A Sample of Classroom Assessment Instruments Attitude Inventories
A Sample of Classroom Assessment Instruments Attitude Inventories Biology Biology Self-Efficacy Instrument for Nonmajors (BSEIN). The Biology Self-Efficacy Instrument for Nonmajors is a 23-item scale that asks students to rate on a five-point scale their level of confidence in three key areas: 1) in writing and critiquing biological ideas through the use of laboratory reports; 2) in general skills used in a typical biology course (e.g., analyzing data, asking meaningful questions); and 3) in ability to apply biological concepts to every day life. Baldwin, J.A., Ebert-May, D., & Burns, D.J. (1999). The development of a college biology self-efficacy instrument for nonmajors. Science Education, 83, 397-408. Biology Attitude Scale. The biology attitude scale investigates students attitudes toward biology with 14 Likert-like questions (five points, strongly agree to strongly disagree) and eight "semantic differential" scale questions. An example of a Likert-like question used is: "Biology is fascinating and fun." An example of a "semantic differential question used is: "Biology is Cruel A B C D E Kind" (students are asked to circle the letter that reflects their view of where biology fits relative to the end points). Russell, J. & Hollander, S. (1975). A biology attitude scale. The American Biology Teacher, 37 (5), 270-273. Chemistry Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire (CAEQ). The CAEQ is a closed-ended survey that asks students to rate their attitudes about chemistry (22 items), their self-efficacy with respect to chemistry (20 items), and their learning experiences in their chemistry courses (35 items). The article below includes the CAEQ and describes the instrument development and testing. Coll, R.K., Dalgety, J., & Salter, D. (2002). The development of the Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire (CAEQ). Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 3(1),19-32. Engineering Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Attitudes Survey (PFEAS). The Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Attitudes Survey (PFEAS) is a 50 item multiple-choice survey that gathers information about incoming engineering students' attitudes in the 13 key areas. URL: http://www.engr.pitt.edu/%7Eoutcomes/# Besterfield-Sacre, M.E., Atman, C.J., & Shuman, L.J. (1998). Student Attitudes Assessment, Journal of Engineering Education, 87(2), 133-141. 17 Mathematics Questionnaire on attitudes about mathematics. This 81-item questionnaire (with 70 closed and 11 open items) asks students to answer questions regarding elements which contribute to success/failure in mathematics, perceptions of mathematics, english, and social science (as comparison), how mathematics is taught, the nature of proofs, reasoning and constructions; motivation; and personal performance. There is no discussion in the article of how the questionnaire was developed, and how it was tested for validity/reliability. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1989). Exploration of students' mathematical beliefs and behavior. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20 (4), 338-355. Modified Fennema-Sherman Scale. Elizabeth Fennema and Julia A. Sherman constructed an attitude scale in the early 1970's that capture students views on mathematics and views on gender and mathematics. . The scale consists of four subscales (i.e., set of questions that is intended to reflect a concept, like confidence): a confidence scale, a usefulness scale, a scale that measures mathematics as a male domain and a teacher perception scale. Each of these scales consists of 12 items. Six of them measure a positive attitude and six measure a negative attitude. The URL below provides the Fennema-Sherman Scale and an adaptation of the scale to science. URL: http://www.woodrow.org/teachers/math/gender/08scale.html Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. (1978). Sex-related differences in mathematics achievement and related factors: A further study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9(3), 189-203. Physics Maryland Physics Expectation (MPEX) Survey. The Maryland Physics Expectation (MPEX) survey has been developed by the Maryland Physics Education Research Group (PERG) as part of a project to study the attitudes, beliefs, and expectations of students that have an effect on what they learn in an introductory calculus-based physics course. Students are asked to agree or disagree on a five-point scale with 34 statements about how they see physics and how they think about their work in their physics course. URL: http://www.physics.umd.edu/rgroups/ripe/perg/expects/mpex.htm Redish, E.F., Steinberg, R.N., & Saul, J.M. (1998). Student Expectations in Introductory Physics. Am. J. Phys., 66, 212-224. <http://www.physics.umd.edu/rgroups/ripe/papers/expects/expects1.htm> Science Epistemological Beliefs Assessment for Physical Science (EBAPS) Instrument. The EBAPS is a forcedchoice instrument designed to assess students' epistemologies (i.e., their views about the nature of knowledge and learning) in the physical sciences. EBAPS has 30 items and most students need 15-22 minutes to complete the EBAPS. URL: http://www2.physics.umd.edu/~elby/EBAPS/home.htm . "The Idea behind EBAPS." 12 December 2001. <http://www2.physics.umd.edu/~elby/EBAPS/idea.htm>. Views About Sciences Survey (VASS). The Views About Science Survey (VASS) is designed to survey student views about knowing and learning science, and to assess the relation of these views to student understanding of science and course achievement (Grades 8-16). URL: http://modeling.la.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html. Halloun, Ibrahim. Views About Sciences Survey – VASS P20 Synopsis. 12 December 2001. http://www.inco.com.lb/halloun/VASS20Snps.PDF 18 Views on Science-Technology-Society (VOSTS). The Views on Science-Technology-Society (VOSTS) survey that investigates students' perceptions of the social nature of science and how science is conducted. The VOSTS has 114 multiple-choice questions and the multiple-choice responses are grounded in the literature and on an extended process of analyzing student comments, creating potential responses, and verifying those comments with students. (The question in the figure below is illustrative of the kinds of questions VOSTS asks.) The validity of the survey arises from its development, which is grounded in student views (Aikenhead & Ryan, 1992). URL: http://www.usask.ca/education/people/aikenhead/. Aikenhead, G., & Ryan, A. (1992). The development of a new instrument: 'Views on ScienceTechnology-Society' (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477-492. Scientific Attitude Inventory II. The SAI II asks students to rate their level of agreement on a five-point scale to 40 statements about the nature of science and potential attitudes about science, both positive and negative. An example statement is: "The laws and/or theories of science are approximations of truth and are subject to change." Moore, R.W. and Hill Foy, R.L. (1997). The scientific attitude inventory: A revision (SAI II). