Skip to main content

Re-Framing Testing to Better Fit Within Problem-solving Classrooms: Ways to Create and Review Tests

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Teaching and Learning Secondary School Mathematics

Part of the book series: Advances in Mathematics Education ((AME))

Abstract

We offer two alternative strategies to simply giving paper-and-pencil mathematics tests that use student thinking as a basis, which we identify as a key underpinning of teaching in problem-solving classrooms. Using student thinking as a basis refers to the idea that teaching is inseparable from, grounded in, and formed by students’ ideas. Specifically, we discuss (1) involving students in developing tests to help them prepare for writing tests and (2) reviewing test material by having students compare, analyze, and critique their classmates’ test responses and subsequently revise their own work. These two strategies are re-castings of the traditional paper-and-pencil test. Teachers can use the strategies to promote deep approaches to learning and, as a result, help students to perform better on tests.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Galbraith, P. (1993). Paradigms, problems and assessment: Some ideological implications. In M. Niss (Ed.), Investigations into assessment in mathematics education (pp. 73–86). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning I: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., Dall’Alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(3), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(93)90015-C.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C., & Parlett, M. (1974). Up to the mark: A study of the examination game. Guildford: Society for Research into Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematics success for all. Reston: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapke, T. (2016). A process of students and their instructor developing a final closed-book mathematics exam. Research in Mathematics Education, 18(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2015.1134342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapke, T. (2017). Involving students in developing math tests. Mathematics Teacher, 110(8), 612–616. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/publications/mathematics-teacher/.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapke, T., & Hall, J. (2016). Summative ~ formative: Exploring novel uses of written exams in an undergraduate mathematics course. In C. A. Shoniregun & G. A. Akmayeva (Eds.), Canada International Conference on Education (CICE-2016) proceedings (pp. 48–51). Mississauga: Infonomics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2014). What makes for powerful classrooms, and how can we support teachers in creating them? A story of research and practice, productively intertwined. Educational Researcher, 43(8), 404–412. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14554450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500099102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willingham, D. T. (2002, Summer). Allocating student study time: “Massed” versus “distributed” practice. American Educator, 26, 37–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(2), 458–477. https://doi.org/10.2307/749877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tina Rapke .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rapke, T., Hall, J., Marynowski, R. (2018). Re-Framing Testing to Better Fit Within Problem-solving Classrooms: Ways to Create and Review Tests. In: Kajander, A., Holm, J., Chernoff, E. (eds) Teaching and Learning Secondary School Mathematics. Advances in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92390-1_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92390-1_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-92389-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-92390-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics