Science Performance Assessment Research Articles

Performance assessment and science learning: Rationale for computers

Performance assessment in science focuses on measuring achievement of problem solving, higher-order thinking, and application of skills and knowledge. Descriptions of how performance assessment tasks are linked to science curriculum objectives are given, along with criteria for and examples of performance assessment tasks. Criteria for developing scoring procedures are considered. Throughout the discussion, the role that computers and related technology can play in problem-based performance assessment is described.

Computer technology-cognitive psychology interface and science performance assessment

The emerging interface between computer technology and cognitive psychology for performance assessment in science education is explored. Cognitive theories of learning offer promises to transform computer technology from a test administration tool into a process assessment tool, and computer technology offers a medium for studying the cognitive processes of learning. Interface theories and interface technologies are briefly discussed. The technology-psychology interface may be a base for building an alternative assessment technology. Some prototype projects in this line of inquiry are presented. As in any other novel approaches to testing, there are several questions that need to be answered in establishing the role of the technology-psychology interface in performance assessment.

The Effects of Working in Pairs in Science Performance Assessments

Concerns about the effects of multiple-choice measures in traditional testing programs have led many educators and policymakers to suggest the use of alternative assessment methods. Some performance-based assessments require students to work in small collaborative groups as part of the test process. This study uses responses to hands-on science tasks at Grades 5 and 8 to examine whether the score a student earns while working with someone else is a truly independent assessment of that student's ability. We also explore whether working in pairs affects an individual's scores on subsequent tasks and whether these results are consistent across grade levels. Our analyses indicate that at Grades 5 and 8, work done with a partner should not be considered as an independent assessment of each student's ability. Some evidence of carry-over effects from working in pairs was found at each grade.

Generalizability of Large-Scale Performance Assessments in Science: Promises and Problems

This study provides empirical evidence about the sampling variability and generalizability (reliability) of a statewide science performance assessment. Results at both individual and school levels indicate that task-sampling variability was the major source of measurement error in the performance assessment; rater-sampling variability was negligible. Adding more tasks improves the generalizability of the measurement. For the school-level assessment, the variation of performance among students within a school was larger than the variation among schools. Increasing the number of students taking a test within a school thus increases the generalizability of the assessment. Finally, the allocation of students in a matrix-sampling design is compared to a studentscrossed-with-tasks design. The former would require fewer tasks per student than the latter to build a generalizable measure of school performance.

The Utility of Multiple Raters and Tasks in Science Performance Assessments

Concern about the education system has increasingly focused on achievement outcomes and the role of assessment in school performance. Our research with fifth and eighth graders in California explored several issues regarding student performance and rater reliability on hands-on tasks that were administered as part of a field test of a statewide assessment program in science. This research found that raters can produce reliable scores for hands-on tests of science performance. However, the reliability of performance test scores per hour of testing time is quite low relative to multiple-choice tests. Reliability can be improved substantially by adding more tasks (and testing time). Using more than one rater per task produces only a very small improvement in the reliability of a student's total score across tasks. These results were consistent across both grade levels, and they echo the findings of past research.

Science performance assessments: benchmarks and surrogates

This study examined the exchangeability of alternative methods for measuring science achievement at the elementary level. Observation of a student performing a hands-on investigation was considered to be the “benchmark” method for science performance assessments. Four less-costly methods — or possible “surrogates” for the benchmark — were, in order of decreasing verisimilitude: (a) A notebook report of an investigation, (b) a computer simulation of an investigation, (c) short-answer questions about an investigation, and (d) multiple-choice questions about an investigation. Exchangeability of each of the four surrogates for the benchmark was examined using three different investigations: “Electric Mysteries,” “Paper Towels,” and “Bugs.” One hundred and ninety-seven fifth- and sixth-grade students were given: (a) All investigations with each method, (b) a multiple-choice science achievement test, and (c) an aptitude test. Results of exchangeability analyses indicated that only the notebook provided a reasonable surrogate for the benchmark. This finding was replicated across the three investigations. Moreover, combinations of surrogates, including the multiple-choice science achievement test, failed to approximate information gained from direct observation of student performance, over and above information provided by the notebook surrogate.

Performance Assessment in Science

The call for alternative assessments of science achievement grows out of the current constructivist reform in science curriculum and cognitive research. This article presents and applies guidelines for developing performance assessments aligned with this research and reform. We sample classroom activities or tasks from a domain of activities and construct performance assessments with them. Using this approach, three hands-on science investigations were constructed so that each could be scored by observers in real time. These investigations were considered benchmarks for performance assessments. Because these investigations are costly to develop and administer, surrogates were developed: student notebooks in lieu of observers, computer simulations of the investigations, free response questions paralleling parts of the investigation, and multiple-choice items with alternatives keyed to student hands-on performance. Data have been collected from over 300 fifth- and sixth-grade students using these assessment...