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 327-336. Modified Nature of Scientific Knowledge Scale (MNSKS). The Nature of Scientific Knowledge Scale (NSKS) was revised to create the MNSKS scale. The MNSKS asked students to rate their level of agreement on a five-point scale to 32 statements about four dimensions of nature of science (creativity of science, development of science, testability of science, and unity of science). As an example, one statement from the MNSKS is "A scientific theory and a work of art are similar in that they both represent creative work of people." The MNSKS does not appear in the article. Meichtry, Y. (1992). Influencing student understanding of the nature of science: Data from a case of curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 389-407 Views on the Nature of Science Questionnaire (Forms A-C). The VNOS-A, B, or C ask students write their responses to a series of between 6 and 10 questions (depending upon the form). An example question is, "Is there a difference between a scientific theory and a scientific law? Illustrate your answer with an example." Abd-El-Khalick, F., Lederman, N.G., Bell, R.L., & Schwartz, R. (2001). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Costa Mesa, CA URL: http://www.flaguide.org/tools/diagnostic/views_of_nature_questionnaire.php Statistics Survey of Attitudes Toward Statistics (SATS). The Survey of Attitudes Toward Statistics (SATS) contains 28 seven-point Likert items designed to assess four components of students' attitudes toward statistics. URL: http://www.unm.edu/~cschau/infopage.htm. Schau, C., Stevens, J., Dauphinee, T., & Del Vecchio, A. (1995). The development and validation of the Survey of Attitudes Toward Statistics. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 55 (5), 868-876. Writing Views about Writing Survey (VAWS). The VAWS is 26-item survey that asks students to rate on an eightpoint scale their attitudes and beliefs about writing and composition. The structure is based on the "contrasting alternative design" developed for to measure students' attitudes towards physics (Halloun & Hestenes, 1996). The paper that presents VAWS data does not describe testing or validation of the VAWS instrument (Rhoads et al., 1998). The authors do indicate that they will conduct validation via focus group interviews with students. The instrument was used to measure change in attitudes toward writing of students 19 enrolled in English class that was geared for students in an engineering learning community (50 students) and of students in a traditional English class (155 students). Rhoads, T.R., Duerden, S.J., & Garland, J. (1998) Views about Writing Survey - A New Writing Attitudinal Survey Applied to Engineering Students. Paper presented at the Frontiers In Education Conference, Tempe, AZ. Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1996). Views about Sciences Survey: VASS. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie98/papers/1220.pdf Classroom Environment Learning Context Questionnaire. This 50-item questionnaire investigates students' level of agreement with statements describing student's view of himself/herself and his/her education (e.g., "I enjoy courses most when they are more theoretical."). Griffith, J. V. & Chapman, D. W. (1982). LCQ: Learning context questionnaire. Davidson, North Carolina: Davidson College. Constructivist Learning Environment Questionnaire (CLES). The CLES is a 42-item questionnaire that asks students to rate on a five-point scale where and how they learn science; the extent to which their classroom environment enables them to present their own views, manage their own learning, and talk with other students about science; and their interest and motivation in the classroom. URL: http://www.letus.northwestern.edu/msta/surveys/source-documents/cles.html Tayler, P.C., Fraser, B.J., and White, L.R. (1994). CLES: An instrument for monitoring the development of constructivest learning environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Available at: http://www.letus.northwestern.edu/msta/surveys/source-documents/index.html Learning Approach Questionnaire (LAQ). This 49-item questionnaire was developed to measure students’ “preferences of using learning strategies that are consistent with either rote or meaningful learning orientations” (Bretz, 1994). Students are asked to rate their level of agreement/disagreement to 44 statements, and the remaining 5 items ask demographic information. An example item is: “I try to relate new material, as I am reading it, to what I already know on that topic.” Bretz, S.L. (1994). Learning strategies and their influence upon students’ conceptions of science literacy and meaningful learning: the case of a college chemistry course for nonscience majors. Dissertation: Cornell University. Metacognition Metacognition Awareness Inventory (MAI). The Metacognition Awareness Inventory (MAI) is a 52-item test intended to measure the metacognitive awareness. Students are asked to rate statements on a 7 point Likertlike scale (1=not at all true of me, to 7=Very true of me). The MAI includes two factors: knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition. Shraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-475. Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) is an 81-item self-report instrument that has two sections: a motivation section (31 items) and a learning strategies section (50 items). Students are asked to rate statements on a 7 point Likertlike scale (1=not at all true of me, to 7=Very true of me). The learning strategies scales incorporate the 20 metacognition construct and seek to measure rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking, metacognitive self-regulation, effort regulation, peer learining, and help seeking. Pintrich P., Smith D., Garcia T., & McKeachie W. (1991) A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Technical Report 91-B-004). The Regents of The University of Michigan. Duncan, T.G., & McKeachie, W.J. (2005). The making of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 117-128. Motivation Achievement Goal Questionnaire (ACG). The Achievement Goal Questionnaire (ACG) has 12 items that look at motivation. Three items assess mastery-approach, three items assess mastery avoidance, three items measure performance approach, and three items measure performance avoidance. Students are asked to rate statements on a 7 point Likert-like scale (1=not at all true of me, to 7=Very true of me). Elliot, A., & McGregor, H.A. (2001). A 2x2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501-519. Concept Maps Biology Using concept maps to assess declarative knowledge. The authors of the paper below used concept maps to assess lower-order knowledge and compared the concept maps against multiple-choice tests, finding high reliability and inter-rater agreement. Students were provided with a small number of terms (5-7) and had to link them in appropriate ways. For example, to "replace" a multiple-choice item which asked, "Which of the following is not a type