luft 1999 rubrics

5/23/2018 Luft 1999 Rubrics

1/15

Journal o ScienCe Teacher Educa tion 10 2): 107-121, 1999.@1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.Rubrics: Design and Use in Science Teacher EducationJulie A. LuftTeaching and Teacher Education, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA

Science teachers at various academic levels are exploring the use of rubrics intheir science classes (Jensen, 1995; Lebowitz, 1998; Liu, 1995; Lundberg, 1997;Nott, Reeve, Reeve, 1992; Radford, Ramsey, Deese, 1995; Shaka Bitner,1996), From the middle school classroom to the university laboratory, scienceteachers use rubrics to assess students' laboratory skills, problem-solving abilities,or science literacy levels, Within each context of use, the clearly stated standardsregarding performance-the basis of a rubric-assist science teachers in clarifyingtheir expectations to students (Lui, 1995; Nott et aL 1992) and in monitoring theirstudents' understanding about science topics (Jensen, 1995; Lundberg, 1997),illtimately, science teachers are provided with valuable information about studentlearning that directly impacts their classroom practice and curriculum planning, inaddition to providing students with opportunities to become self-directed learners,

Similar to science teachers, educators of science teachers are also exploringthe use of rubrics (or similar scoring schemes) in their own programs and classes(Finson, 1994; Herr, Holtzer, Martin, Esterle, Sparks, 1995; Moscovici Gilmer,1996). As such, workshops, institutes, or university courses are becoming commonplaces for in-service teachers to experience rubrics that can be applied to theirinsttuction or to evaluate their own practice (Ford, 1994; Pizzini, 1996; Yager,Kellerman, Liu, Blunck, Veronesi, 1993), Likewise, preservice science teachersare encountering rubrics in both their education and science courses (Luft, Ebert


2/15

108 JULIEA. LUFTassessments have defined a rubric as guidelines laid out for judging student workon performance-based tasks (McColskey O'Sullivan, 1993, p.41). Scienceteachers who have developed rubrics for the assessment o students in their classeshave described a rubric as an established set o criteria used for scoring or ratingstudents tests, portfolios, or performances. A scoring rubric describes the levels operformance students might be expected to attain relative to a desired standard orachievement (Hart, 1994, p. 70). While each definition of rubric is consistent withthe context of use, the theme of descriptions of levels of student performance isfound throughout all.

Articulating levels o student performance can occur through various processes.Some authors suggest beginning a rubric by clarifying goals and standards forstudents. Ochs (1996), for example, proposed that a rubric should be developed toanswer three questions:

a) What do we want students t know and be able t do?b) How well do we want students t know and be able t do?c ow will the teachers and other scorers know when the student knows itnd does it well? p.l21)

Others have suggested beginning the development of a rubric with the depiction ofan acknowledged standard. For instance, the National Science Education Standards(NRC, 1996) recommended beginning the development of a rubric with a descriptionof the performance standard for a scientifically literate person. This descriptionshould then be analyzed and divided into the different components, then furthermodified to consider the science experiences and the developmental level of thestudents. Regardless of whether the criteria for the rubric originates from the


3/15

RUBRICS: DESIGN AND USE 109teacher education-a purposeful nd appropriate construct that articulatesvarying levels of proficiencies for a student that re congruent with the field ofscience education. The construct is purposeful when it informs the student, theteacher, and other interested parties about the growth and knowledge of the scienceeducation student within a task, a performance, or an artifact. The construct sappropriate when it considers the pedagogical knowledge, the content knowledge,and the experiential levels that are relevant to the science education student withinthe task, performance, or artifact. Rubrics are congruent with the field of scienceeducation when they contain criteria that advance science education studentstowards the goals espoused by their science teacher education program. Thisdefinition pertains to all levels of science teacher education and it is the definitionthat is referred to in this paper.

Information Provided by RubricsAlternative assessments offer science teacher educators an opportunity to

present more than a final grade to their students. Enacted effectively, alternativeassessments can provide meaningful information to the student, the teacher, andothers who are interested in the development of science teachers. The potential foralternative assessments in science teacher education can be drawn from Hodson's(1992) article on the assessment of practical work and from the National ScienceEducation Standards (NRC, 1996) recommendations for assessment. Althoughneither specifically discusses teacher education and the use of rubrics, both arerelevant and applicable.

