preparationwill score better than students who do not. • Students will get better at self-assessing over time.

6. Research Context • Small urban 7th – 12th grade school • 8th grade physical science • 100 students • 37% English-Language Learners • 82% Free and Reduced Lunch

7. Methods Students in the treatment group used a self-assessment learning target tracker to keep track of their scores and the teacher’s scores for each lesson. Control Group explaining physical I can group elements based on physical and chemical properties. 3 2 properties Yes 9/2 15 grouping elements 3 - 2 = 1 discrepancy value

8. Methods The treatment was applied to different classes of students throughout the year.

9. Methods and Data Collection • Average absolute discrepancy scores for each student were compared to final assessment scores • Assessment scores for students who engaged in the self-assessment tracking were compared to those who did not. • Discrepancy scores were compared over time • Qualitative and survey data were also taken

10. Result 1 There was no correlation between students’ ability to self-assess and test scores. Hypothesis R2 = 0.0019

11. Result 2 Students who engaged in self-assessment tracking did not score better on final assessments compared to students who did not engage in self-assessment tracking . = treatment

12. Results 3 Students did not get better at self-assessing over time. hypothesis

13. Result 3 The type of question may have had more of an effect on students ability to self-assess.

14. Survey Results • 91% of students felt they were aware of their understanding on a particular concept • 61% of students could articulate their understanding using specific science vocabulary. Student Example:

15. Conclusions and Implications • A student’s awareness of their own learning did not lead to increased achievement • Students are engaging in formative assessment practices by using the self-assessment trackers, but what do we do with this information? • This study implies that structures need to be in place to help students and teachers use formative assessment data to increase student achievement [9] 9. V. Otero and M. Nathan, “Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Views of their Students’ Prior Knowledge in Science,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 45: 497-523 (2008)

16. Future Questions • What is our next step once students and teachers have formative assessment data? • Based on formative assessment data, what in-class structures need to be provided for middle school science students to help address their needs?

17. References 1. D. Nunan. The Learner Centered Curriculum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988 2. D. Little, “The Common European Framework and the European Language Portfolio: involving learners and their judgments in the assessment process,” Language Testing.22: 321-36 (2005) 3. M. Harris, “Self-Assessment of Language Learning in Formal Settings,” ELT Journal. 51: (1997) 4. N. Falchikov and D. Boud, “Student Self-Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis,” Review of Educational Research. 59: (1989-01) 5. B. McDonald, “Improving Learning through Meta Assessment,” Active Learning in High Education. 11: 119-129 (2010) 6. E. Etkina, “College Physics Students Epistemological Self-Reflection and its Relationship to Conceptual Learning,” American Journal of Physics. 70: 1249-1259(2002) 7. Y.Chen, “Learning to Self-Assess Oran Performance in English: A Longitudinal Case Study,” Language Teaching Research. 12: 235-262(2008) 8. S. Ross, “Self-assessment in Second Language Testing: a Meta-Analysis and Analysis of Experiential Factors,” Language Testing.15: 1-20 (1998) 9. V. Otero and M. Nathan, “Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Views of their Students’ Prior Knowledge in Science,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 45: 497-523 (2008)

18. Acknowledgements • Special Thanks to Ryan O’Block, Valerie Otero and members of the Streamline to Mastery Professional Development Program. • This work was partially funded by NSF Grant DUE 934921