Chapter 6: Assessment of Student Learning ... - scienceinquirer

Chapter 6: Assessment of Student Learning
Introduction
This chapter will address the nature of assessment and the purposes of assessment at different
levels in the educational system from the classroom, to the district and state, to the national and
international levels.
The big idea of assessment is that assessments are cyclical in nature— teachers and students use
assessment to monitor student progress which in turn informs instructional decisions that support
learning. This chapter will discuss the role of the teacher and the role of the student in the
assessment instruction cycle. It will also address a variety of assessments designed to test student
mastery of higher-order thinking and the integral role of the investigation and experimentation
standards as part of assessment.
Results from classroom assessments provide quality feedback to teachers. This chapter will
address using data and results that will allow teachers to improve student learning, inform and
guide instruction, and research their teaching practices. This chapter will also cover strategies
for the assessment of English learners and special needs students. Information regarding the
current statewide assessment system in science will also be covered.
I. The Nature of Assessment
The nature of assessment is the essence of knowing what students should know, do, and
understand. In science, assessments should provide students the opportunity to demonstrate their
understanding of important and meaningful science content, to use scientific tools and processes,
and to apply their knowledge and understanding to real-life situations.
Assessment does not exist in isolation, but must be closely aligned with the goals of state
standards, curriculum, and instruction to support learning. Current research calls for “balanced
assessment systems” that align and restore:
• Comprehensiveness—the use of multiple sources of evidence to draw inferences
about an individual student’s proficiency,
• Coherence—a shared model of learning that links curriculum, instruction and
assessment within the classroom and links the classroom with large-scale assessments
and
• Continuity between classroom, district and state assessments calling for a longitudinal
assessment of learning progress over time. i
Assessment, testing, and educational measurement are often used interchangeably to refer to a
process by which educators use students’ responses to stimuli in order to draw inferences about
students’ knowledge and skills. ii While testing usually refers to standardized multiple-choice
instruments, assessment per se denotes a more comprehensive view of student performance. iii
1

The terms assessment and evaluation are also used interchangeably and in many contexts.
Assessment refers to the judgment of student performance and evaluation refers to the judgment
of programs or organizational effectiveness. iv
2

II. Purpose of Assessment
Assessment is a systemic, multi-step process involving the collection and interpretation of
educational data. As the primary feedback mechanisms in the educational system, assessments
provide information to students about how well they are performing; to teachers about how well
their students are learning; to districts about the effectiveness of their teachers and programs; and
to policymakers about the effects of their policies. The intent of this feedback is to allow
stakeholders within the educational system to make informed decisions regarding improved
student learning, teacher development, program modifications, and changes in policy. v
The purposes of assessment can be categorized into three main areas: (1) support of student
learning; (2) certification, which includes reporting individual student achievement, placement
and/or promotion; and (3) accountability, which is designed to evaluate programs and inform
policy. The first purpose focuses primarily on formative and summative classroom assessments
while the second and third are geared more toward large-scale assessments including district,
state, and national tests.
Formative and Summative Classroom Assessments
Formative assessment is defined as assessment carried out during the instructional process for
improving teaching or learning. vi Assessment becomes formative only when either the teacher or
the student uses that information to inform teaching and/or to influence learning. vii
Formative assessments are informal, ongoing assessments that provide continuous opportunities
for teachers to observe, question, listen, and provide immediate feedback to students. Formative
assessment also provides opportunities for students to become more involved in the assessment
process and to become self-reflective about their own learning.
The line between instruction and assessment is blurred in classrooms where formative
assessment is used to support learning. “Everything students do—from conversing in groups,
completing seatwork, answering and asking questions, to sitting quietly and looking confused—
is a potential source of information about what they do and do not understand.The teacher who
consciously uses assessment to support learning takes in this information, analyzes it, and makes
instructional decisions that address the understandings and misunderstandings that these
assessments reveal.” viii
While formative assessments occur minute-by-minute and day-by-day, summative assessments
are cumulative assessments, usually occurring at the end of a unit of instruction. Designed to
measure what a student has learned after a certain period of time, summative assessments are
administered less frequently than formative assessments. Teachers also use summative
assessments as pretests to see what students understand before they teach a unit of instruction
and as posttests afterwards to see what students learned as a result of their instruction.
Summative assessments are also used for reporting grades at the end of a semester.
Summative classroom assessments should (1) enable students to draw on what they have learned
to explain new phenomena, think critically and make informed decisions ix , and (2) consist of
multiple measures including hands-on performance tasks, constructed response investigations,
3

long and short essays, portfolios, interactive computer tasks, and well constructed multiplechoice
tests.
District Summative Assessments
School districts administer summative tests to students throughout the year to determine if
students are learning the grade level science content recommended in the state standards and to
evaluate the district science program. Examples of the types of summative science assessments
used in school districts in California include benchmark and interim assessments and end-ofcourse
tests.
Benchmark and interim assessments are used to monitor progress during the school year toward
meeting state standards and NCLB performance goals. x These assessments usually consist of
multiple-choice questions and are administered at the end of every quarter. These types of
assessments focus on program evaluation and provide teachers with information about which
science standards students have mastered. Current research does not show that benchmark or
interim assessments help to improve student learning or achievement in science. xi
End-of-course tests are used by districts at the high school level to determine the content learned
by students as a result of taking a specific course of study. Districts also implement end-ofcourse
tests to: establish the effectiveness of the curriculum in each science domain; ensure that
course content is focused on state standards; establish a common level of expected student
performance; ensure that evaluation of student performance is consistent across classrooms and
schools in the district; and to help identify students who need additional help to meet graduation
requirements.
Districts participating in state-funded projects also administer summative assessments; for
example, districts participating in the California Mathematics Science Partnerships (CaMSP) are
required to administer a standards-based assessment as a pretest and posttest to students in both
treatment and control groups at the beginning and end of the school year. The analyses of the
pretest and posttest results are used to determine if the treatment teachers’ training makes a
difference in student learning and achievement of science. Districts are using a variety of
multiple-choice tests aligned to enduring grade level standards.
State Summative Assessments
The California Standards Tests (CSTs) are summative assessments that measure student
achievement of the Science Content Standards for California Public Schools. The CST’s are a
battery of standardized tests that comprise the state's STAR (Standardized Testing and
Reporting) Program. All students in grades two through eleven participate in the STAR Program
including students with disabilities and students who are English learners. Section VII of this
chapter addresses the science portion of the CST in more depth.
National and International Assessments
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)—also known as the Nation’s Report
Card—measures fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students’ performance in science with
assessments designed specifically for national and state information needs. The NAEP
4

