Abstract
This article reports on an analysis of alignment between NY state core curricula and NY Regents tests in physics and chemistry. Both the curriculum and test were represented by a two dimensional table consisting of topics and cognitive demands. The cell values of the table were numbers of major understandings in the curriculum and points of test items in the test. The Porter alignment index was computed for each test. It was found that, overall, there was a high alignment between the NY core curriculum and the NY Regents test, and the alignment remained fairly stable from test to test. However, there were considerable discrepancies in emphases on different cognitive levels and topics between the core curriculum and the test. Issues related to the nature of alignment, and the nature and validity of content standards were raised, and implications for science curriculum and instructions were also discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AAAS (1993) Benchmarks for science literacy. Oxford University Press, New York
AAAS (2000) Designs for science literacy. Oxford University Press, New York
Aikenhead GS (2006) Science education for everyday-life: evidence-based practice. Teachers College Press, New York
Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, New York
Bhola DS, Impara JC, Buckendahl CW (2003) Aligning tests with states’ content standards: methods and issues. Edu Meas Issues Pract 22(3):21–29
CMEC (1997) Common framework of science learning outcomes. Council of Ministers of Education, Toronto
Collins A (1998) National science education standards: a political document. J Res Sci Teach 35(7):711–727
Cornbleth C (1990) Curriculum in context. London: The Falmer Press
Cornbleth C (2000) National standards and curriculum as cultural containment? In: Cornbleth C (ed) Curriculum, politics, policy, practice: cases in comparative context. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp 211–238
Curriculum Planning & Development Division, Ministry of Education (2004) Primary science syllabus. Author, Singapore
D’Agostino JV, Welsh ME, Corson NM (2007) Instructional sensitivity of a State’s standards-based assessment. Edu Assessment 12(1):1–22
Department for Education and Employment (DEE) (1999) The National Curriculum for England. HMSO (available at www.qca.org.uk/2812.html)
Doran RL, Laurenz F, Helgeson S (1994) Research on assessment in science. In: Gabel DL (ed) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. Macmillan publishing company, New York, pp 388–442
Gamoran A, Porter AC, Smithson J, White PA (1997) Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Edu Eval Policy Anal 19:325–338
Horn RAJ (2001) The question of complexity: understanding the standards movement in Texas. In: Horn RAJ, Kincheloe JL (eds) American standards: quality education in a complex world––the Texas case. Peter Lang, New York, pp 73–104
Horn RAJ (2004) Standards. Peter Lang, New York
Liu X, McKeough A (2005) Developmental growth in students’ concept of energy: an analysis of selected items from the TIMSS database. J Res Sci Teach 42(5):493–517
Liu X, Zawick J, Arnold J (in press) Using data to reform science instruction. In: Gess-Newsome J (ed) Reforming secondary science instruction. NSF monograph
National Research Council (1996) National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
National Research Council (2006) Systems for state science assessment. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Porter AC (2002) Measuring the content of instruction: uses in research and practice. Edu Res 31(7):3–14
Ravitch D (1995) National standards in American education: a citizen’s guide. Brookings Institutions Press, Washington, DC
Roberts DA, Ostman L (1998) Problems of meaning in science curriculum. Teachers College Press, New York
Roth W-M, Calabrese A (2004) Rethinking scientific literacy. RoutledgeFalmer, New York
Rothman R (2003) Imperfect matches: the alignment of standards and tests. National Research Council, Washington, DC
Schmidt WH, Wang HA, McKnight CC (2005) Curriculum coherence: an examination of us mathematiccs and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies 37(5):525–559
Thomas RM (2005) High-stakes testing: coping with collateral damage. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, NJ
The University of the State of New York (1996) Learning standards for mathematics, science and technology. The author, Albany, NY
van den Akker J (1998) The science curriculum: between ideas and outcomes. In: Tobin KG, Fraser BJ (eds) International handbook of science education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 421–447
Wang J (1998) Opportunity to learn: the impacts and policy implications. Edu Eval Policy Anal 20:137–156
Wei B, Thomas GP (2005) Rationale and approaches for embedding scientific literacy into the new junior secondary school chemistry curriculum in the people’s republic of china. Int J Sci Edu 27(12):1477–1493
Wiggins G, McTighe J (1998) Understanding by design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA
Wixson KK, Fisk MC, Dutro E, McDaniel J (2002) The alignment of state standards and assessments in elementary reading. CIERA Report #3-024. University of Michigan School of Education, Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, X., Fulmer, G. Alignment Between the Science Curriculum and Assessment in Selected NY State Regents Exams. J Sci Educ Technol 17, 373–383 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9107-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9107-5