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.
- Formative assessment
- Design-based research
- Research-practice interactions
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Dini, V., Sevian, H., Caushi, K., & Orduña Picón, R. (2019). Characterizing the formative assessment enactment of experienced science teachers (Manuscript submitted for publication).
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.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
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.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
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.
Roth, K., & Garnier, H. (2007). What science teaching looks like: An international perspective. Educational Leadership, 64(4), 16–23.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Ambitious science teaching. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Pub Group.
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.
Editors and Affiliations
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
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
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17218-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17219-0