assessment contains multiple measures including: multiple-choice items, constructed response
questions, hands-on performance tasks, and interactive computer tasks. All of the components of
NAEP are aligned to the content recommendations in the 2009 NAEP Science Framework.
Participation in NAEP allows states to compare student achievement to the achievement of
students in other states.
The international assessments, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS) and the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), enable the United States
to benchmark its performance—in fourth-grade and eighth-grade mathematics and science in
TIMSS and in 15-year-old students’ mathematics, science, and reading literacy in PISA—to that
of other countries.
Each test was designed to serve a different purpose and each is based on a separate and unique
framework and set of assessment questions although content areas assessed and ages and grade
levels of students are significantly similar. The definitions of science differ among the three
assessments: The NAEP framework defines science as physical science, life science and earth
science. TIMSS also includes life science and earth science, but with regard to physical science,
TIMSS splits it into separate domains for physics and chemistry. NAEP identifies three
categories of “knowing and doing science” as conceptual understanding, scientific investigation,
and practical reasoning. PISA takes a broader approach than both NAEP and TIMMS in
addressing important competencies required for scientific literacy: identifying scientific issues,
explaining scientific phenomena, and using scientific evidence. PISA’s content can be divided
into knowledge of the natural world (in the fields of life systems, physical systems, Earth and
space systems, and technology systems) and knowledge about science itself (scientific inquiry
and scientific explanations). All three assessments are conducted regularly to allow the
monitoring of student outcomes over time.
5

III. Assessment of Student Learning
Quality classroom assessment informs instruction and improves student understanding, learning
and achievement. Both formative and summative assessments make up quality classroom
assessments. Formative assessment is defined as a planned, ongoing dynamic process in which
teachers and students use evidence to adjust teaching and learning. Measurements of student
learning, such as scores from a summative test, are just one component of the formative
assessment process. While informal or formal assessments play a role in this process, they are
not the process itself. xii
In this chapter, assessment of student learning in science is defined as a process of formative
assessment that integrates instruction with multiple measures of student ability including a
variety of techniques for various learning styles and levels of readiness.
The research base clearly supports the process of formative assessment in improved student
learning and achievement. A synthesis of more than 4,000 research studies undertaken during the
last 40 years consistently shows that, when implemented well, formative assessment can
significantly improve student learning and achievement more than any other educational
outcome. xiii
“The big idea of formative assessment is that evidence about student learning is used to adjust
instruction to better meet student needs; in other words, teaching is adaptive to the student’s
learning needs and assessment is done in real time.” xiv When teachers engage in formative
assessment, the purpose of assessment changes from just measuring what students know to
enhancing student learning. xv In this new role, assessment is a shared responsibility between
teachers and students.
The Teacher’s Role in Classroom Assessment
The teacher’s role in ongoing assessment is to facilitate student growth, understanding, and
learning. Teachers use continuous assessments to: improve classroom practice, plan curricula,
develop self-directed learners, report student progress, and investigate their own teaching
practices. xvi
While numerous strategies can be used for formative assessment, current research shows that
higher-level questioning, descriptive feedback, student self-assessment and reflection, and
student self-regulated learning all have a positive effect on student achievement and the ability
for students to transfer their learning to new situations. xvii
Good questioning is at the heart of classroom practice. Teachers spend at least 80% of their time
engaged in questioning on any given day. Research shows that questioning can improve student
learning when teachers: (1) structure questions around information that is critical to the topic, not
around information that might be interesting or unusual; (2) ask questions that are higher-level—
the questions require students to analyze, synthesize, and apply information instead of recalling
facts; (3) provide students with “wait time” after a question so that students have time to think
about their response; and (4) help students establish a mental map to process their learning
experiences. xviii
6

Teacher feedback is central to formative assessment. The effectiveness of formative assessment
is dependent on both the quality of the information gathered and the quality of the feedback
provided. In a study on teacher grading and feedback, researchers investigated the effectiveness
of different kinds of feedback over a series of lessons. The students were randomly assigned to
one of three groups: Group A received written feedback clearly describing what they did
correctly, what was incorrect, and what was needed to improve their work; Group B received
only grades derived from scoring; and Group C received grades and general comments. The
scores for the students in Group A that received constructive descriptive feedback increased
significantly from the first to the second lesson, while the scores for the students in Groups B and
C declined between the first and the second lesson. xix
Research shows that in order for feedback to be effective it should be: (1) corrective in nature
clearly describing what the student is doing that is correct, not correct, and what needs to be done
to improve their work; (2) provided in a timely manner; (3) and specific to a criterion referencing
a specific level of skill or knowledge. xx
The Student’s Role in Classroom Assessment
Students are ultimately responsible for taking action to bridge the gap between where they are
and where they need to go in their learning. xxi Research shows that when students have insight
into their own strengths and weaknesses and develop their own repertoires of strategies for
learning, their learning improves. Self-assessment, peer-assessment, and self-regulation are
metacognitive strategies that assist students in improving their own learning. xxii
Peer-assessment is a powerful complement to formative assessment. Student discourse during
peer-assessment is valuable because it allows students to assume the role of the teacher. In the
role of teacher, students have to make sure that they understand the content so that they can
evaluate the understanding of their peers. xxiii
As students become self-regulated learners, they are able to describe their strengths, analyze
learning tasks to consider their options, explain their choices in completing their learning tasks,
and regularly set goals for future learning. xxiv
In order for self-assessment, peer-assessment and self-regulated learning to become effective
components of student learning, students must understand the criteria used to evaluate their work
and the difference between quality work and substandard work. Students should also be taught
the habits and skills of the collaborative process used in peer-assessment, requiring them to see
their work objectively. To become a self-directed learner, students set their sights on their own
learning goals and understand the steps they must go through in order to get there. xxv
Strategies and Techniques for Formative Assessment
Research maintains that the process of effective formative assessment consists of five key
strategies. xxvi Figure 1 below outlines the five key strategies and one suggested technique for
implementing each strategy. xxvii
Figure 1: Key Strategies and Techniques for Effective Formative Assessment
7

Strategy Technique Description
1. Clarifying Learning
Intentions and
Sharing Criteria for
Success
Sharing
Exemplars
Before asking 11 th grade students to write a lab report, the teacher
gives each student four sample lab reports representing varying
degrees of quality. The lab reports are teacher-generated or from
a previous class. Students are asked to analyze the reports and
2. Engineering
Effective Classroom
Discussions,
Questions, and
Learning Tasks that
Elicit Evidence of
Learning
3. Providing Feedback
that Moves
Learners Forward
4. Activating Students
as Learners of Their
Own Learning
5. Activating Students
as Instructional
Resources for One
Another
White
Boards
Find it and
Fix it
Traffic
Lighting
Pre-Flight
Check List
identify why certain reports are of a higher quality than others.
During a 4 th grade lesson on magnetism, the teacher asks the class
what would happen if two like poles of two magnets were placed
together. He asks the class to write their answers on their white
boards and hold them up on the count of three. Using this kind of
“all student response system” helps the teacher to get a sense of
what students understand while requiring all students to engage in
the task. If all answers are correct, the teacher moves on. If none
are correct, the teacher may choose to re-teach the concept in
another way. If there are a variety of answers, the teacher can use
the information from the student answers to direct a class
discussion.
Students in a 7 th grade classroom just completed a task on plant
and animal cells. Rather then checking all correct answers and
putting a check next to incorrect ones, the teachers tells a student
“three of your answers are incorrect; find them and fix them.” This
requires the student to engage cognitively in response to the
feedback rather than reacting emotionally to a letter grade.
After students in a 3 rd grade class complete a lesson on energy and
matter, they review the learning goal their teacher provided at the
beginning of the lesson and hold up a colored circle to indicate their
level of understanding. Green means I understand; yellow, I’m not
sure; and red, I do not understand. At regular intervals, the teacher
provides time in class for students to move their learning forward by
turning their reds to yellows and their yellows to green.
For homework, students in a 9 th grade class write a paper on a
science–based societal issue. Before turning in their work, students
trade papers with a peer. Each student completes a “pre-flight
checklist” by comparing the peer’s document against a list of
required elements, e.g., identify a science-based societal issue, cite
research studies, analyze data, and communicate findings.
As teachers utilize these key strategies and techniques for formative assessment and integrate
them into their practice, they view their own practice in new ways.
Implementing and Sustaining Formative Assessment with Teacher Learning Communities
Formative assessments are not common practices in most teachers’ classrooms and changes in
teacher practice are not always easy to implement. Furthermore, professional development in
almost any aspect of assessment is sparse. By working with practicing classroom teachers in real
time, researchers have identified practical suggestions for setting up Teacher Learning
Communities (TLC) to implement and sustain formative assessment. xxviii Figure 2 below outlines
a strategy found to be successful in establishing a TLC. xxix
8

Figure 2: Strategies for Implementing a Teacher Learning Community Around Classroom
Assessment
Suggestion
Plan for the TLC to run for at least
two years
Start with volunteers
Meet monthly for at least 75
minutes
Aim for a group of 8-10 teachers
Try to group teachers with similar
assignments
Establish building-based groups
Require teachers to make
detailed, modest, individual action
plans
Creating an Action Plan
Teacher Leader to organize and
coordinate meetings
Rationale
Formative assessment is not a quick fix. It takes time to learn,
practice, and refine your strategies.
Formative assessment cuts across many established practices in
schools and volunteers are more likely to find ways around obstacles.
Monthly meetings are more suited to teachers’ schedules and time.
To ensure that all individuals have adequate time to report and share,
the meeting should last 75 minutes or longer.
When the group is too small, there are not enough differences of
opinion to provide for good teacher learning. When the group is too
large, all members may not have time to talk.
Teachers should work and share in small grade level groups.
While cross-building meetings can be productive, it is best to work
within sites so that support can be maintained with a group of trusted
colleagues.
At the first meeting, each teacher should made a specific plan about
what they want to change. Teachers should focus on a small number
of changes they can integrate into their practice.
The following questions are intended to help teachers format their
own action plans:
1. What is one thing that you will find easy to change? What
difference do you expect it to make to your practice?
2. What is one thing that you would like to change that will require
support? What help would you need?
3. What other changes would you like to make later on in the year?
What help might you need?
4. What will you do differently or stop doing to implement these
changes?
Someone needs to make sure the meetings happen, e.g., secure a
room, send out the agenda, secure refreshments and so on. This
person should not be an expert. The idea of a TLC is that each
person comes with a clear idea about what they want help with and
the group helps that person with the task.
The following five-part process xxx was also found to be successful in implementing and
sustaining teacher learning community meetings:
1. Introduction (5-10 minutes): Participating teachers agree on the goals of the meeting and
agenda.
2. How’s it going? (30-50 minutes): Each teacher provides a summary of what they did in
relation to their action plan during the previous month. The other teachers listen and
provide support for that teacher in moving their plans forward.
9

3. New learning about formative assessment (25-40 minutes): The teacher leader or a small
group of other teachers research and introduce new ideas in formative assessment to the
group. The teachers engage in a shared activities intended to improve their understanding
of formative and summative assessment.
4. Individual teacher planning (10-15 minutes): Based on the group discussion, feedback
and new learning, teachers may want to revise their action plans. Teachers need time to
think through what they are planning to do in the next month. They may also want to
discuss new ideas with their colleagues.
5. Review of the meeting (5 minutes): The lead teacher redirects the group to the original
goals and objectives for the meeting and checks to see if they were achieved.
Teacher learning communities have the potential to support the implementation of formative
assessments while installing ownership in teachers for their own professional development. The
strategies mentioned above provide the foundation for a practical and workable model that will
enable schools to initiate and sustain teacher professional development based on formative
assessment.
The Assessment Instruction Cycle
During the assessment instruction cycle, teachers continuously observe student behavior, collect
evidence, and make reasonable inferences about what students know. Assessment is central to
teaching and to instruction—an invisible thread connects assessment, curriculum and teaching
together in the service of learning. xxxi
There are four major components to the assessment instruction cycle: (1) achievement
expectations; (2) the cyclical nature of assessment and instruction; (3) multiple forms of
assessment; and (4) evidence and feedback. xxxii
The bases for state, district and classroom assessment, as well as curriculum and instruction in
California are the State Science Content Standards. Achievement expectations start with the state
standards and there is strong alignment among the state standards, the state adopted science
curricula, the teachers’ instructional practices and the students’ learning goals. Student learning
goals are clearly translated into plain language that all students can understand. Teachers guide
students through well-defined learning progressions and students understand where they need to
go next to accomplish their goals. Teachers also provide students with criteria for how their work
will be judged and exemplars or models of quality student work. xxxiii
Assessment and instruction are cyclical in nature. Teachers and students use assessment to
monitor student progress, which in turn informs instructional decisions that support learning.
Teachers assess, determine needs, provide descriptive feedback, set goals, provide guided
practice, and keep the cycle in continuous motion. Students work with their teacher to know
where they are in their learning continuum. With their teacher’s guidance, students track and
manage their progress, assess and reflect on their learning, set goals, learn, and keep the cycle in
continuous motion. xxxiv
10

