Designing Authentic Science Assessment for Pre-Service Science Teachers
Keywords:
authentic science assessment, pre-service science teachers, critical thinking
Abstract
The current research aimed to design an authentic science assessment domain for pre-service science teachers to enhance their higher thinking skills, such as critical thinking skills, being aware that if pre-service science teachers experienced effective authentic assessment domains, they would be much more skillful in their future classes. The research was conducted with the case study as one of the qualitative research designs. The authentic assessment process was performed on Cunningham engineering design integrated with Toulmin argument pattern components. Worksheets were utilized as data-collecting devices for the authentic science assessment process. Descriptions and content analysis were used for the evaluation of the gathered data. At the end of the study, it illustrated an innovative application of an authentic science assessment for pre-service science teachers in detail. Such a creative authentic science assessment process based on Cunningham engineering design integrated with Toulmin argument pattern components made pre-service science teachers construct their argument so as to think critically. Also, the illustrated authentic assessment domain would be a multicultural guide for university educators. In the current research, only an authentic science assessment domain was illustrated, this was the limitation of the research, so for further studies, authentic assessment domain constructions could be suggested.
References
Arık, M., & Topçu, M.S. (2023). Development and implementation of engineering-based aircraft unit: Middle school students’ engineering design process skills. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09829-7.
Aziz, M.N.A., Yusoff, N.M., & Yaakob, M.F.M. (2020). Challenges in using authentic assessment in 21st-century ELS classrooms. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(3), 759-768.
Bagnato, S.J. (2007). Authentic assessment for early childhood intervention. The Guilford Press.
Cambridge International Thinking Skills Syllabus 9694 (2020-2022). https://www.cambridgeinternational.org.
Cumming, J.J., & Maxwell, G.S. (1999). Contextualizing authentic assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policies and Practices, 6(2), 177-194.
Cunningham, C.M. (2009). Engineering is elementary. The Bridge, 30(3), 11-17.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
Erickson, E. (2004). Demystifying data construction and analysis. Anthropology and Education, 35(4), 486-493.
Dunn, K.E., & Mulvenon, S.W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessments: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessments in education. Practical, Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 14, 1-11.
Fisher, A., & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical thinking: Its definition and assessment. University of East Anglia, Centre for Research in Critical Thinking.
Fisher, A. (2001). Critical thinking: an introduction. What is critical thinking and how to improve it? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fook, C.Y., & Sidhu, G.K. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153-161.
Frey, B.B. (2013). Modern classroom assessment. SAGE Publications.
Gomez-del Rio, T., & Rodriguez, J. (2022). Design and assessment of a project-based learning in a laboratory for integrating knowledge and improving engineering design skills. Education for Chemical Engineers, 40, 17-28.
Herrington, J., & Herrington, A. (10-12 July 2006). Authentic conditions for authentic assessment: Aligning task and assessment. 29th Herdsa Annual Conference, Perth, Western Australia.
Hidayah, F.U., Linuwih, S., & Subali, B. (2023). The effectiveness of "Sipentik" as an authentic assessment application and for increasing student IT literacy. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 12(1), 107-116.
Ifelebuegu, A.O. (2023). Rethinking online assessment strategies: Authenticity versus AI chatbot intervention. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(2), 1-8.
Ismail, S.M., Nikpoo, I., & Prasad, K.D.V. (2023). Promoting self-regulated learning, autonomy, and self-efficacy of EFL learners through authentic assessment in EFL classrooms. Language Testing in Asia, 13, 1-20.
Jaelani, A., & Umam, A. (2021). Preparing EFL pre-service teachers for curriculum 2013 through authentic materials and assessment integration. Journal of English Educators Society, 6(1), 171-177.
Kinay, İ., & Bağçeci B. (2014). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının otantik değerlendirme sürecine yönelik görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Elektronik Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(6), 39-50.
Kinay, İ., & Bağçeci B. (2015). Otantik değerlendirme sürecine katılan öğretmen adaylarının duyuşsal özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Eğitim ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori ve Uygulama, 6(12), 67-80.
