A Model of Alternative Embedded Assessment in a Pull-Out Enrichment Program for the Gifted

Abstract

Commonly, pullout programs, which are the most common means of fostering gifted students in Israel, include only generic summative assessment of the students. The main goal of this study was to develop a model of alternative embedded assessment and to examine its influence on the learning process. A group of middle school students who participated in the ‘Brain Research’ program was engaged in project-based learning and implemented self, peer and expert-assessment in various stages of the project. The findings indicate that the students' perception of assessment expresses the cognitive as well as the affective aspects, which constitutes the assessment model, and that the embedded assessment encouraged the application of critical thinking, reflective thinking and inquiry skills and enhanced learning within a social context.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baron

B. J.

(1987). Evaluating thinking skills. In: Baron

B. J.

Sternberg

J. R.

Teaching Thinking skills: theory and practice. W. H. Freeman and Company. 219–247.

Bell

Cowie

(2001). The Characteristics of Formative Assessment in Science Education. Science Education, 85, 536–553.

Birenbaum

(1997). Alternatives in assessment. Tel-aviv University: Ramot.

Birenbaum

(2003). New insight into learning and teaching and their implication for assessment. In Segers

Dochy

Cascallar

(Eds.). Optimising New Modes of Assessment: In Search of Qualities and Standards. Klumer Academic Publishers, 13–36.

Black

(1995). Assessment and feedback in Science education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 21, 257–279.

Black

Wiliam

(1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education, 7–74.

Cox

Daniel

Boston

B. O.

(1985). Educating able learners. Austin, TX: University Press.

Curry

Samara

(1993). Curriculum Guide For The Education of Gifted High School Students. Austin: Texas Association for the gifted and talented.

Dewey

(1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D. C. Heath.

10.

Diezmann

M. C.

Watters

J. J.

(2000). An enrichment philosophy and strategy for empowering young gifted children to become autonomous learners in science. Gifted and Talented International, 15, 6–18.

11.

Dochy

Mcdowell

(1997). Introduction Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279–298.

12.

Dori

Y. J.

Herskovitz

(1999). Question-Posing Capability as an Altrnative Evaluation Method: Analysis of an Environmental Case Study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 411–430.

13.

Dori

Y. J.

(2003). From Nationwide Standardized Testing to School-Based Alternative Embedded Assessment in Isreal: Students' Performance in the Matriculation 2000 Project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 34–52.

14.

Dori

Y. J.

Tal

R. T.

(2000). Formal and Informal Collaborative Projects: Engaging in Industry with Environmental Awareness. Science Education, 84, 95–113.

15.

Dori

Y J.

Tal

R. T.

Tsaushu

(2003). Teaching Biotechnology through case studies — can we improve higher order thinking skills of non-science majors?. Science Education, 87, 767–793.

16.

Ennis

R. H.

(1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking disposition and abilities. In Baron

B.J.

Sternberg

R. J.

(Eds.). Teaching thinking skills: theory and practice. NY: W.H. Freeman and Company, p. 9–26.

17.

Harpaz

(1999). Twoards teaching and learning in a thinking community. Mind education (in hebrew), 18, 6–32.

18.

Hogan

Fisherkeller

(1999). Dialogue as Data: Assessing Students' Scientific Reasoning with Interactive Protocols. In: Mintzes

J. J.

Wandersee

H. J.

Novak

D. J.

Assessing Science Understanding — A Human Constructive View. 95–127 Academic Press.

19.

Hogan

Nastasi

K. B.

Pressley

(2000). Discourse Patterns and Collaborative Scientific Reasoning in Peer and Teacher-Guided Discussion. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379–432.

20.

Kaniel

(2002). ‘High Thinking Processes’ (HTP): Elements of curricula and teaching able learners. Gifted Education International, 16, 225–240.

21.

Krajcik

J.S.

Czerniak

Berger

(1999). Teaching Children Science: A Project-Based Approach, McGraw-Hill Boston, MA.

22.

Krajcik

J.S.

Czerniak

Berger

(2002). Teaching Science In Elementary And Middle School Classrooms: A Project-Based Approach, Second Edition. McGraw-Hill: Boston, MA.

23.

Krajcik

J.S.

Blumenfeld

Marx

Soloway

(2000). Instructional, curricular and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In: Minstrell

van Zee

(eds.). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. 283–315.

24.

Krajcik

Blumenfeld

Marx

Fredericks

Soloway

(1998). Middle school students initial attempts at inquiry in project-based science classrooms. The journal of learning sciences, 7, 313–350.

25.

Glaser

Strauss

A. L.

(1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.

26.

