Abstract
Current educational reform efforts emphasize the importance of developing students’ abilities to engage in a variety of science practices, including creating and using models, generating arguments, and building explanations. To achieve these goals, we need to change more than our instructional methods. It is also critical that we carefully reflect on how to modify our assessment tools to better elicit the types of understandings that we value. In this chapter, I describe a strategy we are using to develop formal formative assessments and summative assessment in a general chemistry course for science and engineering majors in the USA. These assessments seek to evaluate the extent to which students can integrate central ideas, crosscutting ways of reasoning, and core practices in making sense of relevant phenomena and in finding reasonable solutions to real problems. The benefits and challenges of our approach to the assessment of student understanding are highlighted in this chapter.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cooper, M. M., Underwood, S. M., Hilley, C. Z., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2012). Development and assessment of a molecular structure and properties learning progression. Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 1351–1357.
European Commission (EC). (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. Luxembourg: European Commission.
Laverty, J. T., Underwood, S. M., Matz, R. L., Posey, L. A., Carmel, J. H., Caballero, M. D., et al. (2016). Characterizing college science assessments: The three-dimensional learning assessment protocol. PLoS ONE, 11(9), e0162333.
National Research Council (NRC). (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2013). The next generation science standards. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Russ, R. S., Scherr, R. E., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science. Science Education, 92(3), 499–525.
Sevian, H., & Talanquer, V. (2014). Rethinking chemistry: A learning progression on chemical thinking. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(1), 10–23.
Smith, C., Wiser, M., Anderson, C., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Implications of research on children’s learning for standards and assessment: A proposed learning progression for matter and atomic-molecular theory. Measurement, 14(1&2), 1–98.
Talanquer, V. (2009). On cognitive constraints and learning progressions: The case of structure of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2123–2136.
Talanquer, V. (2016). Central ideas in chemistry: An alternative perspective. Journal of Chemical Education, 93, 3–8.
Talanquer, V. (2018a). Progressions in reasoning about structure-property relationships. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 998–1009.
Talanquer, V. (2018b). Chemical rationales: Another triplet for chemical thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 1874–1890.
Talanquer, V. (2018c). The importance of understanding fundamental chemical mechanisms. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(11), 1905–1911.
Talanquer, V., & Pollard, J. (2010). Let’s teach how we think instead of what we know. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(2), 74–83.
Talanquer, V., & Pollard, J. (2017). Reforming a large foundational course: Successes and challenges. Journal of Chemical Education, 94, 1844–1851.
Underwood, S. M., Posey, L. A., Herrington, D. G., Carmel, J. H., & Cooper, M. M. (2018). Adapting assessment tasks to support three-dimensional learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(2), 207–217.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge all the general chemistry instructors, laboratory coordinators, and graduate assistants who are and have been involved in the development and implementation of the Chemical Thinking curriculum at our institution. Support from the Association of American Universities (AAU) through their Undergraduate STEM Education Initiative is also appreciated.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Talanquer, V. (2019). Assessing for Chemical Thinking. In: Schultz, M., Schmid, S., Lawrie, G. (eds) Research and Practice in Chemistry Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6998-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6998-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-6997-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-6998-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)