Laying out a new vision for science assessments, a panel of the National Research Council Tuesday proposed that states design testing systems that integrate several key types of science learning, and blend classroom-based assessments with state-level 鈥渕onitoring鈥� tests and gauges of students鈥� 鈥渙pportunity to learn.鈥�
The proposal, detailed in a , offers an expert panel鈥檚 ideas on how testing should change to fully reflect the Next Generation Science Standards adopted by. The picture it paints departs markedly from current assessment practice, which tilts heavily toward students鈥� knowledge of science facts, and typically takes place in one large-scale statewide exam each spring.
Instead, to gauge student learning, the panel recommends that states obtain feedback from three sources. One is ongoing, classroom-based, or 鈥渇ormative,鈥� assessments, which would draw students into building and refining scientific models, generating and analyzing data, and creating oral and written arguments about what they鈥檙e learning.These could take the form of curricular units, student-work portfolios, tasks drawn from a district鈥檚 bank of items, or other activities.
One example of classroom-based assessment mentioned in the report shows how a teacher might ask 6th grade students to build models of air particles, and then lead them in discussion so she can ascertain what they did鈥攁nd didn鈥檛鈥攗nderstand about the scientific practices used to build them. Another shows how a 5th grade teacher could oversee an extended unit on biodiversity in the schoolyard, guiding students as they gather data, analyze it, and build arguments to interpret it.
The second source of information would be state-level 鈥渕onitoring鈥� tests that would be aimed at measuring how well students have learned the material over the course of a year, and that could be used to meet states鈥� accountability needs. The expert panel suggests that while these tests would include multiple-choice and short-essay items, they should lean as heavily as possible on performance tasks鈥攐r, at the very least, 鈥渕ulticomponent tasks.鈥� The panel urges states to consider using a matrix-sampling design for parts of their tests, in which group-level results are drawn from students taking portions, rather than the entirety, of the test.
Finally, the panel says states should collect school-level information about resources that affect students鈥� chances 鈥渢o learn science in the ways laid out in the [NRC] framework and the [new science standards],鈥� such as access to good instructional materials, the level of teachers鈥� subject-matter expertise, and instructional approaches that allow students 鈥渙f varying cultural and linguistic backgrounds鈥� to access the material. The NRC framework is a document developed by a team of experts that was designed to help guide the development of the Next Generation Science Standards.
The three dimensions of the new science standards鈥�"core ideas鈥� of the sciences, the 鈥減ractices鈥� scientists use to do their work, and 鈥渃ross-cutting concepts鈥� that connect the science disciplines鈥攕hould all be integrated into curriculum and instruction, but also into science assessment, the panel says.
鈥楾horough Rethinking鈥� of Assessment Needed
The NRC report notes that the underlying the new science standards 鈥減roposed a dramatic rethinking of science education,鈥� and 鈥渆stablished goals that cannot be achieved through tinkering,鈥� so 鈥渁 thorough rethinking鈥� of assessment is required as well. 鈥淢easuring the learning described in the NGSS will require assessments that are significantly different from those in current use,鈥� the report says.
鈥淚t will not be feasible to assess all of the performance expectations for a given grade level during a single assessment occasion,鈥� the report cautions. 鈥淪tudents will need multiple鈥攁nd varied鈥攁ssessment opportunities to demonstrate their competence on the performance expectations for a given grade level.鈥�
Putting such a new assessment system into practice will take time, and should start from the 鈥渂ottom up,鈥� with the classroom-based assessments, rather than from the 鈥渢op down,鈥� with the state-level tests, the report says. States must pay particular attention to professional development as they think about creating these new approaches to testing, it says.
The report was written by a panel of 17 national assessment and science experts drawn largerly from universities, along with a few from the private sector and from state or local education agencies. It was co-chaired by James W. Pellegrino of the University of Illinois-Chicago and Mark R. Wilson of the University of California at Berkeley.
In a series of meetings, the panel drew on input from science-instruction and assessment experts in state departments of education; leaders of PARCC and Smarter Balanced, the two federally-funded assessment consortia; and assessment organizations including WestEd, the College Board, and the National Assessment Government Board, which administers NAEP.
Funding for the report was provided by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, which also supports 91制片厂视频 Week鈥榮 coverage of 鈥渄eeper learning"; the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation; and the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
For a great look at the challenges ahead in implementing the new science standards and designing assessments for them, take a look at a two-story package that my colleagues Erik Robelen and Sarah Sparks produced earlier this year.