Assessing Science for Understanding (CZ)

Training Module Based on Socio-cognitive Constructivism (CY)

European Dimension in Integrated Science Education (LT)

Development Procedural Skills in Science Education (BG)

Using Laboratory to Enhance Student Learning and Scientific Inquiry (TR)

Unit 1 - Purpose and Characteristic of Classroom Assessment	Unit 2 - A Constructivist Approach in Assessment	Unit 3 - Planning and Implementing Classroom Assessment Projects
Unit 4 - Techniques for Assessing Knowledge and Skills	Unit 5 - Techniques for Assessing Learner Attitudes, Values and self-awareness	Unit 6 - Assessing Learner Reactions to Instructions

Assessing Learner Reactions to Instructions

• To cultivate a sense of responsibility for science teacher students to constructivist assessment;
• To develop management skills of prospective teachers;
• To develop skills using materials, tools and technology;
• To learn to evaluate methods and materials in science assessment;
• To develop the skill in using different techniques.

Techniques for Assessing Learner Reactions to Instructions

Much of the controversy over student evaluations of teaching concerns their use in making promotion and tenure decision – an issue that will not be addressed here, since our interest is in helping teachers design, collect, and use student reactions to improve their own teaching. Students are in a good position to evaluate the impact of the teaching on their own learning. But are the reactions of students reliable, valid, and useful for the purpose of improving teaching, course materials, assignments and activities, and – consequently – useful for improving learning?

The questions of the validity of student judgements is more difficult and controversial. Here the questions is: “Are students really good judges of effective teaching?” The answer is probably that students are the best evaluators a teacher can get on some matters and not very credible judges on others. Teachers usually find some characteristics that are ranked high: concern for students, knowledge of subject matter, stimulation of interest, availability, encouragement of discussion, ability to explain clearly, enthusiasm, and preparation. We belive that it is possible to effect significant improvement in teaching through obtaining feedback from students.

Electronic Mail Feedback

The teacher poses a question to the class, via electronic mail about his or her teaching, and invites student responses. Students respond to the E-mail question wit a personal, though anonymous, message sent to the teacher´s electronic mailbox. Teacher writes one or two questions in which he/she asks for students´ reactions to some aspect of teaching. E-mail message is sent to all students with clear instructions on the lenght and type of response he/she is seeking and the deadline for responding.

Example

The science teacher sent the following question: “What is one specific, small change I could make that would help you learn more effectively in the topic Exploring Motion and Forces? Next day after deadline teacher read e-mails, analyzed the feedback, and wrote an e-mail response to the class, letting them know which suggestions he/she would act on, which he/she would not, and why.

Group Instructional Feedback Technique

This technique has many names and many variations, but they all centre on getting student responses to three questions related to their learning in the class. However they are worded, these three questions basically ask, “What works? What does not? What can be done to improve it?”

Example

The veteran physics teacher agreed to try this technique after he had convinced his colleague from chemistry to act as the “visiting assessor”. These were the prompts they agreed on:

1. Give one or two examples of specific things your teacher does that really help you learn molecular physics.
2. Give one or two examples of specific things your teacher does that make it more difficult for you to learn molecular physics.
3. Suggest one or two specific, practical changes your teacher could make that would help you improve your learning in the class.

The physics teacher told the students what was going to happen and asked them to cooperate. He assured them that their responses would remain anonymous, and he urged them to give honest, thoughtful feedback. Twenty minutes before the end of the next lesson, the chemistry teacher arrived, and the physics teacher introduced him and left. The “visiting assessor” quicly explained what he was doing and why, and how the process would work. He asked students to take about five minutes to write answers to all three questions on cards and then to take five minutes to discuss their answers in a small group. He then asked the groups to share only those responses that they heard from several members. He quickly listed common responses to the first two questions and then asked the students to indicate whether they agreed with each response by raising their hands. The chemistry teacher simply estimated the percentages of students raising their hands each time and wrote that rough estimate on the board. In this way, the whole class saw how much agreement there was on a few common “helpful” and “not helpful” points. The chemistry teacher summarized this information and shared it with the physics teacher.

Group-Work Evaluations

Group-Work Evaluations forms are simple questionnaires used to collect feedback on students´ reactions to cooperative learning in constructivist classroom. Group-Work Evaluations can help students and teachers see what is going well in learning groups, so that potentially destructive conflicts in groups can be discovered and defused. Group-Work Evaluations are most helpful in lessons where students regularly work in small groups.

Example

Science teacher decides what she wants to know about the group work and composes a few questions to get this information. The teacher used the the groups to solve problem. In the end of lesson students got the simple evaluation form:

1. Overall, how effectively did your group work together on this problem?
   Poorly    Adequately    Well    Extremely well
2. Out of the five group members, how many participate actively most of the time?
   None    One    Two    Three    Four    All five
3. Give one specific example of something you learned from the group that you probably would not have learned working alone.
4. Give one specific example of something the other group members learned from you that they probably would not have learned otherwise.
5. Suggest one change the group could make to improve its performance.

Tasks (assignments)

1. Can be your students good evaluators of your teaching? Why?
2. Try to design evaluation sheet for students to evaluate science teacher.
3. Which techniques suits to you the best and why?
4. Can science teacher make any mistake in the application of the technique? Try to find these mistakes.

Summary

Much of the controversy over student evaluations of teaching exists. Students are in a good position to evaluate the impact of the teaching on their own learning. But are the reactions of students reliable, valid, and useful for the purpose of improving teaching, course materials, assignments and activities, and – consequently – useful for improving learning? The questions of the validity of student judgements is more difficult and controversial. Here the questions is: “Are students really good judges of effective teaching?” The answer is probably that students are the best evaluators a teacher can get on some matters and not very credible judges on others. We believe that it is possible to effect significant improvement in teaching through obtaining feedback from students.

Next Reading

Mintzes,J.J., Wanderee, J.H., Novak,J.D. (Ed) Assessing Science Understanding. A Human Constructivist View. San Diego: Academic Press, 2000. ISBN 0-12-498365-0.

References

Angelo T.A., Cross, K.P. Classroom Assessment Techniques. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publisher, 1993. Second Edition. ISBN 1-55542-500-3.