of protozoan? A) paramecium; b) amoeba; c) Euglena; d) bacteria" (d is correct), a student would be provided with the terms (kingdom, Protozoa, Monera, Euglena, paramecium, amoeba, bacteria) and asked to draw a concept map using these terms. Three scoring rubrics were used to measure understanding and had high inter-rater agreement. Scoring rubric A assigned a "0" if students used all pertinent answers and the stem (question) on their map (and assigned a "-1" otherwise). Scoring rubric B assessed whether students linked relationships to the appropriate kingdoms in their map: a "+1" was given if they correctly linked bacteria to kingdom Monera (and not Protozoa); a "–1" was given if they incorrectly did so; and a "0" was given if the terms were not on the map. Finally, scoring rubric C was used to assess misinformation: a "–1" was given if the student linked anything incorrectly to the kingdoms, and a "0" was given otherwise. Rice, D.C., Ryan, J.M., & Samson, S.M. (1998). Using concept maps to assess student learning in the science classroom: must different methods compete? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1103-1127. Using a concept mapping to identify students' misconceptions in biology. This article presents numerous student-generated concept maps and the misconceptions that they reveal. Lavoie, D.E. (1997). Using a modified concept mapping strategy to identify students' alternative scientific understandings of biology. Paper presentation at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, Illinois. Accessible at: http://www.educ.sfu.ca/narstsite/conference/97conference/lavoie.pdf Concept maps as a diagnostic tool. The researchers in the study below investigated the sensitivity of student-generated concept maps as methods for documenting changes in student understanding. The researchers used an experimental pre/post design. Students in an elementary science methods course were randomly divided into two groups. Both sets took a "Life Zones in the Ocean" multiple-choice exam and 21 constructed concept maps on the topic at the start of the experiment. The experimental group received 45 minutes of computer instruction on the marine life zones; the control group received similar instruction on an unrelated topic. Following this, both sets took a "Life Zones in the Ocean" multiple-choice exam and constructed concept maps on the topic at the start of the experiment. The researchers found that the experimental students' concept maps were much more detailed than the control students. Example studentgenerated concept maps are provided, as is an explanation of the scoring rubric used. Wallace, J.D., & Mintzes, J.J. (1990). The concept map as a research tool: exploring conceptual change in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (10), 1033-1052. Concept Tests Astronomy ConcepTests for Astronomy. A library of ConcepTests for astronomy is available at the URL below. Users/contributers need a login id and password and can access this library by contacting Paul Green ([email protected]). URL: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~pgreen/educ/ConcepTests.html Green, P. (2002, to be published). Peer Instruction for Astronomy. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ Chemistry Journal of Chemical Education On-Line Library of Conceptual Questions (CQs). The American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Education offers a library of Conceptual Questions (or CQs) in their Journal of Chemical Education OnLine that would be useful as ConcepTest questions. The site offers questions in a variety of topics, techniques for creating CQs, and accepts submissions of CQs. URL: http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCEWWW/Features/CQandChP/CQs/CQIntro.html Chemistry ConcepTests. The ConcepTests website offers a range of conceptest questions on a variety of topics. Readers can download sets of questions on various chemistry topics in Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf) and Microsoft Word (*.doc) format. URL: http://www.chem.wisc.edu/~concept/ Landis, C.R., Ellis, A.B., Lisensky, G.C., Lorenz, J.K., Meeker, K., Wamser, C.C. Chemistry ConcepTests: A Pathway to Interactive Classrooms, Prentice Hall, Inc., in preparation. Preprints of this booklet are available; email [email protected] for more information. ConcepTests for General Chemistry. This site offers additional conceptests (without answers) for classroom use. URL: http://people.brandeis.edu/~herzfeld/conceptests.html Mathematics Better file cabinet. This site has a searchable database of questions covered in calculus classes. URL: http://betterfilecabinet.com/ 22 Physics Project Galileo: Your gateway to innovations in science education. The Project Galileo site has a variety of teaching materials that are based on research in science education. The site, maintained by Harvard Professor Eric Mazur and colleagues, includes an extensive set of resources for teaching with ConcepTests in astronomy, biology, chemistry, and physics. Physics ConcepTests are stored in a database, from which users can select sets of ConcepTests for use in their classes. URL: http://galileo.harvard.edu Mazur, E. (1997) Peer Instruction: A User's Manual; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ. Conceptual Diagnostic Tests Astronomy Astronomy Diagnostic Test (ADT). The ADT consists for 33 questions, with the first 21 questions collecting the content portion, and the final 12 questions collecting demographic information. The test can be accessed at the URL below. This site also offers comparative data by institution to the ADT question and links to research articles on the development of the ADT. URL: http://solar.physics.montana.edu/aae/adt/ Lunar Phases Concept Inventory. The LPCI was developed based upon interviews with 14 undergraduate students around their conceptual understanding of lunar phases. The LPCI consist of 14 multiple-choice items. Lindell, R.S. (2001). Enhancing College Students' Understanding of Lunar Phases. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska – Lincoln. Biology Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection (CINS). The Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection (CINS) was developed to identify student’s knowledge about natural selection, as well as their misconceptions. The 20 item multiple choice asks students to reflect on scenarios regarding Galapagos finches, Venezualan guppies, and Canary Island lizards, and select options that best reflect what an evolutionary biologist would select. Anderson, D.L., Fisher, K.M., & Norman, G.J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 952-978. Available on-line at: http://scires.educ.msu.edu/EnvironmentalLiteracy/sgnatsel/conc_inv_natsel.pdf . URL: http://www.biologylessons.sdsu.edu/CINS6_03.pdf Chemistry Chemical Concepts Inventory. The Chemical Concepts Inventory (CCI) can be used to identify chemistry misconceptions held by students. The inventory is a multiple-choice instrument composed of nonmathematical conceptual questions (22 questions total). The questions are based on commonly-observed