# Towards a Didactic Model for Assessment Design in Mathematics Education

## Abstract

In this chapter we compare and contrast the didactic and psychometric models of assessment design. We begin with background information and an introduction to assessment, and then the relationship between the goals of mathematics education and assessment is presented. This relationship is made explicit by exhibiting two assessment problems, each reflecting a different way of thinking about mathematics education. The primary objections to the current way of assessing students, and alternatives that have been developed for it, are next presented. We then present a theoretical perspective on the psychometric approach, followed by some recent developments regarding this assessment model Here we arrive at the crucial issue in this chapter, namely, the need to extend assessment design in mathematics education via a didactic model. The consequences of the psychometric requirements and assumptions for mathematics education are presented and discussed. Importantly, we discuss how we can overcome certain misconceptions that inhibit an approach to assessment which is aligned with the new way of thinking about mathematics education. Finally, we present examples of assessment problems that represent a didactic model of assessment design. The chapter concludes with a reference to Freudenthal and his concept of mathematics as a human activity. The approach to assessment in the chapter, and the examples that exemplify it, are identified as consistent with Freudenthal ’s thinking.

## Keywords

Mathematics Education Test Item Classroom Teacher Local Independence Classroom Assessment## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- American Educational Research Association/American Psychological Association/National Council on Measurement in Education (1999).
*Standards for educational and psychological testing*. Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar - Apple, M. (1995). Taking power seriously: New directions in equity in mathematics and beyond. In W. G. Secada, E. Fennema & L. B. Adajian (Eds.),
*New directions for equity in mathematics education*(pp. 329–348). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar - Baker, E. L., O’Neil Jr, H. F., & Linn, R. L. (1993). Policy and validity prospects for performance-based assessment.
*American Psychologist*,*48*(12), 1210–1218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Baxter, G. P., & Junker, B. (2001, August).
*Designing cognitive-developmental assessments: A case**study in proportional reasoning*. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education, April, Seattle, Washington.Google Scholar - Becker, J. P., & Seiter, C. (1996). Elementary school practices. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.),
*International handbook of mathematics education*(pp. 511–564). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Becker, J. P., & Shimada, S. (1997).
*The open-ended approach — A new proposal for teaching**mathematics*. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Berlak, H., Newmann, F. M., Adams, E., Archbald, D. A., Burgess, T., Raven, J., & Romberg, T. A. (1992).
*Toward a new science of educational testing and assessment*. Albany, NJ: SUNY Press.Google Scholar - Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment.
*Phi Delta Kappan*,*80*(2), 139–148.Google Scholar - Buros, O. (1977). Fifty years in testing: Some reminiscences, criticisms, and suggestions.
*Educational**Researcher*,*6*(1), 9–15.Google Scholar - Casas, F. R., & Meaghan, D. E. (2001). Renewing the debate over the use of standardized testing in the evaluation of learning and teaching.
*Interchange*,*32*(2), 147–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Cizek, G. J. (1993a). Rethinking psychometricians’ beliefs about learning.
*Educational Researcher*,*22*(4), 4–9.Google Scholar - Cizek, G. J. (1993b). The place of psychometricians’ beliefs in educational reform: A rejoinder to Shepard.
*Educational Researcher*,*22*(4), 14–15.Google Scholar - Clarke, D. (1996). Assessment. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.),
*International handbook of mathematics education*(pp. 327–370). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Clements, M. A. (1999). Education policy, education research, and the development of mathematics teachers. In N. F. Eilerton (Ed.),
*Mathematics teacher development: International perspectives*(pp. 217–246). Perth, Western Australia: Meridian Press.Google Scholar - Clements, M. A., & Eilerton, N. F. (1996).
*Mathematics education research: Past, present and future.*Bangkok: UNESCO.Google Scholar - Collis, K. F. (1992). Curriculum and assessment: A basic cognitive model. In G. C. Leder (Ed.),
*Assessment and learning of mathematics*(pp. 24–45). Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar - Collison, J. (1992). Using performance assessment to determine mathematical dispositions.
*Arithmetic Teacher*,*39*(6), 40–47.Google Scholar - De Corte, E., Greer, B., & Verschaffel, L. (1996). Mathematics teaching and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.),
*Handbook of educational psychology*. New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan.Google Scholar - De Lange, J. (1987).
*Mathematics, insight and meaning*. Utrecht, The Netherlands: OW&OC, Utrecht University.Google Scholar - De Lange, J. (1992). Critical factors for real changes in mathematics learning. In G. C. Leder (Ed.),
*Assessment and learning of mathematics*(pp. 305–329). Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar - De Lange, J. (1999).
*Framework for classroom assessment in mathematics*. Madison, WI: NICLA/WCER.Google Scholar - Elmore, R. F. (2002). Testing trap: The single largest — and possibly most destructive — Federal intrusion into America’s public schools.
*Harvard Magazine (Alumni)*,*105*(1), 35.Google Scholar - Fiske, E. B. (1997, May 1). America’s test mania.