Hodson (1992) discussed the need for the assessment of practical work to besummative, formative, evaluative, and educative. Hodson contended that


4/15

110 JULIE A. LUFTinformation about their students. The acquired information will ultimately informteachers about what changes they need to enact in order to improve their instruction.Second, information from student assessments should inform and direct curriculardecisions made by the teacher. This results in curriculum being developmentallyappropriate, of interest to the student, and effective in producing the desired learneroutcomes. Third, assessments used by teachers should encourage students to becomeself-directed learners. Being a self-directed learner can come from the opportunityto evaluate and reflect upon one s own work in the science classroom. Fourth,assessments should be able to provide information about a student s progress to allof the stakeholders involved in the student s education. This specifically includesfrequent reports that discuss the student s attained levels of achievement. Fifth,assessments should provide teachers with an avenue to research their own practice.In addition to providing an understanding about a student in the science class,assessments should also provide a teacher with the opportunity to inquire into theeffectiveness of their own practice.

Rubrics, as one of several alternative assessment options in science teacher education courses, can be consistent with the recommendations for assessmentmade by Hodson (1992) and the National Science ducation Standards (NRC,1996). First, rubrics can indicate a student s progress throughout a course. As asummative assessment, rubrics can furnish a description about the level ofproficiency that the student has attained by the end of the course. As a formativeassessment, rubrics can provide an indication of the student s progress on variousassignments encountered throughout the course. The information collected can beshared with any or all of the science education stakeholders involved in the student sdevelopment. Second, rubrics can assist science education students in becomingself-directed and reflective practitioners. For example, when students are asked to


5/15

RUBRICS: DESIGN AND USE lleducator.

In addition to meeting the standards for professional development in theNational Science ducation Standards (NRC, 1996), the conceptualized andenacted secondary science methods course reflects the department's goals forstudents. Specifically, students in the department's preservice program should: adevelop an understanding o constructivism, b engage in reflective practice, cview the classroom as teachers and not students, and d) use research to guideinstructional practices. Ideally, as students participate in the planned scienceeducation curriculum that is comprised of readings sc ience activities journalingreflective essays audiotaping nd videotaping exercises they achieve varyinglevels o the national standards and departmental goals.

Rubrics in a Science Methods Course

For three years I have been using rubrics in my secondary science methodsclass. t first I generated rubrics for class assignments in order to clarify my ownexpectations for my students. Later, students developed their own rubrics in orderto assess the quality of their own assignments. Now a combination of rubrics thatare generated by me and my students are used in the science methods class.Using a Holistic Rubric

The rubric in Appendix A was constructed by students in secondary sciencemethods. During the second class meeting, students were divided into groups othree or four. Each group was asked to develop a description that would portray anA, B, C, and D student in science methods. In addition, they were informed that the


6/15

112Mark:

Larry:Mark:Rose:

JULIEA LUFfWe felt that it meant coming to class on time and having the assignments completed. Being prepared and ready to begin is an importantpart of "good studenting.'Our group felt that participating constructively in classmeant working well with others and being a team player.That s pretty subjective. Can you clarify that?I think we thought it meant listening. trying to understand. and acknowledging others' thoughts. Like "I may disagree with you, but Ineed to understand the point of view that you hold. When I am notsure of what you mean, I need to ask. I also need to make sure that Iunder stand what you have said.

Throughout the remainder of the discussion, subjective topics were clarifiedand problems associated with the use of words such as always, most of time, orsometimes were considered.

After generating a class rubric, the students indicated what they learned fromthe exercise. One student remarked that he learned that assessment was moredifficult than marking something right or wrong.'' Another student appreciated theopportunity to set the grading guidelines for the class. Another student asked whyinstructors of science courses i not use rubrics and added that learning aboutscience was more than answering a question correctly. The processing of personalexperiences led to a discussion about holistic rubrics and how they are used,assessments and who they should inform, and how instructors determine ifcurriculum and rubrics align.