student misconceptions about topics generally covered in the first semester of a college chemistry course. A question from the inventory appears in the figure below. URL: http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCEWWW/Features/CQandChP/CQs/ConceptsInventory/CCIIntro.ht ml Mulford, D.R. (1996). An Inventory for Measuring College Students' Level Of Misconceptions in First Semester Chemistry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University. Available at: http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/dmulford/thesis/title.html 23 Earth Science Test on students' alternative conceptions of earth and space. This article lists the common misconceptions as identified by a survey on students' alternative conceptions of earth and space. The survey was described as having 18 multiple-choice questions, but was not listed in the article. Schoon, K.J. (1992). Students' alternative conceptions of earth and space. Journal of Geological Education, 40, 209-214. Engineering The Foundation Coalition has a variety of concept inventories spanning a wide variety of areas in engineering: chemistry, circuits, computer engineering, dynamics, electromagnetics, electronics, fluid mechanics, heat transfer, materials, material strength, signals and systems, and thermodynamics. Information about these instruments can be accessed at: http://www.foundationcoalition.org/home/keycomponents/assessment_evaluation.html Environmental Science Test on the Greenhouse Effect, Ozone Depletion, and Acid Rain. This diagnostic test asks students to report "yes," "no," or "don't know" to a set of 29 research-based misconception questions about the greenhouse effect, ozone depletion, and acid rain. The survey was adopted from a questionnaire developed by Jane Dove (1996). Khalid, T. (1999). The Study of Pre-Service Teachers' Alternative Conceptions Regarding Three Ecological Issues. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, Massachusetts. <http://www.educ.sfu.ca/narstsite/conference/khalid/khalid.html> Dove, J. (1996). Student teacher understanding of the greenhouse effect, ozone layer depletion and acid rain. Environmental Education Research. 2,89-100. Mathematics Basic Skills Diagnostic Test (BSDT). The Basic Skills Diagnostic Test (BSDT) is a 24-item free-response test on basic mathematics understanding. Eleven questions (two with two parts) assess pre-algebra level (division, multiplication and ordering of numbers represented in fractions and in decimals), concept of area and volume, proportional reasoning. Eight questions assess basic algebra (concept of a variable, order of operations, simplifying expressions, particularly inappropriate cancellation, linear equations), and 3 questions assess intermediate level, concept of a function, graph of a function, concept of a logarithm. The tool can be sent to colleges and universities by contacting the author, Jerome Epstein ((718) 2603572, [email protected]). Epstein, J. "What is the real level of our students? or What do diagnostic tests really measure?" to be published. Physics Force Concept Inventory (FCI) Instrument. The Force Concept Inventory (FCI) instrument is designed to assess student understanding of the most basic concepts in Newtonian physics. This forced-choice instrument has 30 questions and looks at six areas of understanding: kinematics, Newton's First, Second, and Third Laws, the superposition principle, and types of forces (such as gravitation, friction). Each question offers only one correct Newtonian solution, with common-sense distractors (incorrect possible answers) that are based upon student's misconceptions about that topic, gained from interviews. URL: http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-158. 24 The Mechanics Baseline Test (MBT). The Mechanics Baseline Test (MBT) instrument is an advanced companion to the Force Concept Inventory (FCI). The forced-choice MBT has 26 questions that were based upon interviews with students about their misconceptions on basic topics in Newtonian mechanics. The test covers concepts in kinematics (linear and curvilinear motion), basic principles (Newtons' First, Second, and Third Laws, superposition principle, energy conservation, impulse-momentum, and work) and special forces (gravity and friction). URL: http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html. Hestenes, D. & Wells, M. (1992). A Mechanics Baseline Test. The Physics Teacher, 30, 159-165. Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM). The 32-item multiple-choice CSEM was developed to assess students' knowledge about electricity and magnetism. Maloney, D.P., O'Kuma, T.L., Hieggelke, C.J., & Heuvelen, A.V. (2001). Surveying students' conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physics, 69 (S1), S12-S23. Other diagnostic tests. Physicists are quite active in the development of diagnostic tests. A large number can be found at the North Carolina State University's Physics Education Research group at http://www.ncsu.edu/per/ and specifically at their test instruments page at www.ncsu.edu/per/TestInfo.html. There are many other Physics Education Research groups around the country. Known misconceptions in physics. Additionally, the "Student Difficulties in Physics Information Center" lists common misconceptions students have in areas of physics, as well as the research articles that have investigated/uncovered those misconceptions. URL: http://www.physics.montana.edu/physed/misconceptions/index.html Reasoning Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (revised). 12-item test asks about conservation of weight/volume, proportional thinking, probabilistic/proportional thinking, combinatorial thinking, and correlational thinking. Scores on test classify students into three groups: empirical/inductive reasoners, transitional reasoners, and hypothetical/deductive reasoners. Contact Anthony Lawson directly for tool at: [email protected] Lawson, A.E. (1987a). Classroom test of scientific reasoning: revised pencil-paper edition. Arizona State University. Interviews Biology Interviews of students' conceptions of genetics. The article provides an interview protocol, as well as excerpts from interviews, of the concepts of inheritance, genetic structure, genetic processes, and extension. Venville, G.J., & Treagust, D.F. (1998). Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 (9), 10311055. 