Minstrell

(2000). Implications for teaching and learning inquiry: A summary In: Minstrell

Van zee

H. E.

(Eds.). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. AAAS, 471–496.

27.

Nevo

(1995). School-based evaluation: A dialogue for school improvement. Oxford: Elsevier/ Pergamon.

28.

Patton

M.Q.

(1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

29.

Reis

M. S.

Renzulli

J. S.

(1991). The assessment of creative products in programs for gifted and talented students. Gifted child quarterly, 35, 128–134.

30.

Renzulli

J. S.

(1987). The positive side of pull-out programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 245–253.

31.

Resnick

(1987). Education and learning to think. Washington D.C.: National Acdemy Press.

32.

Schwab

J. J.

(1962). The teaching of science as inquiry. In: Shulman

L. S.

Tamir

(1973). Research on teaching in the natural sciences. In: Travers

R.M.W.

(Ed). Second Handbook of Research on Teaching. Rand McNally & Company, 1098–1148.

33.

Shulman

L.S.

Tamir

(1973). Research on teaching in the natural sciences. In: Travers

R.M.W.

(Ed). Second Handbook of Research on Teaching. Rand McNally & Company, 1098–1148.

34.

Stake

(1994). Case studies. In Denzin

N.K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research. 236–247.

35.

Strauss

A. L.

Corbin

(1994). Grounded theory methodology — An Overview. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y.S.

(eds.). Handbook of qualitative research, 273–285.

36.

Taber

S. K.(2000.

). Case studies and generalizability: grounded theory and research in science education. International journal of science education, 22, 469–487.

37.

Tal

R. T.

(2004). Community-based environmental education — A case study of teacher-parent collaboration. Environmental education research. 10, (4), 523–543.

38.

Tal

R. T.

Dori

Y. J.

Lazarowitz

(2000). A Project-Based Alternative Assessment System. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 26,171–191.

39.

Tal

R.T.

Hochberg

(2003a). Assessing high order thinking of students participating in a web-based malaria project. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29 (2), 69–89.

40.

Tal

R.T.

Hochberg

(2003b). Reasoning, problem-solving and reflections: Participating in WISE project in Israel, Science Education International, 14, 3–19.

41.

Tamir

(1996). Science assessment. In: Birenbaum

Dochy

F. J. R. C.

, Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes, and prior knowledge. Boston: Klewer Academic.

42.

Tannenbaum

A. J.

(1983). Gifted Children. New York: Macmillan.

43.

The Department of Gifted Students.(1999). Data of programs for fostering the gifted. Ministry of education, Jerusalem [in Hebrew].

44.

Topping

(2003). Self and Peer Assessment in School and University: Reliability, Validity and Utility. In Segers

Dochy

Cascallar

(Eds.). Optimising New Modes of Assessment: In Search of Qualities and Standards. Klumer Academic Publishers, 55–87.

45.

Treagust

D. F.

Jacobowitz

Gallagher

J. L.

Parker

(2001). Using Assessment as a Guide in Teaching for Understanding: A Case Study of Middle School Science Class Learning about Sound. Science Education, 85, 137–157.

46.

Wallace

(2000). Teaching the very able child. London: David Fulton Publishers.

47.

Wallace

Adams

H.B.

(1993). TASC: Thinking actively in a social context . Oxford: AB Academic Publishers.

48.

Wallace

Bentley (2001). Teaching thinking skills across the curriculum: A practical approach for the middle years. London: Fulton.

49.

Wallace

Pierce

(1992a). The changing nature of giftedness: An examination of various strategies for provision. Gifted Education International, 8, 64–71.

50.

Wallace

Pierce

(1992b). The changing nature of giftedness: An examination of various strategies for provision. Gifted Education International, 8, 4–9.

51.

Wiggins

G. P.

(1993). Assessing student performance, San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

52.

Wiggins

G. P.

(1998). Educative assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

53.

Worthen

B. R.

(1993). Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 74, 444–457.

54.

Zeidler

L. D.

Osborne

Erduran

Simon

Monk

(2003). The role of argument during discourse about socioscientific issues. In Zeidler

L. D.

(Ed.). The Role of Moral Reasoing on Socioscientific Issues and Discourse in Science Education. Kluwer Netherlands, 97–116.

55.

Zohar

(2000). Inquiry Learning as Higher Order Thinking: Overcoming Cognitive Obstacles. In: Minstrell

zee

H. E.

(Eds.). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. AAAS, 405–424.

56.

Zohar

(2004). Higher Order Thinking in Science Classrooms: Students' Learning and Teachers' Professional Development. Kluwer academic

57.

Zohar

Namet

(2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62.