Validities of Standards-Based Science Inquiry Assessment

基于标准的科学探究评估的有效性

• 批准号: 9903287
• 负责人: Edys Quellmalz
• 金额: $ 98.68万
• 依托单位: SRI International
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Continuing Grant
• 财政年份: 1999
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1999-07-15 至 2001-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=9903287&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Validities; Standards; Based; Science; Inquiry

The proposed research examines the validities of a sample of item formats and performance tasks used in three large-scale science assessments: NAEP, TIMSS, and New Standards and in a set of curriculum-embedded assessments. Qualitative analyses will be used to clarify the alignment of formats used in these assessments with the National Science Education Standards and also to analyze the cognitive demands of the varying assessment formats. Similarly, quantitative methods will supply empirical comparisons of student performance on a sample of different types of items and performance tasks to provide evidence of their validity as measures of scientific inquiry. A conceptual map for understanding and designing balanced indicator systems of science achievement will be developed. The research will offer recommendations for enhancing large-scale science assessment systems .Key Features of the ResearchThe "Validities of Standards-based Science Inquiry Assessments: A Study of Multi-Method Indicator Systems" addresses a timely and important issue: "Just how complete and accurate a picture of science achievement is portrayed by today's high-visibility reference exams such as the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS), the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), or the New Standards Science Assessment? " Despite the substantial investment in the development of high standards and "minds-on/hands-on science curricula" there is limited empirical evidence that large-scale science assessment programs adequately test what students know and can do. If current reference exams are not testing many of the deeper and critical learning outcomes identified in the National Science Education Standards (NSES), the validity of their scores as evidence in support of policies shaping educational programs is questionable. The study will mount three integrated lines of research to study the validities of science assessments: (1) a study of the alignment of a sample of assessment question and exercise formats in the reference exams with with National Science Education Standards, (2) a study of the cognitive demands placed on learners when solving different types of items/tasks drawn from the assessments, and (3) an empirical study of the validities of student scores on combinations of different types of assessment formats drawn from these tests. To provide advice on the conduct of these three research studies, SRI International has assembled a team of nationally recognized experts in the fields of science education, cognitive psychology, and educational measurement. The cognitive analysis, alignment, and empirical strands of the proposed research aim to integrate evidence about intended task demands, actual task elicitations, and confirmatory performance. Two critical outcomes of the project will be: a conceptual framework for characterizing the design features of item/task formats that aim to elicit different types of science learning; and recommendations for the design of multi-level assessment systems that would provide more comprehensive measures of students' science knowledge and inquiry strategies. In sum, this research will help to build a map for understanding and designing balanced indicator systems of science achievement.

拟议的研究检验了三个大型科学评估（NAEP、TIMSS 和新标准）以及一组课程嵌入评估中使用的项目格式和绩效任务样本的有效性。定性分析将用于阐明这些评估中使用的格式与国家科学教育标准的一致性，并分析不同评估格式的认知需求。 同样，定量方法将提供学生在不同类型的项目和绩效任务样本上的表现的实证比较，以提供其作为科学探究衡量标准的有效性的证据。将开发一个用于理解和设计科学成就平衡指标体系的概念图。 该研究将为加强大规模科学评估系统提供建议。研究的主要特点“基于标准的科学探究评估的有效性：多方法指标系统的研究”解决了一个及时而重要的问题：“今天的高可见度参考考试，例如第三次国际数学和科学研究（TIMMS）、国家教育进步评估（NAEP）、 还是新标准科学评估？尽管在制定高标准和“动脑/动手科学课程”方面投入了大量资金，但有限的经验证据表明大规模科学评估项目足以测试学生的知识和能力。 如果当前的参考考试没有测试国家科学教育标准（NSES）中确定的许多更深入和关键的学习成果，那么其分数作为支持制定教育计划的政策的证据的有效性值得怀疑。 该研究将通过三个综合研究方向来研究科学评估的有效性：（1）研究参考考试中的评估问题样本和练习格式与国家科学教育标准的一致性，（2）研究学习者在解决从评估中得出的不同类型的项目/任务时所提出的认知要求，以及（3）对不同类型的评估格式组合中学生分数的有效性进行实证研究 从这些测试中。 为了为这三项研究的开展提供建议，SRI International 组建了一支由科学教育、认知心理学和教育测量领域的全国公认专家组成的团队。拟议研究的认知分析、一致性和实证研究旨在整合有关预期任务要求、实际任务启发和验证性表现的证据。 该项目的两个关键成果是：一个概念框架，用于描述旨在引发不同类型科学学习的项目/任务格式的设计特征；以及设计多层次评估系统的建议，该系统将为学生的科学知识和探究策略提供更全面的衡量。总之，这项研究将有助于构建一个理解和设计科学成就平衡指标体系的地图。