25 Chemistry Interviews of students' conceptions of equilibrium and fundamental thermodynamics. Article provides a set of interview questions surrounding a chemical reaction and the codes used to score those interviews. Interviews provided information on the type and extent of student misconceptions regarding the first and second law of thermodynamics, among others. Thomas, P.L. & Schwenz, R.W. (1998). College physical chemistry students' conceptions of equilibrium and fundamental thermodynamics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 (10), 1151-1160. Performance Assessment Critical Thinking Performance Assessments of Critical Thinking. The article below describes the development and testing of four critical thinking performance tasks, and provides a rubric for scoring the tasks. The rubric used had high inter-rater reliability, with 95% of papers having exact or close agreement on scores between raters. Correlations of the tasks against various closed-ended critical thinking tests were low (0.25-0.30); however, high school teachers who used the tasks found them to provide good information on students' skills. Christen, R., Angermeyer, J., Davison, M., & Anderson, K. (1994). Performance assessment of critical thinking: the reflective judgment approach. Research/Practice, 2(1) Scoring Rubrics Rubrics for Oral Presentations Rubric for Oral Presentation. The scoring rubric is an adaptation of several evaluation instruments that have been demonstrated strong inter-rater reliability and validity (Carlson and Smith-Howell, 1995). Carlson, R.E., & Smith-Howell, D. (1995). Classroom Public Speaking Assessment: Reliability and Validity of Selected Evaluation Instruments. Communication Education, 44, 87-97. Quigley, B.L. (1998) Designing and Grading Oral Communication Assignments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 41-49. Rubrics for Written Presentations "Presentation Sandwich" Checklist. The "Presentation Sandwich" checklist is the mnemonic used in an introductory engineering course to describe the presentation requirements for all technical work. The checklist has two major sections: Section I concerns the Presentation Sandwich itself and Section II concerns Graphical Work. Section I has three sub-sections (A, B, and C), one concerning problem context, one concerning the technical work (i.e., the "sandwich filling"), and one concerning the discussion. Students who do not meet all of the yes/no are required to re-submit their work. Space is left for students demonstrating exemplary work. The checklist is provided to students prior to their assignment. McNeill, B., Bellamy, L., & Burrows, V. (1999). A Quality Based Assessment Process for Student Work Products. ASEE Journal of Engineering Education, 88(4). http://ceaspub.eas.asu.edu/mcneill/word_documents/papers/using_checklists_v10.doc Scoring Rubric for Evaluating Writing. Smith, K.A. (1998) Grading Cooperative Projects. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 41-49. Scoring Rubric for an Assignment which Examines a Consumer Product. The rubric shown here involves an assessment of student reports on a product (like a consumer report). These tools were originally developed by pharmacy faculty at Eastern Illinois University to develop and grade students' reports about a health-care product. 26 Hobson, E.H. (1998) Designing and Grading Written Assignments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 51-57. Scoring Rubric for Evaluating a Persuasive Argument Paper. This rubric evaluates a paper that is intended to present a persuasive argument on some topic. The rubric is divided into four categories (organization, content, usage, and mechanics), each of which is weighted to reflect the relative importance of that category. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1996). Meaningful and Manageable Assessment Through Cooperative Learning. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Computer Modeling Checklist. The "Computer Modeling" checklist is used for computer modeling assignments. This checklist has five major sections. Section I concerns the correctness of the model. Section II defines what is expected when charts are present. Section III states how Spreadsheet models must be presented. Section IV is concerned with the written responses given to the questions posed in the assignment. McNeill, B., Bellamy, L. & Burrows, V. (1999). A Quality Based Assessment Process for Student Work Products. ASEE Journal of Engineering Education, 88(4). http://ceaspub.eas.asu.edu/mcneill/word_documents/papers/using_checklists_v10.doc Scoring rubrics for projects that model a real life solution. Charles Emenaker (University of Cincinnati, Raymond Walters College) outlines two scoring rubrics for projects which require students to model a reallife situation mathematically, to interpret and to present their results. One rubric sums the score from four categories: problem understanding, problem plan, problem solution and problem presentation. The other rubric uses a "holistic" four-point scoring system and can be used for problems that require a less-detailed assessment. Emenaker, Charles E. Assessing modeling projects in calculus and pre-calculus: Two approaches. Supporting Assessment in Undergraduate Mathematics website. Accessed on 4/3/02 at http://www.maa.org/SAUM/maanotes49/116.html Rubrics for Problem Solving Rubrics for Assessing Skill in Addressing Open-Ended Problems. This rubric for the assessment of students' skills in addressing open-ended problems is founded on empirical data on the developmental process in problem solving. This four-step process is outlined in Figure 1 below. Essentially, these steps are: Step 1 -Identify the problem, relevant information, and uncertainties; Step 2 – Explore interpretations and connections; Step 3 – Prioritize alternatives and communicate conclusions; and, Step 4 – Integrate, monitor, and refine strategies for re-addressing the problem (Lynch and Walcott, 2001). The rubric measures students' skill level against each of the four steps outlined above. URL: http://www.wolcottlynch.com/index_files/page0002.html Lynch, C.L. & Wolcott, S.K. (2001). Helping your students Develop Critical Thinking skills. IDEA Paper, 37. [On-line]. Available: http://www.idea.ksu.edu/papers/Idea_Paper_37.pdf Scoring Rubric for Evaluating an Inquiry Project. This rubric can be used to evaluate an inquiry project: namely, a project in which students formulate and pursue questions using multiple sources of information and multiple investigative methods. This rubric is based on the research on the nature of inquiry in the learning of professional practitioners and is intended to give weight to the critical processes of investigation while preventing the uncontrolled factors of working in a real-world environment from counting against the student. Busching, B. (1998). Grading Inquiry Projects. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 89-96. 