Assessment of science learning: Living in interesting times

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 49, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 831-841

  Pellegrino, James W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

assessment; educational measurement; validity

Indexed keywords

AFFORDANCES; ASSESSMENT; DESIGN PROCESS; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; HIGH QUALITY; SCIENCE EDUCATION; SCIENCE LEARNING; SHARED UNDERSTANDING; STATISTICAL INFERENCE; VALIDITY;

RESEARCH;

EDUCATION;

EID: 84863854556     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.21032     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. American Association of Medical Colleges. (2012). MR5 Fifth comprehensive review of the Medical Colleges Admission Test (MCAT): Final MCAT recommendations. Retrieved
2. (AERA/APA/NCME) American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
3. Bennett, R. E., (2008). Technology for large-scale assessment. ETS Report No. RM-08-10. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
4. Brown, J., Hinze, S., &, Pellegrino, J. W., (2008). Technology and formative assessment. In, T. Good, (Ed.), 21st Century Education. Vol. 2. Technology (pp. 245-255). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. College Board. (2011a). The AP biology curriculum framework 2012-2013. New York: The College Board.
6. College Board. (2011b). The AP chemistry curriculum framework 2013-2014. New York: The College Board.
7. Corcoran, T. B., Mosher, F. A., &, Rogat, A., (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform. Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Center on Continuous Instructional Improvement, Teachers College Columbia University, New York.
8. Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) & the National Governors Association (NGA). (2010a). 3The common core state standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved
9. Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) & the National Governors Association (NGA). (2010b). 3The Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved
10. Duncan, R. G., &, Hmelo-Silver, C., (2009). Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Journal for Research in Science Teaching, 46 (6), 606-609.
11. Haertel, E. H., &, Lorie, W. A., (2004). Validating standards-based test score interpretations. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2 (2), 61-103.
12. Kane, M. T., (2006). Validation. In, R. L. Brennan, (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17-64). Westport, CT: Praeger.
13. Linn, R., (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29 (2), 4-16.
14. Mislevy, R. J., &, Haertel, G., (2006). Implications of evidence-centered design for educational assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25, 6-20.
15. Mislevy, R. J., &, Riconscente, M. M., (2006). Evidence-centered assessment design: Layers, concepts, and terminology. In, S. Downing, &, T. Haladyna, (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 61-90). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., &, Almond, R., (2003). On the structure of educational assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1, 3-67.
17. National Research Council. (2003). Assessment in support of learning and instruction: Bridging the gap between large-scale and classroom assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
18. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grade K-8., R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, &, A. W. Shouse, (Eds.), Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten through eighth grade. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
19. National Research Council. (2012). 3A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
20. Pellegrino, J. W., (1988). Mental models and mental tests. In, H. Wainer, &, H. I. Braun, (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 49-60). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Pellegrino, J. W., (2012). Measuring what matters: Technology and the design of assessments that support learning. In, R. Luckin, J. Underwood, N. Winters, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, &, S. Puntambekar, (Eds.), Handbook of design in educational technology. England: Taylor & Francis (in press).
22. Pellegrino, J. W., Baxter, G. P., &, Glaser, R., (1999). Addressing the "two disciplines" problem: Linking theories of cognition and learning with assessment and instructional practice. In, A. Iran-Nejad, &, P. D. Pearson, (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 307-353). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
23. 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.
24. Pellegrino, J. W., DiBello, L. V., &, Brophy, S. P., (2012). The science and design of assessment in engineering education. In, A. Johri, &, B. Olds, (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press (in press).
25. Pellegrino, J. W., &, Quellmalz, E. S., (2010). Perspectives on the integration of technology and assessment. Journal of Research on Technology and Education, 43 (2), 119-134.
26. Popham, W. J., Ryan, J. M., (2012, April). 3Determining a high-stake test's instructional sensitivity. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
27. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Hamilton, L., &, Klein, S., (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 369-393.
28. Shepard, L. A., (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29 (7), 4-14.
29. Toulmin, S. E., (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
30. Vendlinski, T., &, Stevens, R., (2002). Assessing student problem-solving skills with complex computer-based tasks. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 1 (3). Available from.
31. Wilson, M. R., &, Bertenthal, M. W., (Eds.). (2005). Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.