Toward coherence in curriculum, instruction, and assessment: A review of learning progression literature

Jin, Hui; Mikeska, Jamie N.; Hokayem, Hayat; Mavronikolas, Elia

doi:10.1002/sce.21525

Cited by 61 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 122 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This kind of LP research does not consider how learners construct their knowledge and how they use the knowledge when implementing scientific practices; rather they only describe the extent to what the learners know according to the level of the LP. Using science knowledge linked to scientific practices, however, is considered much more important than understanding only science knowledge, as addressed in current science education policies such as the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013) and the Korean Science Education Standards for the Next Generation (KOFAC, 2019) and meta-analytic studies on LP s in science education (e.g., Duschl et al, 2011;Duschl, 2019;Jin et al, 2019). The geocognition LP in this study described how students' practice of spatial, temporal, and retrospective reasoning and system thinking improved progressively with the understanding of geological content together based on the evidence from the assessment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating a Learning Progression for Reasoning Practices of Geocognition Using GeoMapApp-Based Assessment

Seungho

2020

Asia-Pac. Sci. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined a case of GeoMapApp-based assessment to investigate a learning progression for middle school students’ understanding of geoscience content and geocognition (spatial, temporal, and retrospective reasoning and system thinking). A 2-year GeoMapApp-based assessment process was administered along with a double-round of the construct modeling approach. Based on the measurement of Rasch analysis, the geocognition learning progression was described in terms of data-driven level, meaning-acquiring level, knowledge-constructing level, and complex reasoning with geocognition level. The geocognition learning progression developed in this study had significant implications in terms of the progress variables integrating geoscientific reasoning practices with geoscience content and the perspective on learning with adopting work-with-it view. While this content is applicable in all regions, it is especially helpful for science teachers in the Asia-Pacific region to understand geocognition learning progressions to improve teaching and better support students to understand local geological environments in terms of plate tectonics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating a Learning Progression for Reasoning Practices of Geocognition Using GeoMapApp-Based Assessment

Seungho

2020

Asia-Pac. Sci. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As we discussed earlier, there is a long history of attention to coherence in the science education literature (Jin et al, 2019). Most of that work, however, has been on curricular coherence, which is focused on how the scientific content builds logically and coherently over time (Fortus et al, 2015).…”

Section: Using Phenomena To Support Coherencementioning

confidence: 99%

Redesign or relabel? How a commercial curriculum and its implementation oversimplify key features of the NGSS

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) requires many teachers to drastically change their classroom instruction. Curricular materials offer a tool to support this transition, but there are questions about the degree to which available curricula truly reflect the shifts required by the NGSS. This study proposes a framework of four key elements of NGSS design that can be used to analyze both curriculum and instruction for alignment to the NGSS. The four key elements include phenomenonbased, three-dimensional, supports student epistemic agency, and coherent. We used this analytic framework to analyze one commercially available middle school curriculum and its implementation in two classrooms. We found that the curriculum and instruction oversimplified the complex vision of science learning required by using natural phenomena primarily as hooks or examples, creating lessons in which students engaged in core ideas and science practices but separately in service of different goals, placing the cognitive load on the teacher to do most of the sensemaking rather than the students, and having the teacher, rather than the students, build coherence between the lessons. Our work suggests that future curriculum should focus on asking students to tell a how and why story around a phenomenon to support threedimensionality, student epistemic agency, and coherence. Furthermore, future work should explore how educative

show abstract

“…A parallel development in the field of educational assessment is the emergence of a new approach to science education manifest in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) (NGSS, 2013). The NGSS were designed to reflect learning progressions, mirroring the process through which students move from naïve understanding to more complex understanding of scientific concepts (Jin, Mikeska, Hokayem, & Mavronikolas, 2019). The NGSS encourage a move away from “cookbook” approaches to teaching science toward helping students engage in the productive “struggle” of thinking though concepts and engaging in practices as they make sense of scientific phenomena (Duschl & Bybee, 2014).…”

Section: Concurrent Developments In Alignment and Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

NGSS Alignment: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going?

Dickinson

Thacker

Michaels

2020

Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concurrent Developments in Alignment and Science Education The Standards for Educational and Psychological Assessment recognize that evidence of validity based on test content is "at the heart of" alignment (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014, p. 15). Alignment studies have traditionally focused on gathering specific evidence of the match between assessment items and performance expectations presented in the form of academic content standards (hereafter referred to as standards) by convening educators and content experts to review test forms in conjunction with content standards to determine the level of consistency between the two. Although such data serve as a good source of validity evidence, this content focus provides only a part of the picture of assessment alignment as envisioned over two decades ago. Alignment criteria, originally developed by a panel of experts and published in a monograph by Norman Webb (1997), included not only Content Focus, but also Articulation Across Grades and Ages, Equity and Fairness, Pedagogical Implications, and System Applicability. The Articulation Across Grades and Ages criterion addresses the extent to which standards and assessment reflect a common, research-based view of human development and how students move from basic to more complex understanding of concepts. The Equity and Fairness criterion addresses the extent to which both standards and assessment provide all students the opportunity to demonstrate high levels of learning. The Pedagogical Implications criterion addresses the classroom practices implied by the standards and assessment. Finally, the System Applicability criterion addresses the extent to which key stakeholder groups understand the standards and assessment and consider them to be acceptable and attainable (Webb, 1997). Early alignment studies that sought to apply these criteria focused on the Content Focus criterion (e.g., Webb, 1999), which set the stage for the Webb alignment benchmarks of categorical concurrence, depth of knowledge consistency, range of knowledge correspondence, and balance of representation to become what are arguably the most commonly known indicators of alignment. Lesser known components of the Content Focus criterion that were omitted from these early empirical studies included structure of knowledge comparability, which compared the relationships among ideas as suggested by the standards with those reflected in the test, and dispositional consonance, which focused on the extent to which broader expectations reflected in standards (e.g., attitudes) are also reflected in assessment practices. This narrowed focus was likely shaped by the fact that evidence of

show abstract

Toward coherence in curriculum, instruction, and assessment: A review of learning progression literature

Cited by 61 publications

References 122 publications

Investigating a Learning Progression for Reasoning Practices of Geocognition Using GeoMapApp-Based Assessment

Investigating a Learning Progression for Reasoning Practices of Geocognition Using GeoMapApp-Based Assessment

Redesign or relabel? How a commercial curriculum and its implementation oversimplify key features of the NGSS

NGSS Alignment: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About