*New York Times (Education Supplement)*, 19.Google Scholar - Freudenthal, H. (1973).
*Mathematics as an educational task*. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar - Froese-Germain, B. (2001). Standardized testing + High-stakes decisions = Educational inequity.
*Interchange*,*32*(2), 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Glaser, R. (1986). The integration of instruction and testing. In
*The redesigning of testing for the 21st**century. Proceedings from the 6th Annual Invitational Conference of the Educational Testing Service,*26 October 1985.Google Scholar - Grouws, D. A., & Meier, S. L. (1992). Teaching and assessment relationships in mathematics instruction. In G. C. Leder (Ed.),
*Assessment and learning of mathematics*(pp. 83–106). Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar - Haney, W., & Madaus, G. (1989). Searching for alternatives to standardized tests: Whys, whats, and whithers.
*Phi Delta Kappan*,*70*, 683–687.Google Scholar - Hashimoto, Y., & Becker, J. P. (1999). The open approach to teaching mathematics — Creating a culture of mathematics in the classroom: Japan. In L. J. Sheffield (Ed.),
*Developing mathematically**promising students*(pp. 101–119). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Herman, J. L., & Winters, L. (1994). Portfolio research: A slim collection.
*Educational Leadership, 52*(2), 48–55.Google Scholar - Keitel, C, & Kilpatrick, J. (1999). The rationality and irrationality of international comparative studies. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna & I. Huntley (Eds.),
*International comparisons in mathematics education*(pp. 241–256). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar - Kilpatrick, J. (1993). The chain and the arrow: From the history of mathematics assessment. In M. Niss (Ed.),
*Investigations into assessment in mathematics education: An ICMI study*(pp. 31–46). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Kohn, A. (2000).
*The case against standardized testing*. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar - Kohn, A. (2001). Learning is threatened by specific, measurable, uniform mandates.
*Education Week*,*21*(4), 38 and 52.Google Scholar - Krutetskii, V. A. (1976).
*The psychology of mathematics abilities in schoolchildren*(translated by J. Teller and edited by J. Kilpatrick). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar - Lajoie, S. P. (1995). A framework for authentic assessment in mathematics. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.),
*Reform in school mathematics*(pp. 19–37). Albany: NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar - Leder, G. C. (1992). Curriculum planning + assessment = learning? In G. C. Leder (Ed.),
*Assessmen*t*and learning of mathematics*(pp. 330–344). Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar - Linn, R. L., Baker, E., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria.
*Educational Researcher*,*20*(8), 15–21.Google Scholar - McLean, L. (1982). Achievement testing — Yes! Achievement tests —
*No!, e + m Newsletter*, Ontario Institute of Education, Fall, p. 1.Google Scholar - Mummé, J. (1990).
*Portfolio assessment in mathematics*. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California.Google Scholar - Nagasaki, E., & Becker, J. P. (1993). Classroom assessment in Japanese mathematics education. In N. Webb (Ed.),
*Assessment in the mathematics classroom*(pp. 40–53). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - National Center for Fair and Open Testing (2001).
*How standardized testing damages education*. Published on the website of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing.Google Scholar - National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1997). Student catches SAT Math problem error.
*NCTM News Bulletin*, March, 4.Google Scholar - National Research Council (NRC) (1989).
*Everybody counts*. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar - Niss, M. (Ed.) (1993).
*Cases of assessment in mathematics education. An ICMI study*. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Osterlind, S. J. (1998).
*Constructing test items*. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.) (2001).
*Knowing what students know: The**science and design of educational assessment*. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar - Pipho, C. (1985). Tracking the reform, part 5: Testing — Can it measure the success of the reform movement?
*Education Week*, 22 May, 19.Google Scholar - Popham, W. J. (1978). C
*riterion-referenced measurement*. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar - Popham, W. J. (1987). The merits of measurement-driven instruction.
*Phi Delta Kappan*,*68*, 679–682.Google Scholar - Popham, W. J. (2001). Standardized achievement tests: misnamed and misleading.
*Education Week*,*21*(3), 46.Google Scholar - Resnick, L. B. (1982). History of educational testing. In A. K. Wigdor & W. R. Garner (Eds.),
*Ability**testing: Uses, consequences, and controversies, part 2: Documentation section*(pp. 173–194). Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar - Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B. R. Gifford & M. C. O’Connor (Eds.),
*Changing assessments: Alternative views of attitude,**achievement and instruction*(pp. 37–75). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Romberg, T. A. (1992). Evaluation: A coat of many colors. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.),
*Mathematics**assessment and evaluation: Imperatives for mathematics educators*(pp. 10–36). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar - Romberg, T. A. (1995).
*Reform in school mathematics and authentic assessment*. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar - Romberg, T. A., Zarinnia, E. A., & Collis, K. F. (1990). A new world view of assessment in mathematics. In G. Kulm,
*Assessing higher order thinking in mathematics*(pp. 21–38). Washington, D. C.: AAAS.Google Scholar - Salmon-Cox, L. (1981). Teachers and standardized achievement tests: What’s really happening?
