Measuring students' scientific content and inquiry reasoning

ICLS 2006 - International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Proceedings

Volumn 1, Issue , 2006, Pages 196-202

  Gotwals, Amelia Wenk ^a   Songer, Nancy Butler ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT SYSTEM; ASSESSMENT TASKS; CONTENT KNOWLEDGE; INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE; MEASUREMENT SCIENCE; SCIENTIFIC CONTENT; SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY; STUDENT RESPONSE;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84884400057     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R., & Wang, W.-C. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(1), 1-23.
2. Black, P. (2003). The importance of everyday assessment. In J. M. Atkin & J. E. Coffey (Eds.), Everyday assessment in the science classroom (pp. 1-11). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
3. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-41.
4. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Haertel, G. D., & Mislevy, R. J. (2001). Principled Assessment Designs for Inquiry (PADI): Proposal funded by the Interagency Educational Research Initiative (IERI).
6. Huber, A. E., Songer, N. B., & Lee, S.-Y. (2003, April). A Curricular Approach to Teaching Biodiversity through Inquiry in Technology-Rich Environments. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Philadelphia.
7. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Bass, K. M., Fredericks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Middle School Students' Initial Attempts at Inquiry in Project-Based Science Classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3 & 4), 313-350.
8. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometricka, 47, 149-174.
9. Mislevy, R. J. (2003). A Brief Introduction to Evidence-Centered Design (Technical). Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
10. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Almond, R. G, Haertel, G D., & Penuel, W. R. (2003). Leverage Points for Improving Educational Assessment. (PADI Technical Report #2). Palo Alto, CA.: Principled Assessment Designs for Inquiry.
11. Mislevy, R. J., Wilson, M. R., Ercikan, K., & Chudowsky, N. (2002). Psychometric Principles in Student Assessment. Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
12. Mistler-Jackson, M., & Songer, N. B. (2000). Student motivation and internet technology: Are students empowered to learn science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 459-479.
13. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
14. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.). (2001). Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press.
15. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabalistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16. Songer, N. B., & Gotwals, A. W. (2004). What constitutes evidence of complex reasoning in science? Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences.
17. Songer, N. B., Lee, H.-S., & McDonald, S. (2003). Research Towards an Expanded Understanding of Inquiry Science Beyond One Idealized Standard. Science Education, 87(4), 490-516.
18. White, B., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, Modeling, and Metacognition: Making Science Accessible to All Students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118.
19. Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). ConQuest: Generalized Item response Modeling Software. Melbourne, Australia: ACER (Australian Council for Educational Research).