After class, I synthesized and created theA, B, C, and D rubric (see Appendix A)and then returned it to the class for individual revision and approval. When this


7/15

RUBRICS: DESIGN AND USE 113and curricular effectiveness, modify the lesson, and then reteach the lesson to adifferent science class. During the Teach/Reteach lesson, scie nce methods studentsare encouraged to use inquiry-based lessons and alternative assessments. Ultimatelythe assignment provides students with an opportunity to us the instructionalmethods that they are learning about (e.g. learning cycle, problem solving,alternative assessment, etc.), reflect on their practice (Zeichner Liston, 1996;Schon, 1983), connect pedagogy and content knowledge (Shulman, 1984), anddevelop the language found in science education while collaborating with theirpeers (Little, 1982; Rosenholtz, 1989). The analytical rubric developed for theTeach/Reteach lesson was developed to be congruent with the professionaldevelopment standards National Science ducation Standards (NRC, 1996), thegoals o the department, and the goals o the lesson. In addition, it was developedto guide students as they completed the assignment.

During the last week o secondary science methods, student groups begantheir Teach/Reteach presentations. Each group was required to give n oralpresentation that followed the guidelines in the rubric, and each student was requiredto turn in a more extensive individual written report on the Teach/Reteachexperience. The students presentations revealed how the corresponding rubricfacilitated their processing of the experience.

All o the student groups successfully completed the logistical and thepresentation portion o their assignment. The logistical section focused on themechanics of the experience, and required that various components be accomplishedthroughout the Teach/Reteach experience (e.g. scheduling, videotaping, etc.). Thepresentation section focused on the inclusion of specific components within eachgroup s shared reflection. Each group attained the highest level o proficiency inboth areas.


8/15

114 JULIEA LUFTsystematically compared their lesson to the recommendations made by Brooks andBrooks (1993) for constructivist practice, and they discussed how students mayhave constructed their knowledge according to Saunders (1992) and Driver, Asoko,Leach, Mortimer, and Scott (1994 ). Most groups were able to discuss their practicein terms of theory to the highest level of proficiency.

The final section was something of each group s choice t h e something extrasection. This section allowed each group to discuss some aspect that contribu tedto all group members understanding of the process of science teaching. F or example,one group spoke about students comments in accelerated and regular scienceclasses. The group found that, after they coded student and teacher comments,students in accelerated classes were less likely to rely upon their teacher for directionand verification of their learning (teacher-independent), while students in regularclasses were more likely to continually confer with the teacher about their progress(teacher-dependent). The group went on to discuss implications for teaching allstudents in science. Other groups shared locating important information on theinternet, the use of video as a motivational tool, and laboratory safety in the publicschools. Most groups achieved the highest level of proficiency in this section.

I created the Teach/Reteach rubric after two years of cursory presentations andpapers by my students. The initial reflections shared by students were immediateand automatic, with little attention to reviewing and researching their practice.Students should engage in the five dimensions of reflective practice of rapidreflection, repair, review, research, retheorizing and research (Zeichner Liston,1996) while constructing their knowledge of science education. To do so, studentsneed a guiding framework, and the Teach/Reteach rubric seemed to be one avenuetowards improvement. Two years later, students are sharing more dimensions oftheir practice and are developing a better understanding of their practice and


9/15

RUBRICS: DESIGN AND USE 115and utilized rubrics in secondary science methods. or example, in order to createa rubric for an assignment in science methods, I had to clarify the goals o the classand the goals within each lesson. I asked myself what was important about thelesson, how a level o understanding would be displayed by the students, and howmy instruction would support the instructional goals specified in the rubric. Increating the rubric, I reflected upon my current instructional methods and mystudents achievement o my goals. As I monitored students performances with thea selected rubric, I examined how my practice was appropriate for my students.Each rubric utilized helped me to understand my enactment o practice and howmy practice was understood by my students.In addition to personal reflection, students had several opportunities to reflectupon their practice with the rubrics. As students utlized and generated rubrics, theywere asked to reflect upon their practice and to connect theory to practice. In orderto create a rubric, students had to work together to articulate the importantcomponents o the assignments. The discourse in the groups allowed students tochallenge and redefine their ideas about assessment in the science classroom, thenature o science during investigations, and the importance o content knowledge.In each instance, students had opportunities to examine their actions as they taughtscience, their beliefs about science teaching, and their knowledge about teachingsc1ence.