Kinay, İ., & Bağçeci B. (2017). Otantik değerlendirme yaklaşımının öğretmen adaylarının öğrenmeye ve katılımcı değerlendirmeye yönelik inançlarına etkisinin incelenmesi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 52, 16-32.
Luongo-Orlando, K. (2003). Authentic assessment: designing performance-based tasks. Pembroke Publishers.
Maxwell, G.S. (1999). Contextualising authentic assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policies and Practices, 6(2), 177-194.
McArthur, J. (2023). Rethinking authentic assessment: work, well-being, and society. Higher Education, 85, 85-101.
Mohamed, R., & Lebar, O. (2017). Authentic assessment in assessing higher order thinking skills. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(2), 466-476.
Moon, T.R., Brighton, C.M., Callahan, C.M., & Robinson, A. (2005). Development of authentic assessments for the middle school classrooms. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16(2/3), 119-133.
Nyanjom, J., Goh, E., Yang, E.C.L. (2023). Integrating authentic assessment tasks in work integrated learning hospitality internships. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 75(2), 300-322.
Purzer, Ş., Quintana-Cifuentes, J., & Menekse, M. (2022). The honeycomb of engineering framework: Philosophy of engineering guiding precollege engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 111, 19-39.
Rennert-Ariev, P., & College, L. (2005). A theoretical model for the authentic assessment of teaching. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 1-11.
Scott, J. (2000). Authentic assessment tools. In R.L. Custer (Ed.), J.W. Schell, B. McAlister, J. Scott, & M. Hoepfl. Using authentic assessment in vocational education. Information Series No. 381 (pp. 40-55). Eric Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 440 293.
Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
Sullivan, D.F., & McConnell, K.D. (2017) Big progress in authentic assessment, but by itself not enough. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 49(1), 14-25.
Svinicki, M.D. (2004). Authentic assessment: Testing in reality. In M.V. Achacoso & M.D. Svinicki (Eds.), Alternative Strategies for Evaluating Student Learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 100, 23-29. Jossey-Bass.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University.
Tozlu, İ., Gülseven, E., & Tüysüz, M. (2019). FeTeMM eğitimine yönelik etkinlik uygulaması: Kuvvet ve enerji örneği. YYÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 869-896.
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 2(2), 1-3.
Yang, D., & Chittoori, B. (2022). Technology-supported engineering design and problem solving for elementary students. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 6(4), 524-542.
Zhong, B., Zheng, J., & Zhan, Z. (2023). An exploration of combining virtual and physical robots in robotic education. Interactive Learning Environment, 31(1), 370-382.
Aziz, M.N.A., Yusoff, N.M., & Yaakob, M.F.M. (2020). Challenges in using authentic assessment in 21st-century ELS classrooms. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(3), 759-768.
Bagnato, S.J. (2007). Authentic assessment for early childhood intervention. The Guilford Press.
Cambridge International Thinking Skills Syllabus 9694 (2020-2022). https://www.cambridgeinternational.org.
Cumming, J.J., & Maxwell, G.S. (1999). Contextualizing authentic assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policies and Practices, 6(2), 177-194.
Cunningham, C.M. (2009). Engineering is elementary. The Bridge, 30(3), 11-17.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
Erickson, E. (2004). Demystifying data construction and analysis. Anthropology and Education, 35(4), 486-493.
Dunn, K.E., & Mulvenon, S.W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessments: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessments in education. Practical, Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 14, 1-11.
Fisher, A., & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical thinking: Its definition and assessment. University of East Anglia, Centre for Research in Critical Thinking.
Fisher, A. (2001). Critical thinking: an introduction. What is critical thinking and how to improve it? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fook, C.Y., & Sidhu, G.K. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153-161.
Frey, B.B. (2013). Modern classroom assessment. SAGE Publications.
Gomez-del Rio, T., & Rodriguez, J. (2022). Design and assessment of a project-based learning in a laboratory for integrating knowledge and improving engineering design skills. Education for Chemical Engineers, 40, 17-28.
Herrington, J., & Herrington, A. (10-12 July 2006). Authentic conditions for authentic assessment: Aligning task and assessment. 29th Herdsa Annual Conference, Perth, Western Australia.
