modes of assessment. biology faculty resisted most alternatives, opting in- stead for traditional tests and quizzes with some alterations. This paper addresses the ...
Testing Alternative Assessment Strategies The Ups and the Downs for Science-Teaching Faculty Assessing Assessment-Some Surprises and Recommendations from Florida State University's Assessment-Evaluation Study
Hedy Moscovici and Penny J Gilmer
nder pan of a National Science Foundation (NSF) gram
U
designed to reStructure science and science education courses, and in the atmosphere of the general reform movement in ed ucation, faculty at
Florida State Universiry (FSU) set out to develop a new biology cou rse for
ness" of the program, citing the numer-
described by Caprio et al. (1989), namely. motivation, selection of the main concepts to teach, how to relate
rhe different models and abstrac-
prospective elementary and early child-
to
hood teachers. We set as our goal a restructuring of the sc ience-co ntent courses to help prospect ive teachers of th ese cou rses become confident and co mfortable with scientific concep ts and processes and be ab le to use these co ncepts in their classrooms and lives.
tion s, how [0 make (he wpies more releva nt, how power relationships in class will influence stude nts' learning,
The development of rhe biology Twenty student; participated in the USF course in volved interdepartmental efassessment study. Some spoke ofthe "busy- forts. Faculty and graduare students ous assignments.
with disuic[ representat ives and elementary teachers in the course development team meetings. We discussed questions and main issues during these meetings, which were similar to those
from arts and sciences and from the science ed ucation department worked
Hedy Moscovici is assistant professor, department ofbiology, Westem Washillgt01l University, Bell;1lgham, WA 98225. Penny j. Gilmer is associate professor, department of chemistry, Florida State University, Talldhassee, FL32312. March/April 1996 JeST
319
how to develop the material in an inquiring mode, and how to overcome students' past negative experiences wi th science. There were two differences between our study and rhat of Caprio et al.: first, we had a more restricted student population. namel y prospective elementary and early childhood teachers and, second, we allocated a relatively large portion of the development time to discussion of alternat ive modes of assessment. Whi le individuals with a strong science education background supported the idea of using diverse modes of assess ment. bio logy faculty resisted most alternatives, opting instead for tradit ional tests and quizzes with some alterations. This paper addresses the different alternative assessment strategies used by the six different bio logy ins(fuctors, each teaching a section of the special class of 22 prospective teachers. Our paper also provides suggest io ns for similar relatively small classes. as well as large college classes. ALTERNATIVE AsSESSMENT
There is a vast literature explo ring the meaning and purpose of assessment. Pollio and Humphreys (1988) recognize the fact that grades represent "judgments made by human beings about complex processes" (p. 95), and that they should be used only in the class context. Rutherford and Ahlgren in Science for All Americans (1990) emphasize the need to mod ifY assessment instruments "so that they could become incentives for purposeful learning" (p. 212). Such a change calls for indi vidual s [0 "invest more heavily than in the past in developi ng new kinds of tests to provide practical alternatives to tests that reward only the memorizat ion of bits of information " (p.212).
Fulfilling the Promise: Biology Education in the Nation sSchools (National Research Council. 1990) broke with the tradition of standard ized tests, and 320
JeST March/April 1996
stated that the "understand ing of central concepts and principles in b iology will not be gai ned as long as classrooms and standard ized tests assess only recall and recognition" (p. 45). [n the recommendat ions, the autho rs ask for individuals to publish "model exam inations" that can measure "cognitive and affecti ve changes and theoret ical and applied knowledge" (pAG) and from publishers of tests that accompany textbooks "[0 improve the diversity and qua li ty of their tests" (p. 47). Collins ( 1993) provides a clear definition of alternative assessment, and underlines the adva ntage of using a multidimensional too l for assessmen t: Alternative assessmenr is not a single entity; rather it is a collection of modes of
gathering dara to describe what studenrs know and are able co do. While these modes of data gathering share different characteristics, no one assessment possesses all the characteristics (Collins, p. 123, 1993).