A final benefit is the use o rubrics in the students own classrooms as theybegin their teaching careers. Over three quarters o the students who experiencedrubrics in secondary science methods now use rubrics in their own classes. Theysay that rubrics allow them to clarify their expectations to students, assist theirstudents in thinking about the process o science, and encourage their students togo beyond a superficial level o thinking that may be found in many classroom


10/15

116 JULIEA. LUFTsame assessor(s). Shaka and Bitner (1996) concluded that it was possible to obtainreliable scores between raters using the same rubric if they received training.

FinalThoughts

Rubrics, like concept maps and portfolios, are another tool for science teachereducators to utilize in their classes. In addition to clarifying expectations to students(Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1994), rubrics can betemplates that encourage reflective thought among students and instructors. Forstudents, the process of creating rubrics can result in meaningful discussions abou tassessment, instructional goals, learning, and curriculum. As students utilize rubrics,they are provided with an opportunity to assess their own learning and understandwhat they know about science education. Instructors who develop rubrics for theirclasses have the opportunity to constantly re-evaluate their instructional goals andunderstand the effectiveness of their instruction and curriculum.

There are no prescribed procedures for developing rubrics in science educationcourses, as rubrics are constructs that are dependent upon their purpose and theiraudience. t would be naive to suggest that rubrics developed within one classwould be applicable to another class. Yet examining rubrics from other scienceeducation courses is an important part of initiating the development of rubrics in aclass. Rubrics from other courses reveal how instructors describe levels ofperformance for similar tasks and how instructors meet the varying needs of theirstudents.Once a rubric is developed for a class, it can become a tool that assists aninstructor in enacting instruction and crafting curriculum. Rubrics provideinformation about students; they do not analyze or interpret what a student or


11/15

RUBRICS: DESIGN AND USE 117Driver, R.,Asoko, H., Leach, J. Mortimer, E., Scott, P. (1994). Constructing

scientific knowledge in the classroom. Education Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.Pinson, K D. 1994). Science alternative assessment models in illinois. Jour

nal o Science Teacher Education, 5(3), 97-110.Ford, M P (1994). Portfolios and rubrics: Teachers close encounters with

self-evaluation as learners n teacher education courses. Paper presented at themeeting o the National Reading Conference, San Diego, CA.

Hart, D. (1994). Authentic assessment: A handbook for educators. MenloPark, CA: Addison-Wesley.

Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., Winters, L. (1992). A practical guide toalternative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curricu-lum Development.

Herr, N., Holtzer, M., Martin, M., Esterle, R., Sparks, C. (1995). Preparingstudent teachers for alternative assessment in science. Journal o Science TeacherEducation, 6(1), 27-32.

Hodson, D. (1992). Assessment of practical work: Some considerations inphilosophy of science. Science and Education, 1 115-144.

Jensen, K. (1996). Effective rubric design: Making the most of this powerfulassessment tool. The Science Teacher 64(5), 34-37.

Lebowitz, S. (1998, April). Use o vee-maps in a college science laboratory.Poster session presented at the annual meeting o National Association for Re-search in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA.

Little, J. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplaceconditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 325-40.

Liu, K. (1995). Rubrics revisited: Allowing students to assume responsibility


12/15

118 JULIEA. LU fp. 114-122). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.

Pizzini, E. L. Ed.). 1996). SSCS implementation handbook. Iowa City:Science Education Center University o Iowa

Quellmalz, E. S. 1991 ). Developing criteria for performance assessments: Themissing link. Applied Measurement in Education, 4(4), 319-992.

Radford, D. L., Ramsey, L. L., Deese, W C. 1995). Demonstration assessment: Measuring conceptual understanding and critical thinking with rubrics. TheScience Teacher 62 7), 52-55.

Rosenholtz, S. J. 1989). Teachers workplace: The social organization ofschools. White Plains, NY: Longman.Rowe, M. B. 1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding upJournal of Teacher Education, 37 1), 43-50.

Saunders, W. 1992). The constructivist perspective: Implications and teaching strategies for science. School Science and Mathematics, 93(3), 136-141.

Schlitt, D., Abraham, M. R. 1973). Verbal interaction: A means for selfevaluation. School Science and Mathematics, 73 8), 678-686.

Schon, D. A. 1983). The reflective practitioner. New York, NY: Basic Books.Shaka, F L. Bitner, B. L. 1996, January). Construction and validationofa

rubric for scoring concept maps Paper presented at the Association for the Educa-tors of Teachers of Science, Seattle, WA.

Shulman, L. S. 1984). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 2), 4-14.

Yager, R. E., Kellerman, L. R., Liu, C. T., Blunck, S.M., Veronesi, P D. Eds.)1993). The Iowa assessment handbook. Iowa City: Science Education Center,University of Iowa.

Zeichner, K. M., Liston, D.P. 1996). Reflective teaching: n introduction.


13/15

RUBRICS: DESIGN AND USEAppendix A

Holistic rubric, generated by students, that discusses A, B, C, and D levels operformance in secondary science methods

Always prepared and attends class Participates consttuctively in class Exhibits preparedness and punctuality in class/classwork Works well with others and s a team player Challenges his/her thoughts about science education Demonstrates initiative and improvement Seeks to understand and acknowledge others thoughts Demonstrates exceptional pedagogical content knowledge Often reaches full potential i sufficiently challenged Class assignments have extra something about them Demonstrates ability to integrate new knowledge into work Usually prepared and attends class Demonstrates excellent pedagogical content knowledge Completes all class assignments occasionally adds something extra

B Participates constructively in class works well with others and is ateam player emonstrates initiative and improvement Seeks to understand and acknowledge others thoughts Stretches to reach full potential

119


14/15

Topic 4 3 2 lAll pa1ts are present: Most part s are Some parts are A few pm1s areanalysis of frrst and present. present. present.second lesson; videoLogistics of all both lessons;lesson plans; anddates suhm itted.The presentation lasts The presentation The presentation The presentationten to fifteen minutes; contains a majority of contains several of the contains a few of thelessons, learning the previously stated previously stated previously statedexperiences, and elements. elements. elementspersonal reflectionsPresentation are shared. thepresentation ispreplanned. concise.and intbnuative.Presenters try to Presenters address the Presenters address Presenters addressunderstand how and obvious issues and some of the obvious some SUJX rticialwhy, as well as tackle a few of the issues and tackle a issues -lack of in-present obvious deeper issues. Depth few of the deeper depth analysis.

Refiection findings. Depth of of thought is apparent- issues. Depth of Reflection is or is notthought is obvious. there is room for more thought is somewhat relevant to scienceReflection is relevant discussion. Reflection apparent. Reflection is education.to science education. is relevant to science or is not relevrult to

)>0 NP: 0... .0 -~ ~

0e.2... cr~ o .;as-' 't8..g . ~

s"g )>... t l0 ... ;>b '=._ .. e. rs- "' = ~' 'a's-s-0 '0

~ -~ - :::: .{)q ""

""p .education. sdcnce education. ..

0....,


15/15

Topic 4 3Both the wrinen There are somematerial and the connections made, andpresentation connect some obvious

Connection theory to prac1ice connections that need(discussion is to be made.supported y readingsand class topics).There is c I arly There is somethingsomething extra in the extra in theanalysis and assignment. Th e extrapresentation. The item makes someteacher does not have contribution to the

Something to struggle to identify student sExtra this item The item is understanding of theunique and adds to the process of sciencestudent s teaching.understanding of theprocess of scienceteaching.

2There are someconnec-tions made.some connections thatneed to be made, andinaccumtcconnections.

There is somethingextra in theassignment that makeslittle contribution tothe student stmderstanding of theprocess of scienceteaching.

IThe wrillen materialand presentatitm couldhave a greaterconnection of theoryto practice.

There appears to besomething extra in theassignment. but theteacher is unsure ofwhat it is and/or itdoesn t contribute tothe student sunderstanding of theprocess of scienceteaching.

>; ;=e

'-0c'i

N

luft 1999 rubrics

Documents

educators of science

science literacy levels

science courses luft

scienceteachers use

scoring rubric

science teacher educationjulie

exploringthe use of

science topics jensen