Teachers use multiple forms of assessment that yield accurate information about students to
support their learning and achievement. Teachers are continuously collecting evidence, analyzing
it, and providing timely descriptive feedback to students. The evidence and feedback are: directly
related to the standards and to the students’ leaning goals; communicated and understood by
students to encourage self-reflection and goal setting; and used to show growth and improvement
over time for students, teachers, and parents. xxxv
11

IV. Examples of Quality Formative and Summative Science Assessments
Assessments should provide students the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of
important and meaningful science content, to use scientific tools and processes, to apply their
understandings to solve new problems, and to draw on what they have learned to explain new
phenomena, think critically, and make informed decisions. xxxvi All assessments should have clear
expectations for students, be valid, reliable, and free of bias.
Validity
Three types of validity are central to assessment: content validity; construct validity; and
instructional validity. Content validity addresses the degree to which an assessment measures the
intended content of the standards. Construct validity refers to the degree to which an assessment
measures a “construct” or ability. The Investigation and Experimentation standards, for example,
outline the skills or constructs necessary to engage in scientific inquiry. To make a valid claim
about a student’s ability to conduct inquiry, the assessment would need to assess the range of
skills in the Investigation and Experimentation standards. Finally, an assessment has
instructional validity if the content of the test matches what is actually being taught during
instruction.
Reliability
When assessments are reliable, they consistently measure what they are intended to measure.
There are three kinds of consistency in classroom assessments: stability—the consistency of
student scores over time; alternate test forms—consistency of results among two or more
different forms of a test; and internal consistency—consistency in the way items on an
assessment work. xxxvii
Bias
Sometimes assessments can be biased against particular groups of students. When an assessment
is biased, the constructs of the test cause students to perform poorly. All assessments should be
free of bias—they should not penalize students because of their gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, religion, or other defining characteristics. Assessments should also not be offensive to
students. xxxviii Different forms of bias include: xxxix
• Content Bias: Does the assessment contain content that is different or unfamiliar to
different groups? Example: asking girls to compare the mass of different footballs when
they have not had experience with footballs.
• Language Bias: Does the assessment contain words that have different or unfamiliar
meanings for different groups? Example: asking urban students about farming techniques
such as forage pits.
• Item Structure and Format Bias: Does the nature of the task confuse members of different
groups? Example: requiring non-English learners to write a long essay in English.
12

• Stereotyping: Does the assessment give a positive representation of different groups?
Assessments should be free of material that may be offensive, demeaning, or emotionally
charged.
• Fairness: Is the assessment balanced in terms of being equally familiar to every group?
Tests should be free of words or phrases that are generally associated with elitism-- polo,
yacht, regatta; finances--venture capital, stock options; regionalisms--grinder, hoagie,
parish; military topics--rapier, mortar, breech; political topics--alderman, pork barrel;
legal topics--tort, docket; and farm topics--combine, thresher.
Assessing the Science Content Standards for California Public Schools
Assessments should cover the content of the standards at each grade level including the standards
for Investigation and Experimentation. The Investigation and Experimentation standards are
central to the role of assessment in the teaching of science. Involving students in scientific
inquiry helps them develop proficiency in: 1) understanding scientific concepts; 2) appreciating
how and what we know in the realm of science; 3) understanding of the nature of science; 4) the
ability to inquire about the natural world; and 5) the ability to use the skills and attitudes
associated with science. xl
The Investigation and Experimentation standards are multifaceted—they call for students to
make observations, pose questions, make predictions, plan and conduct investigations, use tools
to gather, analyze and use data, generate and evaluate evidence and explanations, use critical and
logical thinking, examine information, consider alternative explanations, and communicate their
results.
Student understanding of this rich array of skills cannot be captured in a simple set of multiplechoice
questions. Assessments should consist of different strategies ranging from formative
assessments which include teacher observations and feedback to challenge statements, to
summative assessments which include hands-on performance tasks, constructed response
investigations, open-ended questions, portfolios, and well constructed multiple-choice tests.
Multiple-Measures of Student Achievement
Assessments should be based on multiple measures of student ability and include a variety of
techniques for various learning styles and levels of readiness. Figure 4 below outlines examples
of formative and summative assessments.
Figure 4: Examples of Formative and Summative Assessments
Formative
Teacher Observation, Listening, Questioning and
Feedback
Self-reflection and Self-assessment
Peer Assessment and Reflection
Science Notebooks
White Boards
Summative
Hands-On Performance Tasks
Constructed Response
Open-ended Questions
Multiple-choice Questions
Portfolios
13

Graphic Organizers: Concept Maps, Concept Webs,
Venn Diagrams, Flowcharts
Challenge Statements
Extended Research Projects
Student Presentations
Interviews
Homework Assignments
Interactive Computer Assessments
Constructed Response Items
Constructed response items require students to write their own answers. Student responses are
scored with a scoring rubric tailored specifically to each task. Scoring rubrics can be holistic
(where a single score is assigned to the entire task) or analytical (where each question on a task
receives an individual score). Analytical rubrics are more diagnostic in nature and provide more
detailed information regarding student understanding of science content and inquiry constructs in
the task.
Hands-on Performance Tasks
Hands-on performance tasks integrate standards for life, earth and/or physical science with
Investigation and Experimentation constructs. During a hands-on task, students are presented
with a scenario identifying a problem that needs to be solved. Students are provided hands-on
materials organized on a placemat, and asked to: make predictions; setup and conduct an
investigation; record data and observations; organize data (graphs, charts, tables, etc.); explain if
and how the results of their investigation either support or refute their prediction; analyze their
results and use their own data and findings to explain their answers; use what they’ve learned in
the task to make an application beyond the task; and/or think of another (new) question to
investigate and briefly describe the steps of a plan for a new investigation. Students work with a
partner to conduct their investigation and to collect their data. They work individually to record
their answers in their test booklet.
Examples of performance tasks are in Appendix A.
Constructed Response Investigations
Constructed Response Investigations are extended paper/pencil tasks that integrate science
concepts with inquiry and investigation. Students are presented with a problem that students
(hypothetical) in another school are trying to solve. They are provided a set of authentic data and
a set of questions and required to: analyze the problem and the data; graph and interpret data;
interpret relationships on graphs; construct models, questions, predictions and/or hypothesis;
recommend solutions; and/or design new investigations to further explore the problem in the
task. Although students usually work individually, these tasks can be designed to include
information that students would discuss with a partner before writing their individual responses.
Examples of constructed response tasks are in Appendix A.
14