The idea behind alternative assessment strateg ies lies with the recognition of the d iversity of the student population and the concom itant ways to express learning. Assessment involves subjectiviry on the part of the instructor in deciding what and how to assess and grade the students. Working with the philoso phy of alternative assessment means making a shift ftom the instrllctor's subjectivity and control over the questions on the test, the allocation of points, and the translation of percentages into letter grades. It means taking the direction toward a system instead that acknowledges Students' subjectivity in terlllS of diverse ways to express learning. In our case, each of the alternati ve modes of assessment (jo urnals, portfolios, laboratory proj ects. perfor mancebased tests, etc.) was introduced mainly by the science education group to the biology faculty during the development team meeti ngs. T hese alternatives were described in terms of entries that cou ld provide oppo rtuni ties
to identify students' learn ing from different angles. Their combi nations provided the necessary variery for all students to be able to demonstrate their own learning. With a restricted srudent population (22 students)' the instructors in this course had the oppo rtuni ty to experiment with a va riety of assessment techniqu es. The syllabus contai ned some of th e sugges ted alter natives (such as us ing portfolios to provide selected evidence oflearni ng and student participation) w ith a negotiated percentage of the final grade attached to each (i.e., 15 percent for portfolios and 10 percent for class participation). As a result of d iscussio ns during the development stages. we utilized additional alternative assessment strategies as well as the traditional and modified tests and quizzes. T hese alternatives included the use of journals in which students could add ress unclear topics, for mul ate thei r understa ndin gs in te rms of concepts develo ped during class, and suggest ways to im prove the course. Other alternatives rook the fo rm of hands-o n activ ities, sheets fro m laboratory activities and fro m field trips, in-class presentations, and performance assessment, such as using a microscope ro identifY specific parts of an organism. The faculty tried the multiple-choice test in a "take-home" vers ion , in w hich students answered examinatio n questions by themselves but in which they could use books and nOtes. Several instructors used essay questions as a variation to the traditional multiple-choice test. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY Twenty-four prospective elementary
and early-c hildhood educators registered for this experiential coutse in biology. The course promised in its adve rtising to have the advantage of having a small class, to ta ke into accou nt the special class population, and to enhance learning by using a variety of hands-on activicies.
Two students dropped the ciass, wh ich continued with an enrollment of 22. Twenty of the stud ents were femal es, and twO were males (a usual profile for the population of students having this interest). All but twO of the srudcnrs were freshmen , and those twO we re sophomores. Six instructors were responsible fo r different sections of the same course, and a laborarory assista nt rook care of all the laboratory preparations and the smooth development of the different pans of th e cou rse. Class met three times a week during one semester for nearly two hours per session. A Sarurday educational trip [Q a marine laboratory in rhe area was added to the ge neral schedule. The co urse coun ted for four credits of science requirements. The different instructors decided on the assessment strategies to be used in their individual section. When two instructors had to reach rhe same section, each one provided a grade, and they decided as a team on the distribution of percentages accord in g to the amount of time each instructor had with the class. All class meetings were videotaped, and transcribed partiaJiy or as a whole. Interviews with instructors and Stu dents in class were also transcribed and used in the process of the class analysis. Different artifacts (syllabi , exercise papers, quizzes, tests, overheads, etc.) also added in the process. REsULTS In presenting the results and in discussions on the use of alternative assessment strategies, we have focused on twO main diffi culties that led to discomfort, and a poor fit between stu denrs' expectations and the ir act ual experi ence in class . One student who
dro pped th e course during the first wee k did so because of the large amount of content, ass ignments, and ex periments expected from the Stu d ents. Other students also expressed
\
Many students in the USF assessment study complained ofthe large amount ofwork expected ofthem. their discontent with "lots of work" that they had to do, and the "lot of effort" they had to invest in lea rnin g for the examinations because of the large amounts of information prese nted. Collectively, students underlined the "busyness" of th e course- th ere was always an ass ignment due in the form of a quiz, an examination , a filled-in diagram, a part on an ongoing project for class o r fo r the laboratory parts, journal time, or a lab report. The multiple use of alternative assessment strategies was not fulfill ed in terms of grade representation for students' learning because of instructo rs' unfamiliarity with th eore tical aspects of these strategies, and th eir need to transform "subj ective" entries like students' participation or portfolio assessment into "obj ecti ve", quantifiable entries. These twO very important iss ues are discussed below: i nstructors' unfamiliarity with alternative assessment strategies. Instructors'
.&
unfamiliarity with the alternative modes of assessment suggested a lack of commitment to implement what was proposed and accep ted during the development team meetings. There were sem inars and paper-sharing sessions befo re and during the implementation of the course. The sessions were designed to provide op portuni ties for the instructors in volved in the restructured co urse to build the necessary background vital to the und erstandin g of th e meanin g of alternative assessment strategies. In most cases, faculty from arts and sciences resisted learni ng new techniques for teaching and assessing biology. Discom fort with alternative assessments was so metimes verbalized. An example of this~ looking at the portfolios at the end of the semester and deciding to award the entire 15 percent to all the students who submitted a portfolio because some faculty found it difficult to tty to develop criteria to assess the portfolios presented by th e stud en ts. Other instructors ex-
March/April 1996 JeST
321
pressed disco mfort in a mo re tacit way by not even trying to evaluate portfolios and revertin g to evaluating the students solely by tests and quizzes. .... Transformation of "subjective" assessment into "objective" assessment. So me of the facu lty ex pressed the need to transform what they called "subjective" assess ment in to an "objective" fonn in w hic h they es tablished the criteri a. Lack of un derstandi ng of the mea ning of alte rn a ri ve assess me nt stra teg ies forced so me fac ul ty to transform the different students' tasks into "obj ective/' comparable, and easil y quantifiab le ones. T his was done without rega rd for students' perceprions of their lea rning, and , in most of the cases, led to d iscontent and fr ustration in the students. Many students fel t that their grad es di d no t refl ect their effo rts and commi tment and, mo re signi fica ntly, did not represent their learning of biology. A5 an illustration of this asse rtion , we p rovide the discussion between one student who received a C in one section of the course, and o ne of the two instructo rs who was in charge of that section. Tara [cryin g]: It's not worth it! I could sir in the regular BIO 1660 and make an 'A'! Dr. Landers [showing Tara her grades in her notebookl: You see? Ie is [he average. You have twO As on first two quizzes, while each counts for 4 pOlms, 90 percent on the rake-home test {hat was worth 100 points, 3 from the 5 points on the last quiz, and an S [satisfactory] on the group project. The problem is that you have gOt only 72 percent from the 100 poims allocated on the final exam. You see? It makes a total of 173 points and that's a C. Tara: But I studied so hard together with Student Y. For three days til! late! Dr. Landers: J understand, but what can J do? You see, there are students who gOt 'A's, and 'B's, as well as Cs, and even Ds.
D r. Landers decided on the nu mber of points for each of the assessment activities, and although she used many alte rn ative assess ment stra tegies, th e 322
JeST March/April1996
testS counted for 200 of 2 13 points (94 percent). O ne of the assessmen t tasks was a take-ho me tes t, the other an in-class one, and the questions varied from the multipl e choi ce to the flil-in-th eblanks, to a few essay ty pe, as king for short answers. Although the gradin g system was Dr. Land ers' c reation , when faced with the results she seemed powerless, saying" .. . what can r do?" She reassured herself when students teceived grades between "A" and "0 " in a way th at ap proximated a norm al curve. Dr. Landers constructed a relationship between percentage of poin ts and the grade without taking into consideration studen ts' criteria regardin g their own learnin g. The un iversity bulletins d id not pro vide an y ex plicit correlatio ns between percentage of the achievement and the letter grade, so individual facu lty had the freedo m to make their own decisions. It is interest ing to obse rve th at many o f th e stud ents regarded th e hands-on activi ties as valuable learni ng experiences. For example, the students regarded building the "Biol ogy Belle" (i.e., a stand on which different groups of students built the different body systems into a whole, integrated human body) as a very good, integrati ve exe rcise. Pam, one of the students in class, expressed her valuable learning experience using the "Biology Belle" project as foll owing: I knew the names of the various body systems and the elemenrs that composed them, but I d id n't u nde rstand how they fi t together within the human body. This project allowed hands-on creative experience and the opportuni ry to put the body systems together and form a person- Bio Belle. \Y./e made the eso phagus from a long straw thar wenr into the leather pouch (the stomach), and a pantyhose sruffed with yarn filled the place of the intestine. \Y/e had to position the body pans above the pelvic bone, but below the chest to make room for parts from the respi ratory and circulatory systems (Moscovici, 1994, p. 72-73) .