27 Scoring Rubric for Writing in a Mathematics Class. Annalisa Crannell (at Franklin & Marshall College) has developed writing assignments and a rubric for grading them in her mathematics classes. Rubric URL: http://server1.fandm.edu/departments/Mathematics/writing_in_math/checklist.html Assignment URL: http://www.fandm.edu/DEPARTMENTS/MATHEMATICS/writing_in_math/writing_index.html Crannell, Annalisa. (1994). How to Grade 300 Mathematical Essays and Survive to tell the Tale. PRIMUS, 4(3), 193-201. Rubrics for evaluating questions students ask. This rubric evaluates the number and type of questions students pose in thinking about a problem-based case study situation. Students were asked to read a scenario and then to write down every question they had about the scenario. The set of questions students posed were evaluated along three dimensions: Orientation (i.e., whether question is descriptive, or whether asks about potential solutions/treatments) Relation to Case Study (i.e., whether question could be answered by the case study); and Complexity (i.e., whether question involved a response that involved higher-order thinking). A metric was assigned to the questions that enabled a numeric grading of the set of questions. Dori, Y.J., & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 411-430. Rubrics for Discussions Scoring Rubric for Evaluating a Discussion Conducted via a Listserv. This rubric evaluates a list-serv discussion in four areas: mechanics (grammar), participation (five postings required per week), content, and critical thinking. One can evaluate all the posts or a random sample of posts. The selected postings are rated on the four constructs and then summed for a total score. An instructor can also create two scores from the rubric: the sum of mechanics and participation describes the students' use of technology and the sum of the content and critical-thinking ratings describes the students' content understanding. Morrison, G.R., & Ross, S.M. (1998) Evaluating Technology-Based Processes and Products. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 69-77. Scoring Rubric for Whole-Class Participation. This rubric is a holistic scoring rubric to be used in classes that use a combination of whole-class discussion with occasional small group work. A holistic scoring rubric rates student skills, attitudes, knowledge, and behavior in one score, rather than as a sum of different scores measuring specific competencies. Bean, J.C. & Peterson, D. (1998). Grading Classroom Participation. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 33-40. Rubrics for Evaluating a Portfolio Scoring Rubric for Evaluating a Portfolio. These two rubrics were developed in a course as a negotiation between the students (pre-service elementary education students) and the faculty, and were based upon the recent literature on how to grade proposals. The rubrics emphasize in particular students' growth over time, and attempt to take into consideration contextual factors that students may have faced in the class (which involved work in their field). In addition, having the students grade themselves promoted their ability to reflect on their own learning, a life long skill. Scanlan, P.A. & Ford, M.P. (1998). Grading Student Performance in Real-World Settings. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 97-105. 28 29 30 Recommended Reading List (Submitted by Conference Speakers) Alters & Nelson. 2002. Teaching Evolution in Higher Education. Evolution 56:1891-1901 Black, P. & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, policy, and practice, 5(1), 7-74. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R. Eds. (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Available on line at: http://www.nap.edu Bruer, J. T. (1993). Schools for Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cameron, W. & Chudler, E. (2003) A role for neuroscientists in engaging young minds. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4: 1-6. DeHaan, R.L. (2005) The Impending Revolution in Undergraduate Science Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14 (2): 253-269. Donovan, M. S., Bransford, Pellegrino, Eds. (2001). How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Available on line at: http://www.nap.edu Gabel, D.L., Ed. (1994). Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York: MacMillan. Klymkowsky, Garvin-Doxas & Zeilik. 2003. Bioliteracy and Teaching Efficacy: What biologists can learn from physicists. Cell Biology Education, 2:151-163 Lottridge, S.M. & Seymour, E. (1999). The Student Assessment of Learning Gains Website. [http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/salgains/instructor/default.asp] [An on-line course evaluation website] McClymer & Knoles. 1992. Ersatz Learning, Inauthentic Testing. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching 3:33-50. National Institute for Science Education, College Level 1 Team. (2002). The Field-tested Learning Assessment Guide Website. [http://www.flaguide.net] [This site provides introduction to assessment, self-instructional modules on different assessment techniques, and links to assessment instrument]. Seymour, E. (2001). Tracking the processes of change in US undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Science Education, 86, 79-105. [This article outlines the changing views on assessment and teaching and learning in science, math and technology.] Skrabanek. 1986. Demarcation of the Absurd. The Lancet No. 8487, pp. 960-61. Springer, L, Stone, M.E., & Donovan, S. (1997). Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis (NISE Research Monograph No. 11). University of Wisconsin, Madison: National Institute for Science Education [This is a meta-analysis on the impact of small groups on learning] 31 White, R. and Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. Falmer Press. Contains a chapter on the POE (Predict, Observe, Explain) Framework. Approaches to Biology Teaching (with key words and web sites) Allen, D. & Tanner, K. (2004). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Mapping the journey—Concept maps as signposts of developing knowledge structures. Cell Biology Education, 2, 133-136. Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=192451 Baines, A. T., McVey, M., Rybarczyk, B,, Thompson, J.R., & Wilkins, H. R. Mystery of the toxic flea dip: An interactive approach to teaching aerobic cellular respiration. Cell Biology Education, 3, 62-65. ... Diagnosing secondary students’ misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration ... Teaching Available at: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:Y1u5ROf4xDwJ:cellbioed.org/articles/vol3no1/pdfs/ 03-06-0022.pdf+biology+%26+misconceptions+%26+teaching+OR+learning+%22research%22 Dancy, M. H. & Beichner, R. J. (2002). But Are They Learning? Getting Started in Classroom Evaluation. Cell Biology Education, 1, 87-94. Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=128540&tools=bot Engle, D. (2004). The biological justification for transforming our teaching. Cell Biology Education, 3(4),233-234. Review of Zull, James E. The art of changing the brain: Enriching the practice of teaching by exploring the biology of learning. (Stylus Publishing. ISBN: 1-5792-2054-1. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=533124&tools=bot Feig, A. (2004). Challenge your teaching. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. 11(1), 16-19. ... ingrained learning patterns or misconceptions distilled from ... the allied departments biology, chemistry, mathematics ... learning resulting from teaching innovation ... Available at: www.anahuac.mx/medicina/archivos/dra_anafuentes.pdf Hall, A. C. & Harrington, M.E. (2003). Experimental Methods in Neuroscience: An Undergraduate Neuroscience Laboratory Course for Teaching Ethical Issues, Laboratory Techniques, Experimental Design, and Analysis. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 2(1), A1-A7. Available at: http://www.funjournal.org/results.asp?juneid=73 Kitchen, E., Bell, J.D., Reeve, S. & Sudweeks, R.R. & Bradshaw, W.S.