Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Bridging Research and Practice in Science Education pp 325–337Cite as

A Design-Based Process in Characterizing Experienced Teachers’ Formative Assessment Enactment in Science Classrooms

Part of the Contributions from Science Education Research book series (CFSE,volume 6)

Abstract

Formative assessment can facilitate teachers’ abilities to elicit and notice the disciplinary substance of students’ thinking and to respond based on this. Following a design-based process, we developed principled practical knowledge to create resources that might guide experienced teachers in examining their formative assessment practice and provide researchers with tools to study formative assessment enactment. Starting with the outcomes of the first cycle to generate a generalizable explanatory model, we describe the process of our second cycle, which resulted in a practical guide and research tool. The complexity, challenges, and major learnings of the design-based process are highlighted. Implications for teachers’ professional development are discussed.

Keywords

  • Formative assessment
  • Design-based research
  • Research-practice interactions

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., & Weis, A. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Horizon Research, Inc. (NJ1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85(5), 536–553. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1022.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (2014). Principled practical knowledge: Not a bridge but a ladder. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.812533.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Capps, D. K., Shemwell, J. T., & Young, A. M. (2016). Over reported and misunderstood? A study of teachers’ reported enactment and knowledge of inquiry-based science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 38(6), 934–959. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1173261.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Clinchot, M., Ngai, C., Huie, R., Talanquer, V., Lambertz, J., Banks, G., … & Sevian, H. (2017). Better formative assessment. The Science Teacher, 84(3), 69–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(10), 1109–1136. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20440.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Colestock, A., & Sherin, M. G. (2015). What teachers notice when they notice student thinking: Teacher identified purposes for attending to student thinking. In A. Robertson, R. Scherr, & D. Hammer (Eds.), Responsive science teaching (pp. 126–144). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_2.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dini, V., Sevian, H., Caushi, K., & Orduña Picón, R. (2019). Characterizing the formative assessment enactment of experienced science teachers (Manuscript submitted for publication).

    Google Scholar 

  • Furtak, E., Morrison, D., & Kroog, H. (2014). Investigating the link between learning progressions and classroom assessment. Science Education, 98(4), 640–673. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21122.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lineback, J. E. (2015). The redirection: An indicator of how teachers respond to student thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(3), 419–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.930707.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, J., & Robertson, A. D. (2016). A review of the research on responsive teaching in science and mathematics. In A. Robertson, R. Scherr, & D. Hammer (Eds.), Responsive science teaching (pp. 36–155). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K., & Garnier, H. (2007). What science teaching looks like: An international perspective. Educational Leadership, 64(4), 16–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers’ informal formative assessment practices and students’ understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 57–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20163.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stroupe, D. (2017). Ambitious teachers’ design and use of classrooms as a place of science. Science Education, 101(3), 458–485. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21273.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Szteinberg, G., Balicki, S., Banks, G., Clinchot, M., Cullipher, S., Huie, R., … & Sevian, H. (2014). Collaborative professional development in chemistry education research: Bridging the gap between research and practice. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(9), 1401–1408. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed5003042.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 52(5), 585–609. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21209.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, I. R., Pasley, J. D., Smith, P. S., Banilower, E. R., & Heck, D. J. (2003). Looking inside the classroom. Chapel Hill: Horizon Research Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072002131.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Ambitious science teaching. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Pub Group.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by US NSF award DRL-1621228. The authors recognize the contributions of the other members of the design team whose work is described here: Scott Balicki, Gregory Banks, Michael Clinchot, Robert Huie, Rebecca Lewis, Pamela Pelletier, Raúl Orduña Picón, and Holly Rosa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Science and Mathematics, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA

    Hannah Sevian & Vesal Dini

Authors
  1. Hannah Sevian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vesal Dini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannah Sevian .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CASTeL, School of Physical Sciences, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

    Eilish McLoughlin

  2. CASTeL, School of Chemical Sciences, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

    Odilla E. Finlayson

  3. Department of Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Sibel Erduran

  4. EPI-STEM, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    Peter E. Childs

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sevian, H., Dini, V. (2019). A Design-Based Process in Characterizing Experienced Teachers’ Formative Assessment Enactment in Science Classrooms. In: McLoughlin, E., Finlayson, O.E., Erduran, S., Childs, P.E. (eds) Bridging Research and Practice in Science Education. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 6. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17219-0_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17219-0_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17218-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17219-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

search

Navigation