1 / 25

CAESL And The Future Of Science Assessment

CAESL And The Future Of Science Assessment. Rich Shavelson & Stanford Education Assessment Lab. The Talk’s Charge.

kaia
Télécharger la présentation

CAESL And The Future Of Science Assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CAESL And The Future Of Science Assessment Rich Shavelson & Stanford Education Assessment Lab

  2. The Talk’s Charge “… [A]n address that summarizes our conference theme of building a community to improve assessment. We are hoping that you could help us all to see where CAESL fits into the complicated assessment landscape nationally and inspire us to go forth and fix things!”

  3. Overview • The national landscape: NCLB, science assessment & CAESL • The CAESL landscape: Building communities to improve assessment • The conclusion: “Go forth and fix things”

  4. The National Landscape:No Child Left Behind

  5. NCLB Accountability Mechanisms States must: • Test all 3rd – 8th graders in the nation in mathematics and reading in 2001-2014 and science in 2007-08 • Develop achievement (“proficiency”) standards on the test at least for: Basic, Proficient, Advanced • Track adequateyearlyprogress toward goal of 100% students proficient in reading and math within 12 years • Achieve goal by subgroup including: race/ethnicity, poverty level, disability, limited English proficiency, migrant, homeless…

  6. NCLB Science Assessment 2006-07: Requirements • In 2005-06, states must have challenging academic content standards in science that may be: • Grade specific • Cover more than one grade • Course specific in high school • In2007-08 states must administer “up-to-date” science assessments • Aligned with science standards, including higher-order thinking skills and understanding, • At least once each in grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12

  7. Some Responses To Science Assessment Mandate • U.S. Department of Education • CAESL assessment system NRC Committee on Test Design for K-12 Science Achievement (CAESL’s Wilson & Herman) • Delaware audit-assessment project

  8. CAESL Assessment System (Or MB Aquarium Chocolate Mousse)

  9. NRC Committee “Models”May 2004 Workshop • Partnerships among test publishers, research organizations, and scientific industries (Rich Patz) • Application of assessment advice offered by the National Commission on Instructionally Supportive Assessment (Jim Popham) • Models for multi-level state science assessment systems (Edys Quellmalz) • Classroom-based assessment system for science: A model (Barbara Plake) http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Science%20Assessment%20Workshop%20Agenda.html

  10. Delaware Audit-Assessment: Partnership Between State & Researchers • Science assessment in Delaware • Delaware Student Testing Program—Science • NAEP science assessment • Audit assessment built around State science framework and SEAL’s/CAESL’s knowledge types • Model of collaboration between assessment researchers and a state

  11. More Detail On Responses To NCLB: Criteria For Assessment Systems • Comprehensive: Measures the broad science content/ knowledge domain using multiple indicators • Coherent: Links external, “summative” assessment for accountability with internal (classroom) “formative” assessment for improving learning and teaching • Continuous: Tracks students’ performance throughout their school years

  12. Comprehensive: Expanded SEAL/CAESL Targeted Goals What does it mean to achieve in K-12 science? • Declarative knowledge: knowing that--facts and concepts in the domain • Procedural knowledge: routine procedures and some aspects of problem solving • “Schematic” (analytic) knowledge: conceptual models of how the natural world works • Strategic (“transfer”) knowledge: knowing when, where and how knowledge applies • “Epistemic” knowledge: knowing how we know—knowing how scientific knowledge is built and justified • Communication & social skills: ability to communicate ideas clearly and concisely in the genre of science • Motivation: commitment to learning, knowing and using science • Manner: habit of mind to inquire, observe, bring observation to bear in knowledge claims and reaching moral/ethical judgments

  13. Coherent: Research Multi-Level Assessment Systems • CAESL’s model into practice • CLAS’ multi-level system • Washington State coherent assessment system of embedded assessments • NRC—multi-level models (Quellmalz) http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Science%20Assessment%20Moody.pdf

  14. Continuous Tracking Of Student Performance • BEAR/CAESL continuous assessment of key progress variables • Multi- dimensional vertical equating (Patz et al.)—of SEAL/CAESL knowledge types? Patz http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Science%20Assessment%20Patz.pdf