(2003). Teaching cell biology in the large-enrollment classroom: Methods to promote analytical thinking and assessment of their effectiveness. Cell Biology Education2, 180-194. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14506506&dopt=Ab stract Khodor, J. Halme, D. G., & Walker G. C. (2004). A Hierarchical Biology Concept Framework: A Tool for Course Design, Cell Biology Education, 3, 111-121. ... erroneous answers diagnose the misconceptions held by ... effectiveness of different teaching methods ( Hake ... cellular, and developmental biology” ( Klymkowsky et ... Klymkowsky, M.W., Garvin-Doxas, K., & Zeilik, M. (2003). Bioliteracy and Teaching Efficacy: What Biologists Can Learn from Physicists, Cell Biology Education, 2, 155-161. 32 Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14506504&dopt=Ab stract Markwell, J. (2004). The human side of science education. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 32, 323-325. ... has permitted an evolution of teaching style ... material, attempt to uncover misconceptions, and orchestrate ... Morse, M. P. (2003). Preparing biologists for the 21st century. BioScience, 53 (1), 10. ... students enter our classrooms with misconceptions about the ... is deeper when students learn biology by acting ... agrees that the most effective teaching strategy is … Staub, N.L. (2002). Teaching evolutionary mechanisms. Genetic drift and M&Ms, Bioscience 52(4), 373377. ... Teaching Evolutionary Mechanisms: Genetic Drift and M&M's. ... to correct such misconceptions about evolution ... Sundberg, M.D. (2002). Assessing student learning. Cell Biology Education, 1, 11-15. ... once had two large sections of nonmajor biology students (more ... categories ranging from common misconceptions about the ... learning to our classroom teaching as we ... Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=12587030 Tanner, K., Chatman, L.S. & Allen, D. (2003). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Cooperative learning in the science classroom – Beyond students working in groups. Cell Biology Education, 2, 1-5. Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=152788&tools=bot Tanner, K. & Allen, D. (2004). Approaches to biology teaching and learning: From assays to assessments—On collecting evidence in science teaching. Cell Biology Education, 3, 69-74. Tanner, K. & Allen, D. (2005). Moving from knowing facts toward deep understanding through conceptual change. Cell Biology Education, 4(2), 112-117. ... a longitudinal study of conceptual change in biology. ... tests to evaluate students' misconceptions in science ... Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning ... Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1103711#N0x88e6dc0.0x840c45c Tidon, R. & Lewontin, R. C. (2004) Teaching evolutionary biology. Geneics and Molecular Biology, 27 (1), 124-131. … Issues related to biological misconceptions, curriculum and didactic material are discussed, and some proposals are presented with the objective of aiding .... (2004). 33 Cooperative/Collaborative/Group Learning: L. D. Fink. (2002) Beyond small Groups: Harnessing the extraordinary power of learning teams. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L.D. Find (Eds). Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups, Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom, 2nd ed. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Millis, Barbara J. and Cottell, Philip G., Jr. (1998). Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty. American Council on Education. Oryx Press; Phoenix, AZ. (For higher education faculty in all areas. The authors have used cooperative learning in diverse settings. Good balance of research results and practical application.) Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., Donovan, S. S.(1999). Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69 (1), 21–51. (Examines 39 high-quality studies from 1980 and later in STEM areas. Finds overall, robust gains for achievement, persistence, and attitudes). Misconceptions: Bodner, G.M. (1991). I have found you an argument, Journal of Chemical Education, 68 (5), 385-388. Gabel, D. (1998). The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In B.J. Fraser and K.G. Tobin (eds). International Handbook of Science Education, Kluwer, Academic Publishers, Great Britian, 233-248. Hestenes, D. (1995) What do graduate oral exams tell us?, American.Journal of Physics. 63, 1069. Lewis, E. L., & Linn, M. C. Heat energy and temperature concepts of adolescents, naïve adults, and experts: Implications for curricular improvements. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6), 657-677 (1994). Mulford, D.R.; Robinson, W.R., (in press) An inventory for misconceptions in first-semester general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education. Submitted (2001). Materials on: http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/dmulford/thesis/title.html Osborne, R. & Cosgrove, M. (1983). Common misconceptions among college science students. Journal of Research in College Science Teaching, 20, 825-830. Smith, K.J. and Metz, P.A. (1996). Evaluating student understanding in solution chemistry through microscopic representations, Journal of Chemical Education, 73(3), 233-235. Students’ Alternative Frameworks and Science Education, 4th Edition, H. Pfundt and R. Duit, (IPN Reports-in-Brief, Kiel Germany, 1994). Available on-line at: http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html Misconceptions Web Sites: http;//www.oise.utoronto.ca/~science/miscon.html http://www.physics.montana.edu/phyed/misconceptions http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/dmulford/thesis/title.html 34 Other Useful Web Sites: FLAG (Field-tested Learning Assessment Guilde: http://flagguilde.org Web site contains assessment primer, CATs (Classroom Assessment Techniques, Matching Goals to Assessments, Resources, etc. SALG (Student Assessment of Learning Gains): http://www.flaguide.org/cat/salg/salg1.php or http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/salgains/instructor/ Web site that contains a powerful tool that allows assessment of any/all components of classroom/laboratory practices’ impact on learning. Instructors create their own versions of the SALG from template and can save over them for multiple courses over multiple semesters. Students take SALG on-line and data is returned to faculty as raw or statistically analyzed data. Bibliography STCSE (Students' and Teachers' Conceptions and Science Education). Documents research on teaching and learning science. Role students' and teachers' conceptions in the teaching and learning process given particular attention. http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html Searchable and downloadable in html or Endnote. http://www.first2.org/resources/wrkshopmaterials/workshop_table.html Richard Hake’s web site: http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/ Rich Felder’s web site: http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ 1999-2000 SUCCEED Faculty