Assessment to improve learning in mathematics: The BEAR assessment system

Assessing Mathematical Proficiency

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 311-332

  Wilson, Mark ^a   Carstensen, Claus ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 47549084895     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511755378.025     Document Type: Chapter

References (35)

1. [Adams et al. 1997] R. J. Adams, M. Wilson, and W.-C. Wang, “The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model”, Applied Psychological Measurement 21:1 (1997), 1-23.
2. [Biggs 1999] J. B. Biggs, Teaching for quality learning at university, Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press, 1999.
3. [Biggs and Collis 1982] J. B. Biggs and K. F. Collis, Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy, New York: Academic Press, 1982.
4. [Black et al. 2003] P. Black, C. Harrison, C. Lee, B. Marshall, and D. Wiliam, Assessment for learning, London: Open University Press, 2003.
5. [Bloom 1956] B. S. Bloom (editor), Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Hand book I, cognitive domain, New York and Toronto: Longmans, Green, 1956.
6. [Briggs et al. 2006] D. Briggs, A. Alonzo, C. Schwab, and M. Wilson, “Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items”, Educational Assessment 11:1 (2006), 33-63.
7. [Bruner 1996] J. Bruner, The culture of education, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996.
8. [Claesgens et al. 2002] J. Claesgens, K. Scalise, K. Draney, M. Wilson, and A. Stacy, “Perspectives of chemists: A framework to promote conceptual understanding of chemistry”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 2002.
9. [Glaser 1990] R. Glaser, Testing and assessment: O tempora! O mores!, Pittsburgh: Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, 1990.
10. [Haladyna 1994] T. M. Haladyna, “Cognitive taxonomies”, pp. 104-110 in Developing and validating multiple-choice test items, edited by T. M. Haladyna, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994.
11. [Hoskens and Wilson 1999] M. Hoskens and M. Wilson, Standard Map [Computer program], Berkeley, CA: University of California, 1999.
12. [Kennedy et al. 2005] C. A. Kennedy, M. Wilson, and K. Draney, Grade Map 4.1 [Computer program], Berkeley, California: Berkeley Evaluation and Assessment Center, University of California, 2005.
13. [Land 1997] R. Land, “Moving up to complex assessment systems”, Evaluation Comment 7:1 (1997), 1-21.
14. [Linn and Baker 1996] R. Linn and E. Baker, “Can performance-based student assessments be psychometrically sound?”, pp. 84-103 in Performance-based student assessment: Challenges and possibilities. Ninety-fifth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, edited by J. B. Baron and D. P. Wolf, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
15. [Masters et al. 1990] G. N. Masters, R. A. Adams, and M. Wilson, “Charting student progress”, pp. 628-634 in International encyclopedia of education: Research and studies, vol. 2 (Supplementary), edited by T. Husen and T. N. Postlethwaite, Oxford and New York: Pergamon, 1990.
16. [Minstrell 1998] J. Minstrell, “Student thinking and related instruction: Creating a facet-based learning environment”, paper presented at the meeting of the Committee on Foundations of Assessment, Woods Hole, MA, October 1998.
17. [NRC 2000] National Research Council (Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education), How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school, expanded ed., edited by J. D. Bransford et al., Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.
18. [NRC 2001] National Research Council Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment, edited by J. Pelligrino et al., Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
19. [NSF 1997] National Science Foundation, Review of instructional materials for middle school science, Arlington, VA: Author, 1997.
20. [Olson and Torrance 1996] D. R. Olson and N. Torrance (editors), Hand book of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling, Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.
21. [PISA 2004] PISA, PISA 2003: Der Bildungsstand der Jugendlichen in Deutschland: Ergebnisse des zweiten internationalen Vergleichs, Munster: Waxmann, 2004.
22. [PISA 2005a] Programme for International Student Assessment, “Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003”, Technical report, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2005.
23. [PISA 2005b] Programme for International Student Assessment, “PISA 2003 Technical Report”, Technical report, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2005.
24. [Resnick and Resnick 1992] L. B. Resnick and D. P. Resnick, “Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform”, pp. 37-76 in Changing assessments, edited by B. R. Gifford and M. C. O’Connor, Boston: Kluwer, 1992.
25. [Roberts and Sipusic 1999] L. Roberts and M. Sipusic (director), (producer), “Moderation in all things: A class act” [Film], available from the Berkeley Evaluation and Assessment Center, Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1670, 1999.
26. [Wilson 1990] M. Wilson, “Measurement of developmental levels”, pp. 628-634 in International encyclopedia of education: Research and studies, vol. Supplementary vol. 2, edited by T. Husen and T. N. Postlethwaite, Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1990.
27. [Wilson 2004a] M. Wilson, “A perspective on current trends in assessment and accountability: Degrees of coherence”, pp. 272-283 in [Wilson 2004b], 2004.
28. [Wilson 2004b] M. Wilson (editor), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability: One hundred and third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, part 2, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
29. [Wilson 2005] M. Wilson, Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2005.
30. [Wilson and Draney 2002] M. Wilson and K. Draney, “A technique for setting standards and maintaining them over time”, pp. 325-332 in Measurement and multivariate analysis, edited by S. Nishisato et al., Tokyo: Springer-Verlag, 2002.
31. [Wilson and Draney 2004] M. Wilson and K. Draney, “Some links between large-scale and classroom assessments: The case of the BEAR Assessment System”, pp. 132-154 in [Wilson 2004b], 2004.
32. [Wilson and Scalise 2006] M. Wilson and K. Scalise, “Assessment to improve learning in higher education: The BEAR Assessment System”, Higher Education 52:4 (2006), 635-663.
33. [Wilson and Sloane 2000] M. Wilson and K. Sloane, “From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system”, Applied Measurement in Education 13:2 (2000), 181-208.
34. [Wilson et al. 2000] M. Wilson, L. Roberts, K. Draney, and K. Sloane, SEPUP assessment resources hand book, Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Evaluation and Assessment Research Center, University of California, 2000.
35. [Wolf and Reardon 1996] D. P. Wolf and S. Reardon, “Access to excellence through new forms of student assessment”, pp. 52-83 in Performance-based student assessment: Challenges and possibilities. Ninety-fifth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, edited by J. B. Baron and D. P. Wolf, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.