DOCUMENT RESUME ED 384 474 RC 020 177 TITLE Science and Math Assessment in K-6 Rural and Small Schools. Rural, Small Schools Network Information 1 Exchange: Number 14, Spring 1993. INSTITUTION Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast & Islands, Andover, MA. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 93 CONTRACT RP91002008 NOTE 185p.; Photographs will not reproduce adequately. PUB TYPE Collected Works - General (020) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO8 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Standards; Curriculum Based Assessment; Educational Change; Educational Practices; Educational Testing; Elementary Education; *Elementary School Mathematics; *Elementary School Science; Evaluation Methods; Informal Assessment; *Portfolio Assessment; Program Descriptions; *Rural Education; *Student Evaluation IDENTIFIERS *Alternative Assessment; Authentic Assessment ABSTRACT This packet includes reprints of journal articles and other resources concerning the assessment of science and math in small, rural elementary schools. Articles include: (1) "Standards, Assessment, and Educational Quality" (Lauren B. Resnick); (2) "A True Test: Toward More Authentic and Equitable Assessment" (Grant Wiggins); (3) "How World-Class Standards Will Change Us" (Arthur L. Costa); (4) "Smart Tests" (Deborah L. Cohen); (5) "Laser Disk Portfolios: Total Child Assessment" (Jo Campbell); (6) "Portfolios Invite Reflectionfrom Student's and Staff" (Elizabeth A. Hebert); (7) "Portfolio Assessment in the Hands of Teachers" (Clare Forseth); (8) "Portfolio Assessment" (Susan Black); (9) "Assessing the Outcomes of Computer-Based Instruction: The Experience of Maryland" (Gita Z. Wilder, Mary Fowles); (10) "Why Standards May Not Improve Schools" (Elliot W. Eisner); (11) "Assessing Alternative Assessment" (Gene I. Maeroff); (12) "Assessment Recordkeeping in a Non-Graded Developmentally-Based Program" (Elsbeth Bellemere, Jeanne King); (13) "Strategies for the Development of Effective Performance Exercises" (Joan Boykoff Baron); (14) "Evaluating Elementary Science" (Rodney L. Doran and others); (15) "Science for All: Getting It Right for the 21st Century" (Kenneth M. Hoffman, Elizabeth K. Stage); (16) "Active Assessment for Active Science" (George E. Hein); (17) "The Nature of Elementary Science: What Does 'It' Look Like?" (Gregg Humphrey); (18) "Assessment: What Is 'IT'?" (Gregg Humphrey); (19) "What's Worth Assessing?" (Monte Moses); (20) "Creating Benchmarks for Science Education" (Andrew Ahlgren); (21) "Assessment, Practically Speaking" (Lehman W. Barnes, Marianne B. Barnes); (22) "Getting Connected to Science" (Candace L. Julyan); (23) "EDTALK: What We Know about Science Teaching and Learning"; (24) "What We've Learned about Assessing Hands-On Science" (Richard J. Shavelson, Gail P. Baxter); (25) "NCTM's Standards: A Rallying Flag for Mathematics Teachers" (Thomas A. Romberg); (26) "Measuring What's Worth Learning"; (27) "Report Offers Glimpse of Mathematics Assessment of the Future" (Robert kothman); (28) "The Power of Thinking Mathematics" (Alice 3. Gill, Lovely H. Billups); (29) "Bringing Meaning to Math with a Student-Run Store" (Deborah Black); (30) "Employer Expectations for School Mathematics" (Henry 0. Pollak); and (31) "Evaluating Problem Solving in Mathematics" (Walter Szetela, Cynthia Nicol). (LP) RURAL, SMALL SCHOOLS NETWORK EXCHANGE INFORMATION Number 14 SPRING 1993 SCIENCE AND MATH ASSESSMENT IN K-6 RURAL AND SMALL SCHOOLS U.& DEPARTMENT OF "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS EDUCATION Mc* of Educational Research and Improvement MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) /NS document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization oncenating ft O Minor changes have been made to Improve (*Production Quality Points of view or opinions stated in this docu- TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ment do not nOCOSSanly fepreSent official OERI position or policy INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." The Regional Laboratory for Educational hnia Nentent of the Northeast & Islands BEST COPY AVAILABLE This publication is based on work sponsored wholly or in part by the U.S. Department of Education under contract number RP 91002008. The content of the publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the department or any other agency of the U.S. Go ment. The Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast & Islands Spring 1993 Dear Rural, Small School Leader: The need for alternative assessment methods is evolving alongside a growing shift from schools that are content-centered to schools that are learner-centered. Higher order thinking processes, decision making skills and cooperative grouping strategies are just a few of the myriad student proficiencies that schools are choosing to assess. The range of articles in this Rural, Small Schools Network Information Packet includes a discussion of assessment standards, an overview of a variety of assessment methods, and descriptions of 'state of the art' science and math programs. Students are assessed on what they learn; as well as how they respond to a test. In the past educators have relied heavily on one testing instrument. Multi-faceted assessment instruments like portfolios, essays, multiple choice questions, and hands-on presentation instruments now provide a more in-depth perspective of what students have learned as well as offering students a variety of ways to demonstrate their knowledge. We hope you find this packet informative as you look at assessment as a way of gathering information about students' learning