*Phi**Delta Kappan*,*62*(9), 631–634.Google Scholar - Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. (1997).
*The foundations of educational effectiveness*. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd.Google Scholar - Shafer, M. C, & Romberg, T. A. (1999). Assessment in classrooms that promote understanding. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.),
*Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding*(pp. 159–183). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar - Shepard, L. A. (1988, April).
*Should instruction be measurement-driven?*A debate. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April, New Orleans.Google Scholar - Shepard, L. A. (1991). Pychometricians’ beliefs about learning.
*Educational Researcher*,*20*(1), 2–16.Google Scholar - Shepard, L. A. (1993). The place of testing reform in educational reform: A reply to Cizek.
*Educational**Researcher*,*22*(4), 10–13.Google Scholar - Shepard, L. A. (2000a).
*The role of assessment in teaching and learning*. Santa Cruz, CA: CRESST/CREDE, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar - Shepard, L. A. (2000b). The role of assessment in a learning culture.
*Educational Researcher*,*29*(1), 4–14.Google Scholar - Shimada, S. (1977) (Ed.).
*The open-ended approach in arithmetic and mathematics — A new proposal**toward teaching mathematics*, Mizuumishobo, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).Google Scholar - Sproull, L., & Zubrow, D. (1981). Standardized testing from the administrative perspective.
*Phi Delta**Kappan*,*62*(9), 628–631.Google Scholar - Stake, R. E. (1995). The invalidity of standardised testing for measuring mathematics achievement. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.),
*Reform in school mathematics — and authentic assessment*(pp. 173–235). State University of New York, New York.Google Scholar - Stake, R. E., Cole, C, Sloane, F, Migotsky, C, Flores, C, Merchant, M., Miron, M., & Medley, C. (1994).
*The Burden: Teacher professional development in Chicago school reform*. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois.Google Scholar - Stephens M., Clarke, D. J., & Pavlou, M. (1994). Policy to practice: High stakes assessment as a catalyst for classroom change. In G. Bell, B. Wright, N. Leeson & J. Geake (Eds.),
*Challenges in**mathematics education: Seventeenth Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group**of Australasia*(pp. 571–580). Lismore, Australia: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.Google Scholar - Streefland, L., & Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (1999). Uncertainty: A metaphor for mathematics education.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior*,*27*(4), 393–397.Google Scholar - Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (1995). Toetsen bij reken-wiskundeonderwijs. In L. Verschaffel & E. de Corte (Eds.),
*Naar een nieuwe reken/wiskundedidactiek voor de basisschool en de basiseducatie*(pp. 196–246). Brussels, Deel 1, StOHO.Google Scholar - Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (1996).
*Assessment and realistic mathematics education*. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, CD-β Press.Google Scholar - Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (1997).
*Bananentoets. een onderzoek naar het schattend**vermenigvuldigen met kommagetallen*(internal publication). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University.Google Scholar - Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Fosnot, C. T. (2001). Assessment of mathematics achievements: Not only the answers count. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.),
*Proceedings of the 25th Conference of**the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education*(Vol. 4, pp. 335–342). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University.Google Scholar - Wassermann, S. (2001). Quantum theory, the uncertainty principle, and the alchemy of standardized testing.
*Phi Delta Kappan*,*83*(1), 28–40.Google Scholar - Watson, A. (1999). Paradigmatic conflicts in informal mathematics assessment as sources of social inequity.
*Educational Review*,*51*(2), 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Watson, A. (2000). Mathematics teachers acting as informal assessors: Practices, problems and recommendations.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*41*, 69–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Webb, D. C. (2001).
*Instructionally embedded assessment practices of two middle grades mathematics**teachers*. Unpublished dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.Google Scholar - Webb, N. L. (1992). Assessment of students’ knowledge of mathematics: Steps toward a theory. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.),
*Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning*(pp. 661–683). NCTM/Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar - Webb, N. L. (1993). Visualizing a theory of the assessment of students’ knowledge of mathematics. In M. Niss (Ed.),
*Investigations into assessment in mathematics education: An ICMI study.*Dordrecht (pp. 31–46). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Wiggins, G. (1989a). Teaching to the (authentic) test.
*Educational Leadership*,*46*(1), 41–47.Google Scholar - Wiggins, G. (1989b). A true test: Towards more authentic and equitable assessment.
*Phi Delta Kappan*,*70*(9), 703–713.Google Scholar - Wiliam, D., & Black, P. (1996). Meanings and consequences: A basis for distinguishing formative and summative functions of assessment?
*British Educational Research Journal*,*22*, 537–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Wilson, M., & Sloane, K. (2000). From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system.
*Applied Measurement in Education*,*13*(2), 181–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Wolf, D. P. (1989). Portfolio assessment: Sampling student work.
*Educational Leadership*,*46*(1), 35–39.Google Scholar