Open-ended Questions
Open-ended questions are short paper/pencil tasks that focus on evaluating understanding and
reasoning. They are designed to explore students’ abilities to: communicate scientific
understandings; use inquiry; reason scientifically; express positions on societal issues; and
design an experiment. Students are presented with a prompt, usually in the form of a problem or
scenario, and asked to communicate their understandings of scientific concepts and processes.
Students work individually to record their responses in their test booklet.
Examples of open-ended questions are in Appendix A.
Challenge Statements
Challenge Statements are assessment probes designed to investigate students’ thinking about
important science concepts. The assessment probe consists of a deliberately provocative or
ambiguous statement about a science concept such as—“As electrical current passes through
devices such as light bulbs and motors, some of it gets used up.” The learner is asked to agree or
disagree with the statement and to explain their reasoning. Students are expected to explain their
thinking using everyday language and not use academic vocabulary. Academic vocabulary can
be used as a screen for not revealing misconceptions. The goal of Challenge Statements is to
make student thinking visible and not hide their misconceptions behind their science vocabulary.
Challenge Statements are used before and after a unit of instruction. Students start by thinking
about the Challenge Statement and writing their thoughts individually. They discuss their ideas
with their peers and then have an opportunity to revise their statement based on input from their
group. Challenge Statements demand deeper thinking and investigation. They set the stage for
meaningful discussion as part of learning.
Challenge Statements are evaluated using a 5-point rubric modeled after the five levels of
proficiency measured in the California Standards Tests. In evaluating responses, valid
conceptions and sophistication of reasoning are considered.
Student Science Notebooks
Student Science Notebooks engage students in scientific thinking as they explore questions,
make predictions, plan and conduct investigations, collect, organize and use data, apply their
learning, and communicate their understanding of science. As an assessment tool, science
notebooks have been found to: help students construct their conceptual thinking; inform and
guide instruction; enhance literacy skills; support differentiated learning; and foster teacher
collaboration.
White Boards
White Boards are powerful tools for allowing students to make their thinking visible. The use of
white boards at the beginning of an instructional unit is an effective way to elicit students’ prior
knowledge of the content to be taught. Before teaching a fourth grade lesson on circuits, a
teacher may ask the class to quickly draw a complete circuit on their white boards and hold them
up. The teacher can easily find out which students understand circuits and use this information to
15

teach the lesson. During the lesson, the teacher may ask expert students to use their white boards
to explain their thinking. This provides novice learners an opportunity to learn from expert
thinking, which is usually hidden. xli At the end of the lesson, the teacher may have the students
use the white boards to show what they learned and use this information to prepare for the next
lesson.
Graphic Organizers: Concept Maps, Venn Diagrams, Flowcharts
Graphic organizers, such as concept maps, Venn diagrams, and flowcharts are mental maps of
student thinking and understanding. Concept maps help students see the connections between
concepts and the differences among concepts. Venn diagrams help students see the relationships
between ideas, and flowcharts can help students to sequence events. Like white boards, they can
be used as assessment strategies for making student thinking visible, helping teachers assesses
what students do and do not understand.
Portfolios
Portfolios are collections of student work designed to provide the best evidence of a student’s
scientific literacy. They are used to measure student growth over time, showing achievement of
science concepts, the deepening of understanding of the scientific method, and the growth of
both communication and problem solving skills. Through portfolios, students can become
actively engaged in their own learning, gaining a sense of pride and ownership of their work. As
an assessment tool, portfolios provide opportunities for students to: reflect on and self-evaluate
their learning and work; select a variety of different types of work they think best represent their
understanding of science; and learn how to score and evaluate the work of peers. Teachers use
student portfolios to evaluate the progress of the student, the class, the curriculum, and their
instruction.
Interactive Computer Tasks
Computer simulations can present students with rich, interactive assessments that model systems
in the natural world. Science simulations can model authentic environments and make concepts
that are difficult to represent in a graphic format such convection currents, the movement of
molecules in solids, liquids and gases, and/or plate tectonics visible. In an interactive computer
task, students have the opportunity to manipulate stimuli that they would not be able to
manipulate in real time. In an assessment of plate tectonics and Earth’s structure, for example,
students can investigate the results of different plate movements or how wind, water, and ice
shape and reshape Earth’s surface. Interactive computer simulations allow students to
demonstrate their understandings of science content and inquiry in an active manner. Moreover,
computer technology associated with simulations can provide automatic feedback to students and
teachers and can help to inform and guide instruction.
Select Response Items
Select response items are commonly called multiple-choice items. In responding to a multiplechoice
item, students select one of four possible answer choices and record their responses on a
separate answer sheet. Each multiple-choice item is: aligned to only one content standard;
contains a stem with either a question or a completion format; and four different answer choices
with only one correct answer. The four answer choices should be approximately the same length,
16

have the same format, and have parallel syntax and semantic structures. At least 10 items are
needed for each standard to reliably report student achievement for that standard. Ten items are
also needed to reliably report student achievement for each domain level of life science, earth
science, physical science, and investigation and experimentation. Two examples of multiplechoice
items follow.
Regular Multiple-choice Items
A well-constructed multiple-choice item may be a valuable component of an assessment system
because it can provide broad coverage of important topics and allow students to demonstrate a
variety of skills and knowledge. Many “regular” multiple-choice items usually focus on lowerlevel
recall—assessing small, topical pieces of information such as, what are the parts of a cell,
or in what year was helium discovered. Multiple-choice items require higher-level and theyfocus
more on important skills and can probe analytical reasoning.
While any incorrect student answer can qualify as a misconception, there is a relatively large
research base of documented student misconceptions in science. Documented misconceptions
have been studied and confirmed by researchers through thorough investigations. Documented
common student misconceptions in science can be built into the answer choices. If documented
misconceptions are used in the answer choices, it is recommended that only one of the four
answer choices contain the documented misconception.
Justified Multiple-choice Items
A modified multiple-choice question is called a justified multiple-choice question. Students
select an answer choice and then explain why they think the answer is correct. Students are
directed to use their understanding of specific science content and inquiry to explain why their
answer is correct. Teachers use scoring rubrics specific to each question to score student work.
Examples of justified multiple-choice questions are in Appendix A.
Graphic Organizers for Monitoring and Tracking Formative and Summative Assessments
aligned to the California Science Content Standards
Teachers can use various methods to monitor and track different classroom assessments aligned
to the California Science Content Standards. The matrix shown in Figure 5 below shows general
headings for formative and summative assessments. Enduring California science standards for
grade 4 are listed down the left side of the matrix. Teachers can monitor and track specific
assessments for formative and summative categories in the cells.
17

Figure 5: Graphic Organizer for Monitoring Formative and Summative Assessments
aligned to the California Science Content Standards
QuickTime and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
By using a variety of assessments that have clear expectations for students and are closely linked
to the standards and to learning goals, teachers can capture the full range of student
understanding and progress. They can also use the resulting data in thoughtful and powerful
ways to improve student learning and achievement and to inform and guide their instruction.
18

V. Analyzing and Using Data and Results
Results from classroom assessments provide quality feedback to teachers allowing them to:
improve student learning and achievement; inform and modify instruction; plan curriculum;
target teaching; and research teaching practices.
Once teachers collect data and results, they need to make sense of their findings before they can
apply them to improved learning and instruction. Analyzing data involves: looking for patterns
or trends in both individual student work and for similar patterns in the work of all students in
the class; reflecting on inferences and plausible explanations for findings; making sense out of
clusters of information that go together; and making informed decisions for using the results with
students and with their instruction.
Tally Sheets
Tally Sheets can be designed to record and analyze student results for multiple-choice tests. The
Tally Sheet is a matrix with the item numbers and the codes for the standards assessed identified
across the top of the matrix and the names of the students listed down the left side of the matrix.
The teacher could enter (+) for a correct answer and (–) for an incorrect answer and then tally the
number correct for each student and for each standard. By reading across the matrix from the left
side to the right side, teachers can quickly determine how many items each student responded to
correctly. By reading from the top of the matrix to the bottom of the matrix for each item,
teachers can quickly determine which standards on this particular test were difficult for students
and which were not. In order to make a reliable inference about student understanding of a single
standard, there must be at least ten items for each standard. Figure 6 below shows a tally sheet
made in Excel for recording student responses to a multiple-choice test. Several Tally Sheets can
be made in Excel to keep track of student results and progress.
Figure 6: Tally Sheet for Multiple-choice Answers
QuickTime and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
19

Tally Sheets can also be used to capture and analyze information from a hands-on performance
task. A hands-on performance task was administered to eighth grade students in a large urban
school district. The students investigated variables related to force and motion. After the students
took the test, each question in their booklets was scored with an analytical rubric and
summarized in the Tally Sheet in Figure 7 below.
The parts of the performance task and associated questions are listed at the top of the matrix. The
score points—1 for a correct response, 0—for an incorrect response, and B—for blank are listed
down the left side of the matrix. The data, reported in percentages for the 4, 500 students tested,
is recorded in each cell in the table. The data for question 3B, for example, shows that 76% of
the 4,500 eighth grade students correctly recorded data from their investigation in a data table
while 23% of the students did not record data in a table correctly. The matrix also shows that 1%
of the students left the question blank. In contrast, the data for question 4 show that only 34% of
the 4,500 students were able to organize their results correctly on a graph while 62% of the
students did not graph their data correctly. The matrix also shows that a 4% of the students did
not attempt to graph the data from their investigation.
Figure 7: Tally Sheet Showing Student Results for an Eighth Grade Performance Task
QuickTime and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
The information in Figures 6 and 7 allow teachers to use data from a summative test to inform
instruction and improve student learning. Teachers can identify specific areas where students are
experiencing difficulty and target their instruction to address these areas. This allows teachers to
use results from a summative test in a formative manner. Furthermore, research shows that when
teachers identify specific student weaknesses and target their instruction using metacognitive
teaching strategies to address those weaknesses, student achievement improves significantly. xlii
20

Assessment data should be drawn from multiple sources and triangulated. Triangulation is a
technique of using data from three different sources to determine student achievement of specific
content. Three different sources of data provide teachers three different perspectives of student
work and understanding of that content, making their inferences about student understanding
more reliable.
The Logic Model for Assessment in Figure 8 shows a graphic representation for triangulating
data from pre-posttests, formative and summative assessments, and the state Content Standards
Test.
In this model, the grey box in the middle represents the formative and summative assessments
that take place during the course of standards-based instruction throughout the school year. At
the start of instruction in the fall, the teacher administers a pretest to determine students’ prior
knowledge of the science concepts for that particular grade level. In this scenario, the school is
participating in a CaMSP and required to pre- and posttest students. Throughout the course of the
year, the teacher engages in continuous formative and summative assessment. In the spring, the
teacher administers the California Standards Test for science and at the end of the year, the
posttest is administered.
The model shows that the intent of the data from the pre- and posttest and the CST is to: see how
well students are achieving the Science Content Standards; determine if the school is meeting its
state performance targets in science; investigate program effects between the schools
participating in the CaMSP; to determine program impact; and to inform local and state
evaluators.
The model also shows that data from all assessments are triangulated to form a culminating body
of evidence. At a larger grain size, the results of the culminating body of evidence are used to
inform and guide instruction, inform and guide professional development, plan instruction,
allocate resources, and to disseminate findings of what worked to the larger learning network.
21

Figure 8: Logic Model for Assessment
QuickTime and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
22

VI. Assessing English Learners and Special Needs students
Inclusiveness of Assessments
The principles of universal design help to make assessments accessible to all students. The
application of universal design principles to the development of classroom assessments will: xliii
• Allow for the widest range of student participation, including students with
disabilities and English Language Learners (ELL)
• Ensure that the assessments themselves are not obstacles to improved learning
• Provide valid inferences about the performance of all students
• Provide each student a comparable opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of
the content tested
The seven elements of universally designed assessments include:
1. Inclusive assessment population—addresses the context of the entire student population
to be assessed. California classrooms include students with different cognitive, cultural,
and linguistic backgrounds. These students represent a wide range of skills, abilities, and
diverse learning needs.
2. Precisely designed construct—recommends that all assessments are designed to measure
what they intend to measure. Formative and summative assessments at all grade levels
need to closely align to the intent and content of the standards.
3. Accessible, non-biased items—maintains that all items used in classroom assessment are
not biased against any groups of students.
4. Amenable to accommodations—addresses the use of appropriate accommodations during
testing. While experts maintain that universally designed assessments will be accessible
to most students, some students will still require accommodations. These
accommodations can include: alternate settings (alternate rooms, non-school settings,
special lighting, furniture, and/or acoustics, other school personnel); scheduling and
timing (to correspond with medical or learning needs, short breaks, extended time);
presentation formats (Braille, large print, signing directions, translation, underlining
words/phrases, visual magnification or reduction, acetate shields); and response formats
(use of word processor, typewriter, computer, adult transcription, Brailler, student
dictation).
5. Simple, clear, and intuitive instructions and procedures—maintains that students should
respond to a task in the manner that the test developer intended. Regardless of a student’s
ability, language skills, knowledge, or experience, test directions and instructions need to
be simple, clear, consistent, and easy to understand.
6. Maximum readability and comprehension—focuses on the use of vocabulary and
sentence complexity appropriate for an intended grade level. Research is showing that
linguistic simplification of vocabulary—the use of plain language—can benefit all
students, including students with limited English proficiency. Plain language strategies
23