  15. Technology Needed To Realize Criteria For Assessment System • Comprehensive assessment must capitalize on technology needed to: • Deliver performance assessments, concept-maps, POEs, Bayesian network assessment (etc.) cost-effectively • Construct, present, store, and score assessments (e.g., e-rater, automated) • Coherent assessment must capitalize on technology to: • Store and analyze data • Integrate multiple levels of assessment, • Present and interpret assessment information • Provide quick feedback on performance • Continuous assessment must capitalize on technology to: • Store and analyze data over time • Integrate multiple levels • Present and interpret assessment information over time

  16. The CAESL Landscape: Building Communities To Improve Assessment

  17. Some Directions for Research • Continue to develop assessments linked to knowledge types focusing on: • Knowledge types not yet measured in the CAESL assessment system • Streamlining assessment-development process • Validity of second-language learners’ assessment scores • Accommodations for special needs students • Continue to explore the use of progress variables, solving practical (scoring) constraints for teachers • Initiate case studies of emerging multi-level assessment systems (e.g., WA, Maine) • Initiate studies of the use of computer technology for collecting, scoring and modeling student performance on assessments

  18. … And Grad Student Training • Sponsor • Annual research conference with both student and researcher presentations • A class meeting at end of one of the quarters for students to present work completed in class (rotate annually) • Create practical opportunities for students to apply knowledge holistically to science assessment development problems (e.g., BASEE MSP project)

  19. Missing (In) Action! Build Communities • CAESL knows a great deal about science assessment BUT it needs to: • Communicate this knowledge to educators, policy makers and the public • Link this knowledge to enhancing teachers’ assessment practices and science curricula • Increase its research on practical applications of what it knows • CAESL needs to do a better job linking what it knows about assessment to enhancing • Teachers’ assessment practices • Science curricula • CAESL needs to increase its research on practical applications of what it knows • CAESL can address these and other matters by continuing to build community within the Center

  20. Enhance Public Understanding Of Assessment • Focus on practical questions: • What is science assessment? • What kinds of science knowledge and understanding should we be concerned about and measure to meet NCLB requirements and why? • How can we track progress to improve student learning, curriculum and teaching, and why? • Communicate what we know and need to know: • To specific public and practitioner audiences (e.g., op ed pieces) • At practitioner conferences such as the NSTA and CSTA • Through an improved web site making assessment information and materials accessible to practitioners • Other

  21. Questions For Research On Teacher Practice • How can we make assessments easy for teachers to construct and use in their classroom? • How can we enhance teachers’ formative assessment practices to improve student learning of science and student performance on accountability assessments? • How can we help teachers use summative assessment information collected under NCLB to improve their teaching, curriculum and students’ learning? • What is an appropriate conceptual framework for this applied research— • Teacher conceptual change? • Teacher inquiry questioning skills? • Other?

  22. Linking CAESL’s Strands To Address Practical Research Agenda Enhance community among all 5 CAESLstrands to carry out research agenda: • Strand 1: Focus student apprenticeships on research agenda related to all other 4 strands • Strand 2: Link research agenda with practical challenges of teacher enhancement • Strand 3: Link research agenda with practical challenges of pre-service teacher preparation • Strand 4: Re-allocate part of scare research resources to broader practical research agenda • Strand 5: Link research agenda on public understanding to public outreach

  23. In Conclusion:“Go Forth And Fix Things” • The practical realities and demands of NCLB make CAESL’s mission critical to the quality of science education in this nation • A Center devoted to science assessment is incomplete; curriculum, teaching, learning and assessment cannot be disentangled • This fact gives rise to a broadened practical research agenda for an “Assessment Center”

  24. Concluding Comments (Continued) CAESL will have to plan and address: • The need for practical as well as path-breaking research on formative and summative assessment and its link to curriculum, teaching and learning (even if not highly valued in academia) • The realization that the next generation research and development agenda needs to integrate the views of academics, practitioners, and graduate students • The trade-off with scarce CAESL resources in balancing assessment and practical research needs will be very difficult but important

  25. NRC Committee Charge • Provide guidance and make recommendations … useful to states in designing and developing quality science assessments to meet the [NCLB] 2007-2008 implementation requirement …; and • Foster communication and collaboration between the NRC committee and key stakeholders in the states and in schools so that the guidance provided by the NRC committee's report is both responsive and can be practically implemented in states and schools http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Test_Design_K-12_Science.html

More Related