Towards the Implementation of Formal Formative Assessment in Inquiry-Based Science Education in Switzerland [1 ed.] 9783832592509, 9783832544843

Citation preview

Regula Grob

Towards the implementation of formal formative assessment in inquiry-based science education in Switzerland

λογος

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet u ¨ber http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

c

Copyright Logos Verlag Berlin GmbH 2017 Alle Rechte vorbehalten. ISBN 978-3-8325-4484-3

Logos Verlag Berlin GmbH Comeniushof, Gubener Str. 47, 10243 Berlin Tel.: +49 (0)30 42 85 10 90 Fax: +49 (0)30 42 85 10 92 INTERNET: http://www.logos-verlag.de

Towards the implementation of formal formative assessment in inquiry-based science education in Switzerland

Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung der Würde eines Doktors der Philosophie vorgelegt der Philosophisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Basel

von Regula Grob aus Wattwil SG

Berlin, 2017

Genehmigt von der Philosophisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät auf Antrag von Prof. Dr. Andreas Wetzel (Fakultätsvertreter) Prof. Dr. Peter Labudde (Dissertationsleiter) Prof. Dr. Jens Dolin (Korreferent)

Basel, den 13. 12. 2016

Prof. Dr. Jörg Schibler

List of contents 1

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1

2

CONTEXT OF THE STUDY ..................................................................... 5

3

THEORY ............................................................................................... 7 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8

4

THE CONCEPT OF INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE EDUCATION .................................. 7 THE CONCEPT OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT ............................................... 17 MECHANISMS IN FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT THAT SUPPORT LEARNING .............. 23 METHODS OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT FOR THE CONTEXT OF INQUIRYBASED SCIENCE EDUCATION ................................................................... 29 TEACHER CONCEPTS OF AND SELF-EFFICACY IN FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT .......... 37 OBSTACLES TO PUTTING FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT INTO PRACTICE AND MEASURES OF SUPPORT ....................................................................... 43 EFFECTS OF PROGRAMS IMPLEMENTING FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT .................. 49 INQUIRY AND ASSESSMENT IN SWITZERLAND ............................................. 55

RESEARCH QUESTIONS ...................................................................... 71 4.1 A THEORETICAL FRAME FOR INNOVATION IN TEACHING: THE MODEL OF PROFESSIONAL GROWTH....................................................................... 71 4.2 INTRODUCTION OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................. 75 4.3 USE OF RESULTS FOR GENERATION OF HYPOTHESES ..................................... 79

5

METHODS ......................................................................................... 81 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

6

SETTING ........................................................................................... 81 PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................... 85 DATA COLLECTION .............................................................................. 89 SELECTION OF CASES FOR ANALYSIS ....................................................... 103 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................ 107

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF IMPLEMENTATIONS ........................... 123 6.1 WRITTEN TEACHER ASSESSMENT AT PRIMARY SCHOOL ............................... 123 6.2 PEER-ASSESSMENT AT UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL.................................... 125 6.3 COMBINATION OF PEER-ASSESSMENT AND SELF-ASSESSMENT AT PRIMARY SCHOOL ......................................................................................... 127

7

RESULTS .......................................................................................... 131 7.1 RESULTS ON RESEARCH QUESTION 1: TEACHERS UNDERSTANDING OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT .................................................................... 133 7.2 RESULTS ON RESEARCH QUESTION 2: DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE TEACHERS TRIALS ............................................................................. 139

7.3 RESULTS ON RESEARCH QUESTION 3: TEACHERS AND STUDENTS EVALUATIONS OF THE METHODS TRIALLED............................................... 163 7.4 RESULTS ON RESEARCH QUESTION 4: CHANGES IN TEACHERS UNDERSTANDINGS AND IMPLEMENTATIONS THROUGHOUT THE COLLABORATION IN THE STUDY .... 197 8

DISCUSSION ..................................................................................... 223 8.1 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH QUESTION 1: THE TEACHERS UNDERSTANDING OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT................................................................ 223 8.2 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH QUESTION 2: DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE TEACHERS TRIALS ....................................................................... 227 8.3 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH QUESTION 3: TEACHERS AND STUDENTS EVALUATIONS OF THE METHODS TRIALLED............................................... 239 8.4 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH QUESTION 4: CHANGES IN TEACHERS UNDERSTANDINGS AND IMPLEMENTATIONS THROUGHOUT THE COLLABORATION IN THE STUDY ............................................................ 253

8.5 MEASURES OF SUPPORT FOR FORMAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT PRACTICES IN SWITZERLAND .............................................................................. 261 8.6 TEACHERS DEVELOPING THEIR OWN FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT PRACTICES IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS STUDY ............................................................ 271 9

RETROSPECTS AND PROSPECTS ........................................................ 275 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4