include: reducing wordiness and removing irrelevant material; eliminating unusual or low
frequency words; avoiding ambiguous and irregularly spelled words; avoiding proper
names; avoiding inconsistent naming and graphic conversions; and marking all questions.
7. Maximum legibility—refers to clear, uncomplicated, and legible text, graphs, tables, and
graphics, and response formats.
English Language Learners
Science teachers who assess English learners will need to insure that these learners have a
reasonable way to communicate what they are learning. Language barriers in the testing process
need to be modified so that the focus of the assessment is on science learning, not on the mastery
of English. xliv
A variety of accommodations can be implemented that can make assessments fair for English
learners. These accommodations should address the same content standards for all students
while, at the same time, offering students different ways of performing that respects their
differences and yields accurate results. Accommodations are intended to elicit the most accurate
information about what students know and can do without providing an unfair advantage to
students who do not receive an accommodation. xlv
The table in Figure 9 below describes common testing accommodations that teachers may use in
their classrooms with English learners. These accommodations can be used with formative and
summative assessments. xlvi
Figure 9: Assessment Accommodations for English Learners
Test Accommodations
Extra Time
Word Walls, Glossaries,
Dictionaries
Notes in Primary Language
Models & Rubrics
Enhanced Test Directions
Checklists
Oral Responses
Purpose or Use
Extra time is required to read and understand test questions. English
learners need to engage in extra thinking to respond to questions in
English.
Word walls created during instruction provide reference during
assessment so English learners can communicate understanding
easier. Use English and/or bilingual dictionaries when appropriate.
Student notes from instruction in their primary language helps them to
produce answers they know in their primary language.
Provide models of expected work for students who have not
experienced the type of assessment before. Preview the rubric that will
be used to score student work. Previewing models and rubrics before
an assessment helps students understand assessment objectives.
Read directions aloud and rephrase them so that students know what
is expected. Simplify test directions as much as possible—one step at
a time—allowing students to respond in between steps. Use checklists
for directions.
Test anxiety can make communication in English more difficult. Allow
English learners to give oral responses. Prompt students individually
and scaffold the conversation to elicit meaningful responses. Provide
support for constructed response items with sentence frames for
24

Illustrations, Graphic Organizers
Hands-on Activities
Language Conventions
Small Groups
written answers.
Allow students to express ideas with labeled drawings, diagrams or
graphic organizers. Ask students to follow up with oral explanations or
demonstrations.
Have students perform an activity or experiment and tell what they are
doing and thinking. Orally prompt students as needed.
Focus on student understanding of science content during a science
assessment and ignore language conventions. Address language
conventions during instruction.
Administer assessments to small groups of English learners using
prompts and scaffolds and allowing for oral responses.
Special Needs Students
Students with special needs should have access to the same content standards curriculum and
high quality instruction as students without disabilities. This can be accomplished through: a)
adaptations in delivery of content to make it accessible to students’ level of understanding, and
b) differentiation in level of expectation for student achievement to focus on prioritized target
skills within that content that are both meaningful to students and build growth in academic
learning.
25

VII. The California Standards Test
The purpose of the California Standards Test (CST) is to determine students’ achievement of the
California content standards for each grade or course in science. Students’ scores are compared
to preset criteria to determine whether the students’ performance on the test is advanced,
proficient, basic, below basic, or far below basic. The state target is for all students to score at the
proficient and advanced levels. CST scores are used for calculating each school’s Academic
Performance Index (API) and Adequate Yearly Progress (APY).
The California Science Standards Tests are multiple-choice and administered annually to
students in grades five, eight, and ten. The following tables provide information about the
content and test blueprints for each grade level test.
Grade 5
Content Area Grade Level
Standards
Physical Science 5
4
Life Science 5
4
Earth Science 5
4
Investigation and
5
Experimentation
4
Grade 8
Number
of Items
Percentage on
Test
Reference Sheets
8
29 • Periodic Table of
6
Elements
7
29 • Mineral
7
Information
8
29
6
4
13
2
48 100
Content Area Content Standards Number Percentage on Reference Sheets
of Items Test
Physical Science Motion 8 13 • Periodic table of
Forces 8 13
the elements,
Structure of Matter 9 15
formulas, and
Earth in the Solar System 7 12
conversions
(Earth Science)
Reactions 7 12
Chemistry of
3 5
Living Systems
(Life Science)
Periodic Table 7 12
Density and
5 8
Buoyancy
Investigation and
6 10
Experimentation
60 100
26

Grade 10
Content Area Content Standards Number
of Items
Percentage on
Test
Life Science Cell Biology 10 17
Genetics 12 20
Ecology 11 18
Evolution 11 18
Physiology 10 17
Investigation and
6 10
Experimentation
60 100
Reference Sheets
Students in grade 10 who completed a standards-based science course take one of the tests listed
above in addition to taking the Grade 10 Life Science Test. Students in grades 9 through 11 who
completed a standards-based science course take one of the following CST’s.
Biology/Life Science
Content Area Content Standards Number
of Items
Percentage on
Test
Life Science Cell Biology 9 15.0
Genetics 19 31.6
Ecology 7 11.7
Evolution 9 15.0
Physiology 10 16.7
Investigation and
6 10.0
Experimentation
60 100
Reference Sheets
27

Chemistry
Content Area Content Standards Number Percentage on Reference Sheets
of Items Test
Physical Science Atomic & Molecular
Structure
Chemical Bonds
6
7
10.0
11.7
• Chemistry
Formulas, Units &
Constants
Conservation of Matter and 10 16.7 • Chemistry
Stoichiometry
Gases and Their Properties 6 10.0
Periodic Table of
Elements
Acids and Bases 5 8.3
Solutions 3 5.0
Chemical
5 8.3
Thermodynamics
Reaction Rates 4 6.7
Chemical
4 6.7
Equilibrium
Organic
Chemistry and
Biochemistry
2 3.3
Investigation and
Experimentation
Earth Sciences
Nuclear
Processes
2 3.3
6 10.0
60 100
Content Area Content Standards Number
of Items
Percentage on
Test
Earth Science Earth’s Place in the
12 20.0
Universe
Dynamic Earth Processes 9 15.0
Energy in the Earth System 18 30.0
Biogeochemical Cycles 5 8.3
Structure and
5 8.3
Composition of
the Atmosphere
California
5 8.3
Geology
Investigation and
6 10.0
Experimentation
60 100
Reference Sheets
28

