Development and Validation of Scientific Practices Assessment Tasks for the General Chemistry Laboratory

Stephenson, Norda S.; Duffy, Erin M.; Day, Elizabeth L.; Padilla, Kira; Herrington, Deborah G.; Cooper, Melanie M.; Carmel, Justin H.

doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00897

Cited by 30 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 48 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One way to mitigate the challenges associated with each of these approaches is to combine the two approaches. One study conducted interviews that incorporated both concurrent and retrospective components; 37 in this case, respondents were asked to actively think-aloud as they answered test items (concurrent). After they had completed the items, the researchers then asked respondents about their interpretations of test items (retrospective).…”

Section: Designing Cognitive Interview Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response process validity evidence in chemistry education research

Deng

Streja

Flynn

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response process validity evidence can provide researchers with insight into how and why participants interpret items on instruments (e.g., tests, questionnaires). In the chemistry education research literature and in the social sciences more broadly, there has been variable use and reporting of response process aspects of studies. This manuscript's objective is to support researchers in developing purposeful, theory-driven protocols to investigate response processes. We highlight key considerations for researchers who are interested in using cognitive interviews in their research, including: the theoretical basis for response process, collecting response process validity evidence through cognitive interviews, and using that evidence to inform instrument modifications.

show abstract

Section: Designing Cognitive Interview Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response process validity evidence in chemistry education research

Deng

Streja

Flynn

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the task design is accompanied by the rubric development. The ESs lay out the foundation for the rubric development so that they collectively describe the extent to which students meet the LP [8,9]. However, tasks and the rubric should be validated with student responses to explore if they are working as intended.…”

Section: Theoretical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We explore how we can synthesize students' written work to give instructors feedback about students' performance and how they can modify their course to better assist students in achieving particular learning goals. We build on the work conducted by Harris et al [8] and Stephenson et al [9] to articulate a methodology to determine feedback that goes beyond reporting numerical scores to the instructors of the course. This work is an initial effort to articulate a theory-based methodology for developing and delivering instructor feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment feedback: A tool to promote scientific practices in upper-division

Jambuge¹,

Rainey²,

Wilcox³

et al. 2020

2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students' scores on assessments play a vital role in course modifications, though their effectiveness relies on the quality of the interpretation of these scores. We adapt the notion of assessments as a change agent so that a well-developed rubric accompanied by intentionally designed instructor feedback can act as a tool to inform course improvement. In conjunction with work developing a standardized upper-division thermal physics assessment, this pilot work articulates a methodology to determine feedback for instructors to inform how well their courses support students in meeting learning goals. In this paper, we present an example using a task targeting the scientific practice of "using mathematics" to explicate this methodology. This work highlights the importance of assessment feedback to inform explicit course modifications in physics.

show abstract

“…For example, asking questions and defining problems, planning and carrying out investigations, analyzing and interpreting data, constructing explanations and designing solutions, and obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information can all be carried out in the absence of a novel research question. These practices are echoed in models for assessment at the university level in chemistry, physics, and biology curricula [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Repetition is Important to Students and Their Understanding During Laboratory Courses that Include Research

Wiggins¹,

Lily²,

Sefi-Cyr³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) provide students with opportunities for the same gains that apprenticed research with faculty members offer. As their popularity increases, it is important that critical elements of CUREs are supported by thoughtful design. Student experiences in CUREs can provide important insights into why CUREs are so effective. We present evidence from students who participated in CUREs at the introductory, intermediate, and advanced levels, as well as from graduate teaching assistants for an introductory lab course that included a CURE. Students and teaching assistants describe repetition as a valuable element in CUREs and other laboratory experiences. We used student work and open-ended interviews to identify which of five previously described elements of CUREs students found important. Because repetition was particularly salient, we characterized how students described repetition as they experienced it in courses that contained full-length or “micro”-CUREs. In prompted interviews, students described how repetition in CUREs provided cognitive (learning concepts) and practical (learning technical skills) value. Recent graduates who had participated in CUREs at each level of their Biology education were particularly aware that they placed value in repetition and acknowledged it as motivational in their own learning. Many students described repetition in metacognitive terms, which also suggests that as students advance through laboratory and CURE curricula, their understanding of how repetition supports their learning becomes more sophisticated. Finally, we integrated student descriptions to suggest ways in which repetition can be designed into CUREs or other laboratory courses to support scientific learning and enhance students’ sense of scientific identity.

show abstract

Development and Validation of Scientific Practices Assessment Tasks for the General Chemistry Laboratory

Cited by 30 publications

References 48 publications

Response process validity evidence in chemistry education research

Response process validity evidence in chemistry education research

Assessment feedback: A tool to promote scientific practices in upper-division

Repetition is Important to Students and Their Understanding During Laboratory Courses that Include Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About