A Psychometric Approach to the Development of a 5E Lesson Plan Scoring Instrument for Inquiry-Based Teaching

Abstract

This research centers on the psychometric examination of the structure of an instrument, known as the 5E Lesson Plan (5E ILPv2) rubric for inquiry-based teaching. The instrument is intended to measure an individual’s skill in developing written 5E lesson plans for inquiry teaching. In stage one of the instrument’s development, an exploratory factor analysis on a fifteen-item 5E ILP instrument revealed only three factor loadings instead of the expected five factors, which led to its subsequent revision. Modifications in the original instrument led to a revised 5E ILPv2 instrument comprised of twenty-one items. This instrument, like its precursor, has a scoring scale that ranges from zero to four points per item. Content validity of the 5E ILPv2 was determined through the expertise of a panel of science educators. Over the course of five semesters, three elementary science methods instructors in three different universities collected post lesson plan data from 224 pre-service teachers enrolled in their courses. Each instructor scored their students’ post 5E inquiry lesson plans using the 5E ILPv2 instrument recording a score for each item on the instrument. A factor analysis with maximum likelihood extraction and promax oblique rotation provided evidence of construct validity for five factors and explained 85.5 % of the variability in the total instrument. All items loaded with their theoretical factors exhibiting high ordinal alpha reliability estimates of .94, .99, .96, .97, and .95 for the engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate subscales respectively. The total instrument reliability estimate was 0.98 indicating strong evidence of total scale reliability.

Appendix

5E Inquiry Lesson Plan Version 2 Rubric (5E ILPv2)

Science Learning Cycle Lesson Plan Rubric v1

0	1	2	3	4	Concepts and/or skills selected for the lesson align with National Science Education Standards and relevant state/local standards
0	1	2	3	4	The lesson plan contains objectives that are clear, appropriate, measurable, and align with the assessment/evaluation
0	1	2	3	4	Materials list is present and complete

Exploration—Phase 1 (Engage and Explore)

Engage item 1
0	1	2	3	4	The engage elicits students’ prior knowledge (based upon the objectives)
Engage item 2
0	1	2	3	4	The engage raises student interest/motivation to learn
Engage item 3
0	1	2	3	4	The engage provides opportunities for student discussion/questions (or invites student questions)
Engage item 4
0	1	2	3	4	The engage leads into the exploration
Explore item 1
0	1	2	3	4	During the explore phase, teachers present instructions
Explore item 2
0	1	2	3	4	Learning activities in the exploration phase involves hands-on/minds-on activities
Explore item 3
0	1	2	3	4	Learning activities in the exploration phase are student-centered (When appropriate, teacher questions evoke the learners’ ideas and/or generate new questions from students. Student inquiry may involve student questioning, manipulating objects, developing inquiry skills (as appropriate) and developing abstract ideas). *See back for list of typical inquiry skills
Explore item 4
0	1	2	3	4	The inquiry activities of the explore show evidence of student learning (formative/authentic assessment). *See back for a list of formative assessment methods

Invention—Phase 2 (Explain)

Explain item 1
0	1	2	3	4	There is a logical transition from the explore phase to the explain phase
Explain item 2
0	1	2	3	4	The explain includes teacher questions that lead to the development of concepts and skills (Draws upon the explore activities/or data collected during the explore activities)
Explain item 3
0	1	2	3	4	The explain includes mixed divergent and convergent questions for interactive discussion facilitated by teacher and/or students to develop concepts or skills
Explain item 4
0	1	2	3	4	The explain includes a complete explanation of the concept (s) and/or skill(s) taught
Explain item 5
0	1	2	3	4	The explain phase provides a variety of approaches to explain and illustrate the concept or skill. (For example, approaches might include but are not limited to the use of technology, virtual field trips, demonstrations, cooperative group discussions, panel discussions, interview of guest speaker, video/print/audio/computer program materials, or teacher explanations.)
Explain item 6
0	1	2	3	4	The discussions or activity during the explain phase allows the teacher to assess students’ present understanding of concept(s) or skill(s)

Expansion—Phase 3 (Elaborate and Evaluate)

Elaborate item 1
0	1	2	3	4	There is a logical transition from the explain phase to the elaborate phase
Elaborate item 2
0	1	2	3	4	The elaborate activities provide students with the opportunity to apply the newly acquired concepts and skills into new areas
Elaborate item 3
0	1	2	3	4	The elaborate activities encourage students to find real-life (every day) connections with the newly acquired concepts or skills
Evaluation item 1
0	1	2	3	4	The lesson includes summative evaluation, which can include a variety of forms/approaches. * See back for list of some methods of evaluation
Evaluation item 2
0	1	2	3	4	The evaluation matches the objectives
Evaluation item 3
0	1	2	3	4	The evaluation criteria are clear and appropriate
Evaluation item 4
0	1	2	3	4	The evaluation criteria are measurable (i.e., rubrics)

— Points

Additional Lesson Plan components:

0	1	2	3	4	Relevant safety issues are addressed. Appropriate safety equipment is delineated. Selection of materials is age appropriate
0	1	2	3	4	The time specified in each of the lesson plan phases (exploration, invention, expansion) is appropriate
0	1	2	3	4	Accommodations for students with special needs are addressed. A variety of cognitive levels is addressed throughout the lesson. The lesson is appropriate for all students
0	1	2	3	4	The lesson plan includes a bibliography. Cited works include web sites, textbooks, children’s literature, and relevant articles. Using only children’s literature is not acceptable. Multiple sources must be used for content verification

Scoring Criteria

4	Excellent	All elements of the item are present, complete, appropriate, and accurate, with rich details. Another teacher can use the plan(or phase) as written
3	Good	Most of the elements of the item are present, complete, appropriate, and accurate, with rich details. Another teacher could use the plan (or phase) with a few modifications
2	Average	Approximately half of the elements of the item are present, complete, appropriate, and accurate, with some details. Another teacher could use the plan (or phase) with modifications
1	Poor	Few of the elements of the item are present, complete, appropriate, and accurate, with few details. Another teacher would have to re-write the lesson (or phase) in order to implement the lesson
0	Unacceptable	Key elements of the item are not present. Descriptions are inappropriate. Plan lacks coherence and is unusable as written

*Typical inquiry skills—predicting, hypothesizing, observing, measuring, testing, recording, graphing, creating tables, drawing conclusions.

*Typical formative assessment methods: science journals, science notebooks, photonarratives, KWL charts, concept maps, writing assignments, art work, drawings/charts, graph, quiz, test, PowerPoint presentation, I-movie, movie, cartoons. Note that evaluation comes from the culmination of the formative assessments used during the lesson.

*Examples of appropriate experiences include the following: the use of technology, Internet field trips, field trips, hands-on/minds-on learning activities, cooperative group discussions, panel discussions, interview of guest speaker, video/print/audio/computer program materials, teacher explanations, Webquest, TrackStar, I-movie, PowerPoint.