Advertisement

Preservice Teachers' Development and Implementation of Science Performance Assessment Tasks

  • Judith A. MorrisonEmail author
  • Amy Roth McDuffie
  • Valarie L. Akerson
Article

Abstract

Preservice teachers in a science methods course were provided instruction on performance assessment, then guided through a design and implementation process of performance assessment tasks. We assessed the effect of designing and implementing a performance assessment task on preservice teachers' understanding of standards-based assessment. The findings show that these preservice teachers improved in their understanding of assessment as a formative process as well as their science content understanding of the topic addressed in their designed task. We found that preservice teachers need to experiment with performance assessment tasks in an authentic context in order to understand the full potential and value of the task.

Keywords

field-based experience performance assessment science methods standards-based assessment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. & Mitchener, C. (1994). Research on science teacher education. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 3–44). New York: Macmillan. Google Scholar
  3. Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Google Scholar
  4. Borko, H., Mayfield, V., Marion, S., Flexer, R. & Cumbro, K. (1997). Teachers' developing ideas and practices about mathematics performance assessment: Successes, stumbling blocks, and implications for professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(3), 259–278. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Champagne, A. B. & Kouba, V. L. (2000). Writing to inquire: Written products as performance measures. In J.J. Mintzes, J.H. Wandersee & J.D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 223–248). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  6. Darling-Hammond, L. & Falk, B. (1997). Using standards and assessment to support student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 190–199. Google Scholar
  7. Dickinson, V.L., Burns, J., Hagen, E. & Locker, K.M. (1997). Becoming better primary science teachers – a description of our journey. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 295–311. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Karns, K., Hamlett, C. & Katzaroff, M. (1999). Mathematics performance assessment in the classroom: Effects on teacher planning and student problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 609–646. Google Scholar
  9. Firestone, W., Mayrowetz, D. & Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 95–113. Google Scholar
  10. Kelly, M.K. & Kahle, J.B. (1999). Performance assessment as a tool to enhance teacher understanding of student conceptions of science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA. Google Scholar
  11. McTiighe, J. (1999). Performance task blueprint. In Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (Ed.), Second performance assessment summer workshop manual (p. 39). Seattle, WA: Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Google Scholar
  12. Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  13. National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press. Google Scholar
  14. Peterson, P., Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. & Loef, M. (1989). Teachers pedagogical content beliefs in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 6(1), 1–40. Google Scholar
  15. Putnam, R. & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29, 4–15. Google Scholar
  16. Roth McDuffie, A., Akerson, V. & Morrison, J. (2003). Designing and implementing meaningful field-based assessment methods for mathematics methods courses: A theoretical framework and program description. The Mathematics Educator, 13(1), 22–32. Google Scholar
  17. Schoon, K.J. & Sandoval, P.A. (1997). The seamless field experience model for secondary science teacher preparation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(2), 127–140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shavelson, R.J., Baxter, G.P. & Pine, J. (1992). Performance assessments; political rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, 22–27. Google Scholar
  19. Shepard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14. Google Scholar
  20. Shepard, L., Flexer, R., Hiebert, E., Marion, S., Mayfield, V. & Weston, T. (1996). Effects of introducing classroom performance assessment on student learning. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 15, 7–18. Google Scholar
  21. Shymansky, J.A., Chidsey, J.L., Henriquesz, L., Enger, S., Yore, L.D., Wolfe, E.W. & Jorgenson, M. (1997). Performance assessment in science as a tool to enhance the picture of student learning. School Science and Mathematics, 97, 172–183. Google Scholar
  22. Spector, B.S. (1999). Bridging the gap between preservice and inservice science and mathematics teacher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA. Google Scholar
  23. Stenmark, J. (1991). Mathematics assessment: Myths, models, good questions, and practical suggestions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  24. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). The basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  25. Washington Commission on Student Learning (1998). Essential academic learning requirements. WA: Olympia. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Judith A. Morrison
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amy Roth McDuffie
    • 1
  • Valarie L. Akerson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Teaching and LearningWashington State UniversityRichlandU.S.A.
  2. 2.Indiana UniversityBloomingtonU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations