Advertisement

Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 419–445 | Cite as

Promoting Prospective Elementary Teachers’ Learning to Use Formative Assessment for Life Science Instruction

  • Jaime L. SabelEmail author
  • Cory T. Forbes
  • Laura Zangori
Article

Abstract

To support elementary students’ learning of core, standards-based life science concepts highlighted in the Next Generation Science Standards, prospective elementary teachers should develop an understanding of life science concepts and learn to apply their content knowledge in instructional practice to craft elementary science learning environments grounded in students’ thinking. To do so, teachers must learn to use high-leverage instructional practices, such as formative assessment, to engage students in scientific practices and connect instruction to students’ ideas. However, teachers may not understand formative assessment or possess sufficient science content knowledge to effectively engage in related instructional practices. To address these needs, we developed and conducted research within an innovative course for preservice elementary teachers built upon two pillars—life science concepts and formative assessment. An embedded mixed methods study was used to evaluate the effect of the intervention on preservice teachers’ (n = 49) content knowledge and ability to engage in formative assessment practices for science. Findings showed that increased life content knowledge over the semester helped preservice teachers engage more productively in anticipating and evaluating students’ ideas, but not in identifying effective instructional strategies to respond to those ideas.

Keywords

Preservice teacher education Formative assessment Life science 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is funded by the Spencer Foundation. However, any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors. We thank Tina Vo and anonymous reviewers for their help in thinking about these issues and their thoughtful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

References

  1. AAAS Project 2061. (2013). AAAS project 2061 science assessment website. Retrieved from assessment.aaas.org
  2. Anderson, J. L., Ellis, J. P., & Jones, A. M. (2014). Understanding early elementary children’s conceptual knowledge of plant structure and function through drawings. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13, 375–386.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barman, C. R., Stein, M., McNair, S., & Barman, N. S. (2006). Students’ ideas about plants and plant growth. The American Biology Teacher, 68(2), 73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristic of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buck, G. A., Trauth-Nare, A., & Kaftan, J. (2010). Making formative assessment discernable to pre-service teachers of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 402–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caracelli, V. J., & Greene, J. C. (1997). Crafting mixed-method evaluation designs. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 19–32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Coffey, J. E., Hammer, D., Levin, D. M., & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 1109–1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cresswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Donovan, M. S., & Bransford, J. D. (Eds.). (2005). How students learn: Science in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  12. Falk, A. (2011). Teachers learning from professional development in elementary science: Reciprocal relations between formative assessment and pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 96, 265–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Forbes, C. T., Sabel, J. L., & Zangori, L. (in press). Integrating life science content and instructional methods in elementary teacher education. The American Biology Teacher.Google Scholar
  14. Friedrichsen, P. M. (2001). Moving from hands-on to inquiry-based: A biology course for prospective elementary teachers. The American Biology Teacher, 63(8), 562–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Graham, P. (2005). Classroom-based assessment: Changing knowledge and practice through preservice teacher education. Teacher and Teacher Education, 21, 607–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grotzer, T. A., & Basca, B. B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38(1), 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haefner, L. A., Friedrichsen, P. M., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2006). Teaching with insects: An applied life science course for supporting prospective elementary teachers’ scientific inquiry. The American Biology Teacher, 68(4), 206–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haefner, L. A., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers’ developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1653–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hammer, D., Goldberg, F., & Fargason, S. (2012). Responsive teaching and the beginnings of energy in a third grade classroom. Review of Science, Mathematics, and ICT Education, 6(1), 51–72.Google Scholar
  20. Heritage, M., Kim, J., Vendlinski, T., & Herman, J. (2009). From evidence to action: A seamless process in formative assessment? Educational Measurement: Issues Practice, 28, 24–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keeley, P. (2005). Science curriculum topic study. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kohler, F., Henning, J. E., & Usma-Wilches, J. (2008). Preparing preservice teachers to make instructional decisions: An examination of data from the teacher work sample. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 2108–2117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Krall, R. M., Lott, K. H., & Wymer, C. L. (2009). Inservice elementary and middle school teachers’ conceptions of photosynthesis and respiration. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Levin, D. M., Hammer, D., & Coffey, J. E. (2009). Novice teachers’ attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 142–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., Wolfinger, R. D., & Schabenberger, O. (2006). SAS for mixed models (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
  26. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Morrison, J. A. (2013). Exploring exemplary elementary teachers’ conceptions and implementation of inquiry science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(3), 573–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  30. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards. For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  31. Nowicki, B. L., Sullivan-Watts, B., Shim, M. K., Young, B., & Pockalny, R. (2013). Factors influencing science content accuracy in elementary inquiry science lessons. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1135–1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Otero, V. K. (2006). Moving beyond the “get it or don’t” concept of formative assessment. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Otero, V. K., & Nathan, M. J. (2008). Preservice elementary teachers’ views of their students’ prior knowledge of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 497–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Rice, D. C. (2005). I didn’t know oxygen could boil! What preservice and inservice elementary teachers’ answers to ‘simple’ science questions reveals about their subject matter knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1059–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2006). Informal formative assessment and scientific inquiry: Exploring teachers’ practices and student learning. Educational Assessment, 11, 205–235.Google Scholar
  37. Shavelson, R. J., Young, D. B., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., … Yin, Y. (2008). On the impact of curriculum-embedded formative assessment on learning: A collaboration between curriculum and assessment developers. Applied Measurement in Education, 21, 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Talanquer, V., Bolger, M., & Tomanek, D. (2015). Exploring prospective teachers’ assessment practices: Noticing and interpreting student understanding in the assessment of written work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. doi: 10.1002/tea.21209 Google Scholar
  39. Talanquer, V., Tomanek, D., & Novodvorsky, I. (2013). Assessing students’ understanding of inquiry: What do prospective science teachers notice? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Weld, J., & Funk, L. (2005). “I’m not the science type”: Effect of an inquiry biology content course on preservice elementary teachers’ intentions about teaching science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaime L. Sabel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cory T. Forbes
    • 1
    • 2
  • Laura Zangori
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education, 522 Hardin Hall, College of Education and Human SciencesUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  2. 2.School of Natural ResourcesUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  3. 3.Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of EducationUniversity of Missouri-ColumbiaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations