Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2020.40.3.271

Teacher Feedback on Process-Centered Assessment for Scientific Argumentation  

Kim, Misook (Korea National University of Education)
Ryu, Suna (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.40, no.3, 2020 , pp. 271-289 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study investigates the types of teacher feedback in the process-centered assessment for scientific argumentation. The process-centered assessment visualizes the process of developing scientific argumentation at a group level. Four teachers and 353 high school students participated in this study. We analyzed video recordings, the collaborative modeling-argumentation papers, and teachers' interviews. The findings indicate that the teachers provided feedback on scientific concepts and the development of small group argumentation. We presented a representative case for each category in detail. The study suggests that teachers' efficient use of feedback leads to improvement in students' self-regulation. This study contributes to providing specific and useful guidelines on the use of process-centered assessment for enhancing students' scientific argumentation.
Keywords
teacher feedback; process-centered assessment; scientific argumentation; visualization of the process; feedback types; case study;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 11  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Bell, B., Bell, N., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education (Vol. 12). Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
2 Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
3 Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Assessment for learning in the classroom. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 9-25). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
4 Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment. Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.   DOI
5 Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
6 Brookhart, S. M., & Moss, C. M. (2015). How to give professional feedback. Educational Leadership, 72(7), 24-30.
7 Chen, J., Wang, M., Grotzer, T. A., & Dede, C. (2018). Using a threedimensional thinking graph to support inquiry learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(9), 1239-1263.   DOI
8 Choi, S. K. (2018). A study on the practice of process-focused assessment: Focusing on perceptions of Korean language teachers and application methods of Korean language education. Journal of CheongRam Korean Language Education, 68, 129-176.   DOI
9 Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291.   DOI
10 Elliott, S. N., Kettler, R. J., Beddow, P. A., & Kurz, A. (2010). Research and strategies for adapting formative assessments for students with special needs. In H. Andrade, & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 15-29). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
11 Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Argumentation in science education. Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
12 Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 263-285). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
13 MOE & KICE (Ministry of Education & Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation) (2017). How do you assess the process? (KICE ORM 2017-19-1). Sejong: Author.
14 Evans, C., & Waring, M. (2011). Exploring students' perceptions of feedback in relation to cognitive styles and culture. Research Papers in Education, 26, 171-190.   DOI
15 Gonzalez-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2019). Teachers' framing of argumentation goals: Working together to develop individual versus communal understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(6), 821-844.   DOI
16 Ha, H., & Kim, H.-B. (2017). Exploring responsive teaching's effect on students' epistemological framing in small group argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(1), 63-75.   DOI
17 Ha, H., Lee, Y., & Kim, H.-B. (2018). Exploring the teachers' responsive teaching practice and epistemological framing in whole class discussion after small group argumentation activity. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 38(1), 11-26.   DOI
18 Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.   DOI
19 Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and selfregulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.   DOI
20 Nam, J., Choi, J., Ko, M., Kim, J., Kang, S., Lim, J., & Kong, Y. (2005). The effects of formative assessment-based teaching and learning strategy on the students' science concept understanding, motivation and metacognitive ability in middle school. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 49(3), 311-320.   DOI
21 Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2013). Analyzing teachers' feedback practices in response to students' work in science classrooms. Applied Measurement in Education, 26(3), 163-175.   DOI
22 Ryu, S., Kwak, Y., & Yang, S. H. (2018). Theoretical exploration of a process-centered assessment model for STEAM competency based on learning progressions. Journal of Science Education, 42(2), 132-147.   DOI
23 Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2015). The influence of group dynamics on collaborative scientific argumentation. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(2), 335-351.
24 Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.   DOI
25 Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.   DOI
26 Shepard, L. A. (2009). Commentary: Evaluating the validity of formative and interim assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(3), 32-37.   DOI
27 Kim, J. (2018). The concept and educational implication of process-focused assessment. Journal of Learner-centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(20), 839-859.
28 Heritage, M. (2007). Formative assessment: What do teachers need to know and do? Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2), 140-145.   DOI
29 Hong, S. H., Chang, I., & Kim, T. S. (2017). Elementary school teachers' recognition of process-centered evaluation using consensual qualitative research (CQR). The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 47-69.
30 Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Designing argumentation learning environments. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroombased research (pp. 91-116). Dordrecht: Springer.
31 Kim, M., & Ryu, S. (2019). Development of scientific conceptual understanding through process-centered assessment that visualizes the process of scientific argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(5), 637-654.
32 Kim, S. S., Kim, H. K., Seo, M. H., & Seong, T. J. (2015). Formative assessment for classroom practice. Seoul: Hakjisa.
33 Kim, Y.-J., Lee, G.-G., & Hong, H.-G. (2019). A Case Study on Teacher's Process-centered Evaluation Competency(T-PEC): Focused on the Case of a Meddle-School/a High School Science Teacher. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(6), 695-706.   DOI
34 Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.   DOI
35 Kwak, H. S., Kang, O. R., & Kim, K. S. (2016). Research trends on dynamic assessment studies in Republic of Korea. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 27(2), 1-18.   DOI
36 McMillan, J. H. (2017). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice that enhance student learning and motivation. London: Pearson.
37 LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (1999). Analysis from the bottom up: the item level of analysis. In M. D. LeCompte, & J. J. Schensul (Eds.), Analyzing and interpreting ethnographic data (pp. 67-83). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
38 Lee, B., & Sohn, W. (2017). The effects of formative feedback on basic psychological needs and classroom engagement: Teacher-student relationship as a moderator. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 30(1), 123-143.
39 Lee, H. (2015). Dynamization measure of feedback structure for improving learner's participation. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 15(3), 377-400.
40 Lee, K.-H., Kang, H. Y., Ko, E.-S., Lee, D.-H., Shin, B., Lee, H. C., & Kim, S. H. (2016). Exploration of the direction for the practice of process-focused assessment. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 26(4), 819-834.
41 McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203-229.   DOI
42 MOE (Ministry of Education) (2015a). Overview of elementary and secondary school curriculum (MOE Notification No. 2015-74 [supplement 1]). Sejong: Author.
43 MOE (Ministry of Education) (2015b). Science curriculum (MOE Notification No. 2015-74 [supplement 9]). Sejong: Author.
44 MOE & DMCOE (Ministry of Education & Daejeon Metropolitan City Office of Education) (2016). Development of teaching and learning materials for the 2015 revised curriculum-integrated science & science inquiry and experiment. Sejong: Author.
45 Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.   DOI