Physics
Content Area Content Standards Number
of Items
Percentage on
Test
Physical Science Motion and forces 12 20.0
Conservation of Energy and 12 20.0
Momentum
Heat and Thermodynamics 9 15.0
Waves 10 16.7
Electric and
11 18.3
Magnetic
Phenomena
Investigation and
6 10.0
Experimentation
60 100
Reference Sheets
The California Standards Tests for Science also contain four additional tests that students can
take in conjunction with the tenth grade test. These four tests are designed to integrate/coordinate
concepts from life science, earth science, physical science, and investigation and experimentation
together.
29

VIII. Shifting Classroom Assessment “More of/ Less of Chart”
More of
The process of continuous formative and
summative assessment
Assessment data informs and guides
instruction
Students have clarity of learning goal(s)
Students receive descriptive feedback
Teacher selects unbiased and fair assessment
tools for a purpose
Teachers use multiple measures to assess
student understanding
Less of
Assessment only for grading
Assessment data not used for instruction
Students have limited to no knowledge of
learning goal(s)
Students receive a grade or non-descriptive
feedback
Teacher uses assessment tools without
consideration of bias, fairness, or purpose
Teachers only use multiple-choice questions
IX. Conclusion
The ultimate goal of assessment is to improve student understanding and achievement of
important and meaningful science. It is also for students to develop inquiry skills and habits of
mind that will enable them to become fully proficient in science.
30

References
i Shepard, L.A. (2005). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Paper presented at ETS Invitational
Conference, The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York.
ii Popham, J.W. (2000). Modern Educational Measurement. Practical Guidelines for Educational Leaders.
Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
iii National Research Council. (2001). Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education
Standards. Committee on Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
iv Shepard, L.A. (2005). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Paper presented at ETS Invitational
Conference, The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York.
v National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Committee on
Science Education Standards and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
vi Shepard, L.A. (2005). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Paper presented at ETS Invitational
Conference, The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York.
vii National Research Council. (2001). Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education
Standards. Committee on Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
viii Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day
by Day. Educational Leadership, 63(3).
ix National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Committee on
Science Education Standards and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
x Shepard, L.A. (2005). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Paper presented at ETS Invitational
Conference, The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York.
xi Shepard, L.A. (2005). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Paper presented at ETS Invitational
Conference, The future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York.
xii Popham, J.W. (2008). Transformative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
xiii Wiliam, D. (2007). Changing Classroom Practice. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 36-42.
xiv Wiliam, D. (2007). Chapter 9, Content Then Process: Teacher Learning Communities in the Service of
Formative Assessment. Solution Tree. P.191.
xv Wiliam, D. (2007). Chapter 9, Content Then Process: Teacher Learning Communities in the Service of
Formative Assessment. Solution Tree.
31

xvi National Research Council. (2001). Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education
Standards. Committee on Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
xvii Black, P. (2004). The Nature and Value of Formative Assessment for Learning. (Draft paper). Kings
College, London.
xviii Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D.J., Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom Instruction that Works. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
xix Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback
conditions on motivational perceptions, interests and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology,
79(4), 474-482.
xx Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D.J., Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom Instruction that Works. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
xxi Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science,
18, 119-144.
xxii Black, P. (2004). The Nature and Value of Formative Assessment for Learning. (Draft paper). Kings
College, London.
xxiii Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science,
18, 119-144.
Black, P. (2004). The Nature and Value of Formative Assessment for Learning. (Draft paper). Kings
College, London.
xxiv Foster, G., Sawicki, E., Schaeffer, H., Zelinski, V. (2002). I Think, Therefore I learn! Ontario, Canada:
Pembroke.
xxv Black, P. (2004). The Nature and Value of Formative Assessment for Learning. (Draft paper). Kings
College, London.
xxvi Wiliam, D. (2007). Chapter 9, Content Then Process: Teacher Learning Communities in the Service of
Formative Assessment. Solution Tree. P.192-194.
xxvii Wiliam, D. (2007). Chapter 9, Content Then Process: Teacher Learning Communities in the Service of
Formative Assessment. Solution Tree. P.192-194.
xxviii Wiliam, D. (2007). Changing Classroom Practice. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 36-42.
xxix Wiliam, D. (2007). Changing Classroom Practice. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 36-42.
xxx Wiliam, D. (2007). Changing Classroom Practice. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 36-42.
xxxi National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Committee on
Science Education Standards and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32

xxxii Stiggins, R. (2005). Measuring Up. PL October 2005. [Need to find complete reference.]
xxxiii Stiggins, R. (2005). Measuring Up. PL October 2005. [Need to find complete reference.]
xxxiv Stiggins, R. (2005). Measuring Up. PL October 2005. [Need to find complete reference.]
xxxv Stiggins, R. (2005). Measuring Up. PL October 2005. [Need to find complete reference.]
xxxvi National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Committee on
Science Education Standards and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
xxxvii Popham, J.W. (2002). Classroom Assessments. What Teachers Need to Know. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
xxxviii Popham, J.W. (2002). Classroom Assessments. What Teachers Need to Know. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
xxxix ETS {Need to find reference.]
xl National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Committee on
Science Education Standards and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
xli Georghiades, P. (2004). From the general to the situated: Three decades of metacognition.
International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365 – 383.
xlii Comfort, K. B., Klein, S., Bolus, R. (2005). Research in standards-based science assessment:
Iinvestigating teacher understanding and use of science assessment data. Unpublished
manuscript.
xliii Thompson, S. J., Johnstone, C. J., & Thurlow, M. L. (2002). Universal design applied to large-scale
assessments (Synthesis Report 44). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on
Educational Outcomes.
xliv Carr, J., Sexton, U., & Lagunoff, R. (2007). Making Science accessible to English Learners. San
Francisco, CA: WestEd
xlv Carr, J., Sexton, U., & Lagunoff, R. (2007). Making Science accessible to English Learners. San
Francisco, CA: WestEd
xlvi Carr, J., Sexton, U., & Lagunoff, R. (2007). Making Science accessible to English Learners. San
Francisco, CA: WestEd
33