Making Students' Thinking Explicit in Writing and Discussion: An analysis of formative assessment prompts

Science Education

Volumn 92, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 799-824

  Furtak, Erin Marie ^a,c   Ruiz Primo, Maria Araceli ^b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 51149087935     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20270     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Atkin, J. M., & Coffey, J. E. (Eds.). (2003). Everyday assessment in the science classroom. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
2. Atkin, J. M., Coffey, J. E., Moorthy, S., Sato, M., & Thibeault, M. (2005). Designing everyday assessment in the science classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
3. Aulls, M. W. (1998). Contributions of classroom discourse to what content students learn during curriculum enactment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 56-69.
4. Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
5. Black, P. (1998). Formative Assessment: Raising standards inside the classroom. School Science Review, 90(291), 39-46.
6. Black, P., & Harrison, C. (2001). Self- and peer-assessment and taking responsibility: The science student's role in formative assessment. School Science Review, 83(302), 43-49.
7. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74.
8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
9. Brown A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Interactive learning environments and the teaching of science and mathematics. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. diSessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 111-139). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 474-482.
12. Butler, R., & Nisan, M. (1986). Effects of no feedback, task-related comments, and grades on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 210-216.
13. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
14. Furtak, E. M. (2006). The dilemma of guidance in scientific inquiry teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
15. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
16. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084.
17. Li, M. (2001). A framework for science achievement and its link to test items. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
18. Li, M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (2006). Towards a science achievement framework: The case of TIMSS-R study. In T. Plomp & S. Howie (Eds.), Contexts of learning mathematics and science: Lessons learned from TIMSS (pp. 291-312). New York: Routledge.
19. Minstrell, J. (1992, April). Facets of students' knowledge: A practical view from the classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
20. Minstrell, J., & van Zee, E. (2003). Using questioning to assess and foster student thinking. In J. M. Atkin & J. E. Coffey (Eds.), Everyday assessment in the science classroom (pp. 61-73). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
21. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22. National Research Council. (2001). Classroom assessment and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
23. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
24. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.). (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
25. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1974). The child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1942)
26. Pottenger, F. M., & Young, D. B. (1992). The local environment: FAST 1. Foundational approaches to science teaching (2nd ed.). Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research and Development Group.
27. Pottenger, F. M., & Young, D. B. (1996). The local environment teacher's guide (2nd ed.). Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research and Development Group.
28. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4-13.
29. Rivard, L. P., & Straw, S. B. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566-593.
30. Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (1997). Toward a framework of subject-matter achievement assessment. Unpublished manuscript. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
31. Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2007). Assessment in science and mathematics: Lessons learned. In M. Hoepfl & M. Lindstrom (Eds.), Assessment of technology education, CTTE 56th yearbook (pp. 203-232). Woodland Hills, CA: Glencoe-McGraw-Hill.
32. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2006). Informal formative assessment and scientific inquiry: Exploring teachers' practices and student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(3/4), 205-235.
33. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers' informal formative assessment practices and students' understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 57-84.
34. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Rhetoric and reality in science performance assessments: An update. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1045-1063.
35. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
36. Shavelson, R. J., & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (1999). Leinstungsbewertung im naturwissenschaftllichen. Unterricht (On the assessment of science achievement). Unterrichtswissenschaft, 27, 102-127.
37. Shavelson, R. J., & the Stanford Education Assessment Laboratory (2003). On the integration of formative assessment in teaching and learning with implications of teacher education. Paper presented at the biannual meeting of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Padova, Italy.
38. Shavelson, R. J., & Young, D. B. (2000). Embedding assessments in the FAST curriculum: On beginning the Romance among curriculum, teaching, and assessment. An assessment project proposal to the National Science Foundation.
39. Shepardson, D. P., & Britsch, S. J. (1997). Children's science journals: Tools for teaching, learning, and assessment. Science and Children, 34(5), 13-17, 46-47.
40. Smith, M. L. (2006). Multiple methodology in education research. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complimentary methods in education research (pp. 457-475). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Smith, C., Carey, S., & Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition, 21(3), 177-237.
42. Smith, C., Maclin, D., Grosslight, L., & Davis, H. (1997). Teaching for understanding: A study of students' preinstruction theories of matter and a comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches of teaching about matter and density. Cognition and Instruction, 15(3), 317-393.
43. Smith, C., Snir, J., & Grosslight, L. (1992). Using conceptual models to facilitate conceptual change: The case of weight-density differentiation. Cognition and Instruction, 9(3), 221-283.
44. Stanford Education Assessment Laboratory. (2003). Teacher's guide to the reflective lessons. Unpublished manuscript.
45. White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London: Palmer Press.
46. Yerrick, R. (2005). Playing the game of science: Overcoming obstacles in re-negotiating science classroom discourse. In R. K. Yerrick & W.-M. Roth (Eds.), Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research (pp. 231-257). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
47. Yin, Y. (2005). The influence of formative assessments on student motivation, achievement, and conceptual change. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.