TY - JOUR
T1 - Multilevel Assessment for Discourse, Understanding, and Achievement
AU - Hickey, Daniel T.
AU - Zuiker, Steven J.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant REC-0196225 to the University of Georgia. Subsequent work on this manuscript was supported by the MacArthur Foundation. The opinions presented here are our own and do not necessarily represent the positions of the University of Georgia, the National Science Foundation, or the MacArthur Foundation. The contributions of coinvestigators Ann Kindfield, Ann Kruger, and Laura Fredrick and project manager Nancy Schafer on the second project are gratefully acknowledged. The graduate students and educators who made substantive contributions to this research project include Bryon Hand, Gerda Louizi, Marina Michael, Marcus Norman, Annette Parrott, John Price, and H. Art Russell. Susie Gronseth and Rebecca Itow provided assistance in the preparation of this manuscript.
PY - 2012/10
Y1 - 2012/10
N2 - Evaluating the impact of instructional innovations and coordinating instruction, assessment, and testing present complex tensions. Many evaluation and coordination efforts aim to address these tensions by using the coherence provided by modern cognitive science perspectives on domain-specific learning. This paper introduces an alternative framework that uses emerging situative assessment perspectives to align learning across increasingly formal levels of educational practice. This framework emerged from 2 design studies of a 20-hr high school genetics curriculum that used the GenScope computer-based modeling software. The 1st study aligned learning across (a) the contextualized enactment of inquiry-oriented activities in GenScope, (b) "feedback conversations" around informal embedded assessments, and (c) a formal performance assessment; the 2nd study extended this alignment to a conventional achievement test. Design-based refinements ultimately delivered gains of nearly 2 SD on the performance assessment and more than 1 SD in achievement. These compared to gains of 0.25 and 0.50 SD, respectively, in well-matched comparison classrooms. General and specific assessment design principles for aligning instruction, assessment, and testing and for evaluating instructional innovations are presented.
AB - Evaluating the impact of instructional innovations and coordinating instruction, assessment, and testing present complex tensions. Many evaluation and coordination efforts aim to address these tensions by using the coherence provided by modern cognitive science perspectives on domain-specific learning. This paper introduces an alternative framework that uses emerging situative assessment perspectives to align learning across increasingly formal levels of educational practice. This framework emerged from 2 design studies of a 20-hr high school genetics curriculum that used the GenScope computer-based modeling software. The 1st study aligned learning across (a) the contextualized enactment of inquiry-oriented activities in GenScope, (b) "feedback conversations" around informal embedded assessments, and (c) a formal performance assessment; the 2nd study extended this alignment to a conventional achievement test. Design-based refinements ultimately delivered gains of nearly 2 SD on the performance assessment and more than 1 SD in achievement. These compared to gains of 0.25 and 0.50 SD, respectively, in well-matched comparison classrooms. General and specific assessment design principles for aligning instruction, assessment, and testing and for evaluating instructional innovations are presented.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867312121&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84867312121&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10508406.2011.652320
DO - 10.1080/10508406.2011.652320
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84867312121
SN - 1050-8406
VL - 21
SP - 522
EP - 582
JO - Journal of the Learning Sciences
JF - Journal of the Learning Sciences
IS - 4
ER -