Hidayah, F.U., Linuwih, S., & Subali, B. (2023). The effectiveness of "Sipentik" as an authentic assessment application and for increasing student IT literacy. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 12(1), 107-116.
Ifelebuegu, A.O. (2023). Rethinking online assessment strategies: Authenticity versus AI chatbot intervention. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(2), 1-8.
Ismail, S.M., Nikpoo, I., & Prasad, K.D.V. (2023). Promoting self-regulated learning, autonomy, and self-efficacy of EFL learners through authentic assessment in EFL classrooms. Language Testing in Asia, 13, 1-20.
Jaelani, A., & Umam, A. (2021). Preparing EFL pre-service teachers for curriculum 2013 through authentic materials and assessment integration. Journal of English Educators Society, 6(1), 171-177.
Kinay, İ., & Bağçeci B. (2014). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının otantik değerlendirme sürecine yönelik görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Elektronik Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(6), 39-50.
Kinay, İ., & Bağçeci B. (2015). Otantik değerlendirme sürecine katılan öğretmen adaylarının duyuşsal özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Eğitim ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori ve Uygulama, 6(12), 67-80.
Kinay, İ., & Bağçeci B. (2017). Otantik değerlendirme yaklaşımının öğretmen adaylarının öğrenmeye ve katılımcı değerlendirmeye yönelik inançlarına etkisinin incelenmesi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 52, 16-32.
Luongo-Orlando, K. (2003). Authentic assessment: designing performance-based tasks. Pembroke Publishers.
Maxwell, G.S. (1999). Contextualising authentic assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policies and Practices, 6(2), 177-194.
McArthur, J. (2023). Rethinking authentic assessment: work, well-being, and society. Higher Education, 85, 85-101.
Mohamed, R., & Lebar, O. (2017). Authentic assessment in assessing higher order thinking skills. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(2), 466-476.
Moon, T.R., Brighton, C.M., Callahan, C.M., & Robinson, A. (2005). Development of authentic assessments for the middle school classrooms. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16(2/3), 119-133.
Nyanjom, J., Goh, E., Yang, E.C.L. (2023). Integrating authentic assessment tasks in work integrated learning hospitality internships. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 75(2), 300-322.
Purzer, Ş., Quintana-Cifuentes, J., & Menekse, M. (2022). The honeycomb of engineering framework: Philosophy of engineering guiding precollege engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 111, 19-39.
Rennert-Ariev, P., & College, L. (2005). A theoretical model for the authentic assessment of teaching. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 1-11.
Scott, J. (2000). Authentic assessment tools. In R.L. Custer (Ed.), J.W. Schell, B. McAlister, J. Scott, & M. Hoepfl. Using authentic assessment in vocational education. Information Series No. 381 (pp. 40-55). Eric Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 440 293.
Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
Sullivan, D.F., & McConnell, K.D. (2017) Big progress in authentic assessment, but by itself not enough. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 49(1), 14-25.
Svinicki, M.D. (2004). Authentic assessment: Testing in reality. In M.V. Achacoso & M.D. Svinicki (Eds.), Alternative Strategies for Evaluating Student Learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 100, 23-29. Jossey-Bass.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University.
Tozlu, İ., Gülseven, E., & Tüysüz, M. (2019). FeTeMM eğitimine yönelik etkinlik uygulaması: Kuvvet ve enerji örneği. YYÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 869-896.
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 2(2), 1-3.
Yang, D., & Chittoori, B. (2022). Technology-supported engineering design and problem solving for elementary students. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 6(4), 524-542.
Zhong, B., Zheng, J., & Zhan, Z. (2023). An exploration of combining virtual and physical robots in robotic education. Interactive Learning Environment, 31(1), 370-382.
Published
2023-12-01
How to Cite
Tüysüz, M., Tüzün, Ümmüye N., & Çavuş, H. (2023). Designing Authentic Science Assessment for Pre-Service Science Teachers. Dinamika Ilmu, 23(2), 261-276. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v23i2.6979
Section
Articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