processes. An evaluation card has been provided so you can send us your feedback. We also welcome your suggestions for future Information Exchange Packet topics. Please jot any ideas you may have on the card or contact us at the Rural, Small Schools Network, 83 Boston Post Road, Sudbury, MA 01776, (508) 443-7991. Sincerely, John R. Sullivan, Jr., Ed.D. Virginia L. Warn Program Director Associate Program Director Rural, Small Schools Network Rural, Small Schools Network Servin:.; Nett E/whin(l. Nott Inrk. Puerto Rico. and the U.S. Wiwi') Islands 300 Brickstune Square: Suite 900. indoter IN 01810 (508) 470-0098 Fax (508)475-9220 3 CONTENTS SCIENCE AND MATH ASSESSMENT IN X -6 RURAL AND SMALL SCHOOLS Overview of Assessment SECTION I: "Standards, Assessment, and Educational Quality," by Lauren B. Resnick, Stanford Law and Policy Review, Winter 1992-93. "A True Test: Toward More Authentic and Equitable Assessment," by Grant Wiggins, Phi Delta Kappan, May 1989. "How World-Class Standards Will Change Us," by Arthur L. Costa, Educational Leadership, February 1993. "Smart Tests," by Deborah L. Cohen, Teacher Magazine, March 1993. "Laser Disk Portfolios: Total Child Assessment," by Jo Campbell, Educational Leadership, May 1992. "Portfolios Invite Reflection--from Students and Staff," by Elizabeth A. Hebert, Educational Leadership, May 1992. "Portfolio Assessment in the Hands of Teachers," by Clare Forseth, The School Administrator, December 1992. "Portfolio Assessment," by Susan Black, The Executive Educator, February 1993. "Assessing the Outcomes of Computer-Based Instruction: The Experience of Maryland," by Dr. Gita Z. Wilder and Mary Fowles, T.H.E. Journal, September 1992. "Why Standards May Not Improve Schools," by Elliot W. Eisner, Educational Leadership, February 1993. "Assessing Alternative Assessment," by Gene I. Maeroff, Phi Delta Kappan, December 1991. "Assessment Recordkeeping in a Non-Graded Developmentally-Based Program," by Elsbeth Bellemere and Jeanne King, presented at the High/Scope Foundation Conference on Assessment in Ypsilanti, Michigan, Winter 1990. "Strategies for the Development of Effective Performance Exercises," by Joan Boykoff Baron, Applied Measurement in Education, copyright 1991. SECTION Science Assessment X-6 "Evaluating Elementary Science," by Rodney L. Doran, Douglas Reynolds, Janice Camplin, and Nicholas He)aily, Science and Children, November/ December 1992. "Science for All: Getting It Right For the 21st Century," by Kenneth M. Hoffman and Elizabeth K. Stage, Educational Leadership, February 1993. "Active Assessment for Active Science," by George E. Hein, Expanding Student Assessment, edited by Vito Perrone, copyright 1991 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. "The nature of elementary science: what does "it" look like?," by Gregg Humphrey, Teachers' Lab, September 1991. "Assessment: what is "IT?," by Gregg Humphrey, Teachers' Lab, November & December 1991. "What's Worth Assessing?," by Monte Moses, The School Administrator, December 1992. "Creating Benchmarks For Science Education," by Andrew Ahlgren, Educational Leadership, February 1993. "Assessment, Practically Speaking," by Lehman W. Barnes and Marianne B. Barnes, Science and Children, March 1991. "Getting Connected to Science," by Candace L. Julyan, Hands On!, Volume 14, Number 1, Spring 1991. EDTALK: What We Know About Science Teaching And Learning, published by the Council for Educational Development and Research, pages 57-62. "What We've Learned About :Assessing Hands-On Science," by Richard J. Shavelson and Gail P. Ba'ter, Educational Leadership, May 1992. SECTION III: Math Assessment K-6 "NCTM's Standards: A Rallying Flag For Mathematics Teachers," by Thomas A. Romberg, Educational Leadership, February 1993. "Measuring What's Worth Learning," a report from National Academy Press, copyright 1993. "Report Offers Glimpse of Mathematics Assessment of the Future," by Robert Rothman, Education Week, December 9, 1992. "The Power of Thinking Mathematics," by Alice J. Gill and Lovely H. Billups, American Educator, Winter 1992. "Bringing meaning to math with a student-run store," by Deborah Black, Teachers' Lab, November/December 1992. "Employer expectations for school mathematics," by Henry 0. Pollak, Teachers' Lab, October 1992. "Evaluating Problem Solving in Mathematics," by Waite:: Szetela and Cynthia Nicol, Educational Leadership, May 1992. Overview or Assessment SECTION I: Reprinted with permission from Stanford Law and Policy Review, Winter 1992-93. Standards, Assessment, and Educational Quality Lauren B. Resnick Learning Research and Development Center University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 15260 1993 Stanford Law and Policy Review, a, 53-59. Standards, Assessment, and Educational Quality by Lauren B. Resnick National performance standards can play a vital role in systemic American schools leaders managers, engineers, are underachieving institutions. physicians, lawyers, and other education reform. professionals to use their minds Their aspirations are too low and they are not working up to well. For the majority of students, capacity. The reason lies not in however, educational aims were students learning less than before. much more modest. The goal was to teach basic citizenship and to inculcate the limited Indeed, scores on tests of "basic skills" have risen over the skills young people would need to take their places as past two decades.' But students are not learning the skills and knowledge they will need in the future. Why is this workers in an economy needing many more willing hands It was a mass production form of than active minds. so? education suited