Survey of Teaching Practices and Perceptions of Institutional Attitudes toward Teaching. SUCCEED Coalition Report, December 2001. View full report (95 pages) or executive summary (9 pages). Reports frequencies of use of active and cooperative learning, learning objectives, writing assignments, and faculty development services, and perceptions of the value ascribed to teaching quality by faculty, administrators, and the faculty reward system. Survey respondents were 586 engineering faculty members at 8 institutions. http://www2.ncsu.edu:8080/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/#WhatsNew Project Galileo has ConcepTests that have been field-tested. http://galileo.harvard.edu/ Joe Redish’s web site: http://www.pysics.umd.edu/perg/papers/redish/cogsci.html ABC's of teaching with excellence: A compendium of suggestions for teaching with excellence," B.G. Davis, L. Wood, R.C. Wilson; online at: http://teaching.berkeley.edu/compendium including the Minute Paper description. PKAL (Project Kaleidoscope: http://www.pkal.org - [email protected]) has an on-line publication on "What Works, What Matters and What Lasts." The goal of this collection of stories and essays is to capture, analyze and disseminate lessons learned from the experience of leading agents of change: institutional, organizational and individual so to inform the work of the larger community. Teaching Large Lecture Classes, TA Professional Development, Cognitive Apprenticeship Model, etc. with downloadable files: http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed/ More on Bloom’s Taxonomy: http://www.kcmetro.cc.mo.us/longview/ctac/blooms.html 35 Web Sites With Scientific Teaching Examples: Group problem-solving in lecture www.ibscore.org/courses.htm http://yucca.uoregon.edu/wb/index.html http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/education/educationmenu.php Problem-based learning www.udel.edu/pbl/ www.microbelibrary.org www.ncsu.edu/per/scaleup.html http://webphysics.iupui.edu/jitt/jitt.html Case studies www.bioquest.org/lifelines/ http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases.case.html http://brighamrad.harvard.edu/education/online/tcd/tcd.html Inquiry-based labs http://chemistry.Beloit.edu http://mc2.cchem.berkeley.edu www.plantpath.wisc.edu/fac/joh/bbtl.htm www.bioquest.org/ http://biology.dbs.umt.edu/biol101/default.htm http://campus.murraystate.edu/academic/faculty/terry.derting/ccli/cclihomepage.html Interactive computer learning www.bioquest.org/ www.dnai.org http://evangelion.mit.edu/802TEAL3D/ http://ctools.msu.edu/ General Papers: D. Ebert-May et al., Bioscience 47, 601 (1997). P. Laws, Phys. Today 44, 24 (1991). D. Udovic et al., Bioscience 52, 272 (2002). J. C.Wright et al., J. Chem. Educ.75,986 (1998). J. Trempy et al. Microbiol. Educ. 3, 26 (2002). L. Springer et al., Rev. Educ. Res. 69, 21 (1999). Bonwell, Charles C. & Eison, James A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHEERIC Higher Education Reports; Report No. 1. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development. Hake, R.R. (1998a). "Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses," American Journal of Physics 66, 64-74 (1998); online at <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/>. Handelsman, J. et al., Biology Brought to Life: A Guide to Teaching Students How to Think Like Scientists. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997. 36 Hestenes, D. (1979). Wherefore a science of teaching?, The Physics Teacher, 17, 235-242. Karplus, R. (1977). Science Teaching and the Development of Reasoning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 14(2): 169-175. (Currently online at <http://www.kluweronline.com/issn/1059-0145/contents> as an Appendix to Fuller (2003). Also in Fuller (2002), pages 70-76. Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R,. & Renner, J.W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Monograph, Number one. ED324204. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking Science - Language, Learning, and Values. Norwood NJ: Ablex publishers. Learning Cycle: Schneider, L.S. & J.W. Renner (1980). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17 (6), 503517. McDermott, L.C. (1991). Millikan Lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned–Closing the gap, American Journal of Physics, 59, 301-315. Musheno,B., Lawson,A. B. (1999). Effects of learning cycle and traditional text on comprehension of science concepts by students at differing reasoning levels. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 23-27. Robinson, W. R. (1999). A view of the science education research literature: Student understanding of chemical change. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(3), 297-298. Smith, E., Blakeslee, T, & Anderson, C. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual change learning in science," Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30, 111-126. Strike, K. A. & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147176). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Wyckoff, S. (2001). Changing the culture of undergraduate science teaching, Journal of College Science Teaching, February: 306-312. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Cambridge, B. (December 1999). The Scholarship of teaching and Learning: Questions and Answers From the Field. AAHE Bulletin 52(4): 7-10. Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. (1999). Informational Program. Booklet. Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Glassick, C.E., M.T. Huber, and G.I. Maeroff. (1997). Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. Special Report of The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Huber, M.T. (July/August 2001). Balancing Acts: Designing Careers Around the Scholarship of Teaching. Change 33(4): 21-29. 37 Hutchings, P. & Shulman, L.S. (September/October 1999). The Scholarship of Teaching: New Elaborations, New Developments. Change, 31(5): 10-15. Shulman, L.S. 2000. From Minsk to Pinsk: Why a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. The Journal of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) 1(1); online at: http://www.iusb.edu/~josotl/search_archives.ht Quotable Quotes “Science not as a noun…but as a process, a set of activities, a way of proceeding and thinking.” (Tinker & Thornton, 1992, p. 155). "There is no neutral pedagogical practice. Every single one is based on a given conception of the learning process and of the object of such a process. Most probably, those practices much more than the methods themselves are exerting the greatest lasting effects in the domain of literacy, as in any field of knowledge." (Ferreiro, Emilia, 1991). Elementary and high school students perceive science largely as a passive process of observing and recording events. They view good scientists as ones who make careful observations and keep complete and accurate records of all they observe.” (Carey, Evans, Honda, Jay & Unger, 1989; Songer & Linn, 1991). ‘The structure of our institutions conveys a more powerful message than their contents." (Jay Lemke) 38
© Copyright 2024