AIMS OF THE STUDY .......................................................................... 275 CRITIQUE OF METHODOLOGY .............................................................. 275 IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY ............................................................... 277 PROSPECTS ..................................................................................... 277

10 LITERATURE ..................................................................................... 281 APPENDIX .............................................................................................. 307 A1. TEACHER PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE ....................................................... 307 A2. QUESTION FOR TEACHERS TO DEFINE FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT ................. 310 A3. EVALUATION FORM FOR TEACHERS ....................................................... 311 A4. EVALUATION FORM FOR STUDENTS ....................................................... 315 A5. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TEACHERS ................................................... 317 A6. TOPICS FOR TEACHER GROUP DISCUSSIONS ............................................. 320 A7. DESCRIPTION OF CASES ...................................................................... 321 A8. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES FOR RQ 1 ................................................ 327 A9. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES FOR RQ 2 ................................................ 328 A10. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES FOR RQS 3.2 AND 3.5 ................................ 332 A11. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES FOR RQ 3.3 ............................................. 336 A12. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES FOR RQ 3.6 ............................................. 337 A13. DESCRIPTION OF CATEGORIES FOR RQ 4.5 ............................................. 338

List of tables TABLE 1: CYCLE LENGTHS FOR FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT (FROM WILIAM, 2010). ............ 22 TABLE 2: ALIGNMENT OF INQUIRY ACTIVITIES AS DEFINED IN BELL ET AL. (2010), THE SCIENCE COMPETENCE MODEL (HARMOS, 2008) AND THE MANNERS OF THINKING, WORKING AND ACTING (D-EDK, 2014) FROM THE CURRICULUM OF THE COMPULSORY SCHOOL LEVELS. ....................................................................... 58 TABLE 3: ALIGNMENT OF INQUIRY ACTIVITIES AS DEFINED IN BELL ET AL. (2010) AND THE CURRICULUM FOR THE GYMNASIUM (RLP NACH MAR). ................................ 60 TABLE 4: CONNECTIONS BETWEEN RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM SUB-CHAPTER 4.2 AND THE HYPOTHESES DERIVED FROM THE RESULTS IN SUB-CHAPTERS 8.5 AND 8.6........... 79 TABLE 5: PARTICIPANTS OF THE STUDY TEACHING AT PRIMARY SCHOOL (N=9). TEACHERS MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK LEFT THE PROJECT AFTER TWO SEMESTERS. ...... 86 TABLE 6: PARTICIPANTS OF THE STUDY TEACHING AT UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL (N=11). TEACHERS MARKED WITH TWO ASTERISKS COLLABORATED WITH OLIA TSIVITANIDOU FOR ONE (S8) OR TWO (S9; S10) SEMESTERS. THE TRIALS THAT EMERGED FROM THAT COLLABORATION ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS STUDY. ....... 87 TABLE 7: DATA FROM THE TEACHER PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................... 92 TABLE 8: DATA FROM THE WRITTEN DEFINITION TASK. .............................................. 93 TABLE 9: DATA FROM THE EVALUATION FORMS FOR TEACHERS. ................................... 95 TABLE 10: TEACHING MATERIALS. ........................................................................ 96 TABLE 11: ASSESSED STUDENT ARTEFACTS AND CORRESPONDING FEEDBACK................... 97 TABLE 12: OBSERVATION NOTES FROM LESSONS VISITED. .......................................... 98 TABLE 13: DATA FROM THE EVALUATION FORMS FOR STUDENTS. .............................. 100 TABLE 14: DATA FROM THE INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS WITH TEACHERS. ........................ 101 TABLE 15: DATA FROM THE GROUP DISCUSSIONS WITH THE TEACHERS. ....................... 102 TABLE 16: OVERVIEW OF CASES. ....................................................................... 105 TABLE 17: CODING FRAME FOR THE FIRST RESEARCH QUESTION................................. 108 TABLE 18: CODING FRAME FOR RESEARCH QUESTION 2. .......................................... 109 TABLE 19: CODING FRAME FOR THE THIRD RESEARCH QUESTION................................ 112 TABLE 20: CODING FRAME FOR THE FOURTH RESEARCH QUESTION. ............................ 115 TABLE 21: TEACHER PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRES THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE ANALYSIS. .. 116 TABLE 22: OVERVIEW OF SCALES BUILT FROM THE ITEMS OF THE TEACHER PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE. TWO VALUES FOR CRONBACH S Α BECAUSE OF THE TWO MEASUREMENTS (SEPT 2014 / JAN 2016) .................................................... 116 TABLE 23: TEACHERS UNDERSTANDING OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT. ........................ 133 TABLE 24: PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS (IN N=18 METHODS TRIALLED IN 14 TRIALS): USABILITY OF METHODS. 4=VERY USEFUL; 1=VERY USELESS. ............................... 164 TABLE 25: UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS (IN N=22 METHODS TRIALLED IN 20 TRIALS): USABILITY OF METHODS. 4=VERY USEFUL; 1=VERY USELESS. .................... 164