to the mass production economy of the Schooling as we know it today was designed early in Broad, liberating education for the many was this century) It aimed to educate a small elite of future time.' American considered unnecessary and unachievable. tests, the standardized tests that report on children's and Dr. Lauren B. Remick is the director of the Learrung Research and schools' "grade level", are the products of mass production Development Center at the Untuerury of Pittsburgh and a Professor in education' They assess students' command of disembodied the Department of Psychology and School of Education as the Univ. bits of information, not their ability to analyze complex of Piasburgh. She is also the co-director of the New Standards situations or marshal knowledge to solve problems.' Yet Project, which is developmg a new national student performance assessment system. Preparation of this paper was supported by grants these tests substantially control what is taught in schools. from the Pew Charitable Trusts and the John D. aid Catherme T. The strategy seemed to work for many decades: MacArthur Foundation for the work of the New Standards Project. Living standards rose for more and more Americans and An earlier version of the paper was irreserued at the annual meeang of American democracy seemed secure' But the world at the American Educational Research Assoc-v.:mon, April 1992, as part the beginning of the next century will bear few rewards for of the symposnan: "The Federal Reform of Education: Boon or individuals or nations that limit themselves to educating Bane for American Public Schools.' WINTER 1992-93 53 8 LAUREN B. RESNICK changes in the way schools are managed and in how only a few to think.' To maintain a high-wage economy, schools relate to families, communities, and the social almost all individualswill have to think their way though service delivery system. Stimulating and enabling these their workdaysanalyzing problems, proposing solutions, interlocking changes constitutes a systemic reform po licy troubleshootingandrepairing equipment, communicating the only kind of policy likely to produce the new levels of with others, and managing resources of time and materials. student achievement that are sought. For the first time since the Industrial. Revolution, the human resource needs of a vibrant economy and the civic PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND requirements of a truly participatory democracy are SYSTEMIC CHANGE converging. The time has come for American schools to set their sights higher, to move from their inherited Implementing systemic change requires attention preoccupation with low-level fact and skill learning to not only to how the elements of a system function the goals of thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving for together in equilibrium, but to how they might influence every student. . one another in a period of disequilibrium, and which Doing so will require the most thorough revision of elements might be most susceptible to organized, aspiration and practice that any set of institutions has of intentional modification. In some countries, an effort at ever known. It will necessitate setting new standards national improvement of education would begin with quality and mobilizing all resources to ensure that every attention to curriculum and, perhaps, organizational : structure, including teacher certification requirements.' The time has come for Both of these would fall under the purview of a ministry American schools to set their of education with the power. after consultation appropriate to the country's processes, to impose the curriculum and sights higher and address the the new forms of organization. Textbooks, exams, and goals of thinking, reasoning the content of teacher education programs would change in due course in response to the mandated curriculum. and problem-solving. In countries that, like us, have traditions of local rather than national control of education, this centralized approach to changing the system is not available. Some single child, regardless of the child's race, language, countries, most notably Britain, have responded to this origin, or presumed native ability, has the learning condition by overthrowing significant aspects of the opportunities needed to meet those standards. It will local control tradition and moving toward a national mean re-educating teachers to work in new ways and ; curriculum.9 We in the United States are trying to induce giving them the authority they will need to set a new systemic changes without federalizing education and course with their students. New methods of assessing student achievement will be essential in this without creating a controlling national curriculum. We .: What are the need a different point of departure. transformation. possibilities! New forms of assessment, assessments based on complex task performances, scored by trained and Three frequently proposed starting points for reform are textbooks, teacher education, and education thoughtful judges, can release educators from the grip of governance. All are crucial to a full program of systemic testing programs that drive instructional attention away reform. But none of the three serves as a promising from thoughtfulness and complex applications of starting point. Consider textbooks first. These serve as a They can exemplify new standards for knowledge. kind of de facto national curriculum, and changes in achievement and provide clear representations of what textbooks would strongly influence what is taught and students should now be striving to learn and teachers But because textbook