The students only teceived a grade of S/U for this ac ti vity, with all students receiving an 'S', but the assessment d id nOt translate into points toward the fi nal grade. Because of the multitude of ass ignm ents and tasks, students did not have enou gh time to present their parr to the whole class, and the project lost its educational potential. After the course, we discussed with D r. Landers the learning potential of the "Biology Belle" project, and she decided to allow more time for Students to share their parr with the class in futu re course implementatio ns. She also ex pressed the need to re-addtess content topics and number of assignments as their amount was relatively hi gh, not allowing enough thinking and application time. The decision to have grades for each of the four units of the course fo rced instructors from each tearn to work together to decide on com mo n vaJues for the assessment process. Individual faculty did nor discuss assessmen t strategies with each other prior to this class. That is why they were sutprised to find that some instructOrs assessed students' presenta tio ns on an S/U basis, while others used studen t peer assessment in the p rocess of determining a grade. Some instructors gave credit to students who linked personal ex periences to biological concepts, while other instrucrors only gave credit when studenrs' res ponses matc hed the expected respo nses. Looking at the assessment criteria, written assig nments counted for more points than oral presentations, even thou gh these students had already decided on a teaching career that will rely on their ability to communicate orally what they know about biology. The onl y category that could assess students' abili ty and interest as ex pressed orall y was "participation. " Unable to use such a subjecti ve entity) the instructional team used "attendance" instead because atte ndance was easier ro quanti fY.
With this transformation , th e facul ty did not evaluate the ability of th e studen ts to speak of th eir understanding of biology. T here were many cases of students who attended but did not take an active part in th e lesson who received more points on " participation " than othe r st ud ents w ho , although they anended fewer sessio ns, were actively involved in answering and asking questions, or providing examples. Although co nsidered an "objective" entity, the grade on each unit reflected rhe values of the instructors rather man what rhe studen ts learned in terms of scientific concepts that rhey could utilize in the future. Instructors with so me background in education o r science education were more open [Q new ideas and had rhe will to fe-th in k ass ignments. For examp le, Dr. Landers decid ed to provide stud ents w ith diagrams of th e body systems to be used as resources instead of items to be returned as assignments. Instructors without a background in education or science education did nOt show interest in the altern ative assessment strategies, and did nOt attend meetings that were geared toward their clarifications and explanations. SUGGESTIONS FOR OTHER SIMIlAR eOURSES G rading has to refl ect not me rely ass ignments that are easy to evaluate but students' learning. As instructors, we have th e responsibil ity to be rece ptive to feedback fro m th e students and to know when and what they learn, and how they may use what they have learned in th e futu re. It may involve, for example, observing students duri ng laboratory sessions, evaluations of oral presentations (by peers, self, and instructor), o rla nd portfolios that provide evidence o f a student's learnin g. Instructors need to beco me familiar with alternative modes of assessment by learn ing and reflecting on altern atives prior to the implementation of
the co urse. They should be aware of the edu cational principles in alte rnative assess ment strategies in which recogni tion of individual d iversity replaces the instructor's subj ectivity. In o ur case, it would have been very helpful to share information rega rding alternative modes of assessment, un derstand them and their rationale, and decid e as a group, or on individual units what to use, and to what extent. I nstructors mUSt co mmit themselves to the use of altern ative modes of assessment once they decide to use them, even if alternative assessments take mo re time than expected . I n the case of alternati ve assessment, even though it may take more time, it provides a more accurate image of student learning and the Stude nts' ability to use th eir und erstandings in th e future. The qu es tion of appropriate assessment should add ress the extent to which the tasks assess what students know rath er than effi ciency in terms of time spent per student. SUGGESTIONS FOR USING ALTERNATIVE AssESSMENT STRATEGIES IN LARGE LECTURE SETIINGS .... Use journal entries so stud ents can express their understandings, as well as any unclea r iss ues remaining after class. As it is difficult to ad dress all the journal entries at o ne ti me, one possibility is to select a manageable number (i.e., all th e social security numbers ending with t he number X) and rOtate. ... Use minute papers as described by Zahn (I991), in which he wants to know if students' have their ex pectations met in class, and when they are not met, w h ose "fault " was it?instructo r's or student's? H e wants to know the topics that remain "the muddi est." It is implicit that the teaching and lea rning in class are the dual responsibilities of th e instructo r and the students. .... Use e1ecrronic mail messages to conve rse with students. Again, the density of messages can be controlled by th e
instructor depending on the amount of time an d help available (B rabston & Krishnan, 1993). .... H ave the students work in groups on applications of different concepts than were addressed in class. The different projects cou ld be exami ned and the best, let's say five projects would get 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10% bonus points added to students' grades. ... Have the students provide a small portfolio in which they select two or three entries indicative of their own lea rning, and attach a shorr ex planation rega rdin g why they chose those particular en tries. 0 Acknowledgmen[s The authors ",knowledge with gr.llilUde the [inle and effort [hat [he biology F..cuhy connibuted in th( development ~nd implementation or ,hi, n~ oou~ for rrosj>