TABLE 26: CODING SYSTEM FOR BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF ASSESSMENT METHODS TRIALLED AS PERCEIVED BY THE TEACHERS. ......................................... 166 TABLE 27: BENEFITS OF WRITTEN TEACHER ASSESSMENT (N=17 TRIALS FROM 12 TEACHERS): CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). .................................................................................. 177 TABLE 28: CHALLENGES OF WRITTEN TEACHER ASSESSMENT (N=17 TRIALS FROM 12 TEACHERS): CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). .................................................................................. 178 TABLE 29: BENEFITS OF PEER-ASSESSMENT AS MENTIONED BY THE TEACHERS (N=17 TRIALS FROM 13 TEACHERS): CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ........................................................... 179 TABLE 30: CHALLENGES RELATED TO PEER-ASSESSMENT (N=17 TRIALS FROM 13 TEACHERS): CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). .................................................................................. 181 TABLE 31: BENEFITS OF SELF-ASSESSMENT AS PERCEIVED BY THE TEACHERS (N=6 TRIALS FROM 6 TEACHERS): CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ........................................................... 183 TABLE 32: CHALLENGES OF SELF-ASSESSMENT AS PERCEIVED BY THE TEACHERS (N=6 TRIALS FROM 6 TEACHERS): CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ............................................................... 183 TABLE 33: USABILITY OF WRITING COMMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF PEER-ASSESSMENT AS EVALUATED BY THE STUDENTS. 4=VERY USEFUL; 1=VERY USELESS. AM = ARITHMETIC MEAN; SD = STANDARD DEVIATION. CLASSES 1-3 ARE SUMMARIZED AS ONE SETTING BECAUSE THE RESPECTIVE PEER-ASSESSMENT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE SAME TEACHER IN THE SAME INQUIRY-BASED UNIT WITH THREE DIFFERENT CLASSES.................................................................................................. 189 TABLE 34: USABILITY OF COMMENTS FROM PEERS AS EVALUATED BY THE STUDENTS. 4=VERY USEFUL; 1=VERY USELESS. AM = ARITHMETIC MEAN; SD = STANDARD DEVIATION. CLASSES 1-3 ARE SUMMARIZED AS ONE SETTING BECAUSE THE RESPECTIVE PEER-ASSESSMENT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE SAME TEACHER IN THE SAME INQUIRY-BASED UNIT WITH THREE DIFFERENT CLASSES. .............................. 190 TABLE 35: CODING SYSTEM FOR BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF PEER-ASSESSMENT (BOTH ASSESSOR AND ASSESSE ROLES) AS PERCEIVED BY THE STUDENTS. ................. 191 TABLE 36: BENEFITS OF ASSESSING PEERS AS REPORTED BY THE STUDENTS (N=103 STUDENTS FROM 5 CLASSES). CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ........................................................... 191 TABLE 37: BENEFITS OF RECEIVING FEEDBACK FROM PEERS AS REPORTED BY THE STUDENTS (N=103 STUDENTS FROM 5 CLASSES). CATEGORIES AND SUBCATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ....................... 192

TABLE 38: CHALLENGES OF ASSESSING PEERS AS REPORTED BY THE STUDENTS (N=103 STUDENTS FROM 5 CLASSES). CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ........................................................... 194 TABLE 39: CHALLENGES OF RECEIVING FEEDBACK FROM PEERS AS REPORTED BY THE STUDENTS (N=103 STUDENTS FROM 5 CLASSES). CATEGORIES AND SUBCATEGORIES (LEFT) AS WELL AS PARAPHRASES OF QUOTES (RIGHT). ....................... 194 TABLE 40: ELEMENTS IN THE TEACHERS WRITTEN DEFINITIONS IN THE THREE ROUNDS OF IMPLEMENTATION. SINCE THE TEACHERS WERE ASKED ABOUT THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF THE TERM FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT ANONYMOUSLY, THEIR CODES ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE CODES INTRODUCED IN SUB-CHAPTER 5.2. ........... 199 TABLE 41: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF THE PERSONAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT EFFICACY BELIEF SCALE AND ITS ITEMS. MDN=MEDIAN; AM= ARITHMETIC MEAN; SD= STANDARD DEVIATION. ........................................................................ 202 TABLE 42: WILCOXON TESTS AND EFFECT SIZES FOR THE PERSONAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT EFFICACY BELIEF SCALE AND ITS ITEMS. SIGNIFICANCE: *P