Performance Assessment in Science as a Tool to Enhance the Picture of Student Learning

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 97, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 172-183

  Shymansky, James A ^a   Enger, Sandra ^a   Chidsey, Jennifer L ^a   Yore, Larry D ^b   Jorgensen, Margaret ^c   Henriques, Laura ^a   Wolfe, Edward W ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^c EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27144433699     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1997.tb17364.x     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York : Oxford University Press.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York : Oxford University Press.
3. Barnes, L. W., & Barnes, M. B. (1991). Assessment, practically speaking: How can we measure hands-on science skills. Science and Children, 28(6), 14–15.
4. Bybee, R. W. (1996). The contemporary reform of science education. In J. Rhoton & P. Bowers, (Eds.), Issues in science education (pp. 1–14). Arlington, VA : National Science Teachers Association.
5. Champagne, A. (1994). Finding out what students know and can do: Examining assessment alternatives. [Interview in videotape program]. Washington, DC : Council of Chief State School Officers.
6. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for numeral scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40, 37–47.
7. Feldt, L. S., Forsyth, R. A., Ansley, T. N., & Alnot, S. D. (1994). Iowa Tests of Educational Development: Interpretive guide for teachers and counselors. Chicago, IL : Riverside.
8. Feuer, M. J., & Fulton, K. (1993). The many faces of performance assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 74, 478.
9. Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative assessment. Alexandria, VA : Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
10. Kaplan, B. A., & Johnson, E. G. (1992). Reliability of professional scored data: NAEP-related issues. Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service.
11. Madaus, G. F., West, M. M., Kinax, R., Viator, K., Fongkong, M. C., Butler, P., McDowell, C., Simmons, R., & Sweeney, E. (1992). The influence of testing on teaching math and science in grades 4–12 (NSF Grant No. SPA8954759). Boston : Boston College.
12. Meng, E., & Doran, R. L. (1990). What research says about appropriate methods of assessment. Science and Children, 28(1), 42–45.
13. Messick, S. (1992). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service.
14. Meyer, C. (1992). What's the difference between “authentic” and “performance” assessment? Educational Leadership, 49(8), 39–40.
15. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC : National Academy Press.
16. Report raises questions about Kentucky's testing system. (1995, February 22). Education Week, 11.
17. Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC : National Academy Press.
18. Shavelson, R. J. (1994). Finding out what students know and can do: Examining assessment alternatives. [Interview in videotape program]. Washington, DC : Council of Chief State School Officers.
19. Shavelson, R. J., & Baxter, G. P. (1992). What we've learned about assessing hands-on science. Educational Leadership, 49(8), 20–25.
20. Sheppard, L. A. (1991). Psychometricians' beliefs about learning. Educational Researcher, 20(7), 2–16.
21. Shymansky, J. A., & Yore, L. D. (1994, October). Refocusing science assessment: Informing learners, teachers, and other stakeholders. Paper presented at the regional meeting of the National Science Teachers Association, Portland, OR.
22. Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessment authenticity, context, and validity. Phi Delta Kappan, 74, 200–214.
23. Worthen, B. R. (1993). Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kapan, 74, 444–454.