publishers respond learned. teach. primarily to market incentives, a radical change in demand Standards and assessment alone, however, will work from purchasers ( i.e., educators) must be created. no magic. Real educational improvement requires Textbook publishing can be expected to follow, not lead, interlocking and coherent changes in several components of the education system. These include curriculum, the reform effort. textbooks, teacher preparation, and continuing The prospects are not much better for teacher education as a starting point. The argument for reforming professional development. Further, for these elements to teacher education is compelling; only a quite differently sustain themselves, there will need to be fundamental STANFORD LAW Si. POLICY REVIEW S4 9 STANDARDS, ASSESSMENT, AND EDUCATIONAL QUALITY prepared teaching force will be able to educate students ordinary ways of proceeding as soon as they become too in the new, more demanding ways that are required for visibly successful or their special advocates move on so But teacher education in this country is new challenges. the future. largely controlled by institutions with even greater Performance standards are a promising start for traditions of "local" control than the public schools. systemic change. We need an education system in which good schools that have high expectations for students Individual faculty at colleges and universities substantially and that work hard to meet them can thrivewhere control their own programs of instruction. No one has proposed a convincing and, at least for the moment, good schools are the norm rather than exceptions needing. special protection. We should organize education so that it does not depend upon a few exceptional people putting We in the United States are out extraordinary effort, but relies instead upon thousands of competent and committed people working in concert trying to induce systemic with, rather than against, the "system." Performance change without federalizing standards represent the best means to achieve this. Such education and creating a standards provide tangible goals that students can strive to achieve. Standards also allow teachers to measure controlling national student performance against an objective criterion of curriculum. If we can agree on national standards for excellence. student achievement and create conditions in school systems all over the country in which those standards are internalized and made the centerpiece of educators and politically viable means of d irectly inducing the hundreds students' efforts, there is a good probability that of institutions responsible for educating teachers to make radical changes in what they do themselves or demand of curriculum, professional development, textbooks, and, future teachers. Furthermore, even with major changes eventually, teacher preparation can be changed so that in pre-service teacher education, it would take a long the entire system is working toward the standards. time to change schooling practice. Newcomers to any INTERNALIZED STANDARDS: KEY TO A profession are not well positioned to cake the lead in NEW CULTURE OF TEACHING changing practice. For many years to come, the vast majority of teachers in place will have been educated in the "old" ways. Means must be found to more directly This approach may sound like a prescription for affect the practices of those already in the teaching force. federal, or at least national, tests or exams tied to standards What about changing the management structure of set by a committee of experts. It is not. National standards alone will not achieve our goals. Standards must be educationgiving local educators and parents more direct decision-making power? There seems little doubt, for internalized. Unless standards are held as personal goals reasons discussed below, that such changes are essential by teachers first, and eventually by studentslittle in the way of profound educational change can result from a to overall systemic reform. Apart from a few schools with substantial outside resources, however, changes in standard-setting and assessment process. Let us consider management and decision making have, so far, rarely why this is so. produced significant changes in curriculum, teaching, If a national test embodying the highest standards and learning. Those that have reached such results have of a thinking curriculum could be created in Washington almost always depended upon exceptional individual and given to every student in America, with test scores leaders.'° These leaders often negotiate special privileges sent back to schools from a national office, educators for the schoolfor example, freedom from certain might hope to change their school's performance mandated tests during an experimental period, the right especially if some consequences for themselves or their to choose faculty in ways that are not standard in their students were attached to test scores. But if educators did districtand sometimes raise extra funds from not understand in a profound manner the differences foundations and other donors. Such schools are tolerated between high and low scores, they would not know how as exceptional experiments that do not really challenge to direct their efforts. Adclitionai I if educators were not the normal ways in which the system works. Without a personally invested in the standards and assessments change in the surrounding system, exceptional schools of based on them, the various forms ofcheating and"working this kind are fragile and likely to be driven back to around the system" that have bein amply documenked in I 0 WINTER 1992.93 SS