The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Examining the Utility of Elementary Science Notebooks for Formative Assessment Purposes
Abstract
This article explores the potential of using students' science notebooks to help elementary teachers monitor conceptual understanding. Data came from 25 teachers and their 4th- and 5th-grade students working on a unit on electricity. At the time data were collected, 8 of the teachers had received professional development on science content knowledge, unit learning goals, assessing student work, and feedback. Measures included conceptual understanding of circuits from students' notebooks, a performance task, and a multiple-choice test. Classes of teachers with and without professional development are compared on these measures, and notebooks of students in trained teachers' classes are examined in some detail. Qualitative data from teacher interviews and observations of professional development sessions help explain the findings and identify teacher support needs. Notebooks have potential for formative assessment, but this use is limited by the guidance teachers give students, itself a function of teachers' knowledge of science content and learning goals.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Fifteen studies concluded that teachers need pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to be able to implement DBDM or AfL”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006
In the citing paper
“A factor identified in numerous AfL studies, although not found in the DBDM literature, concerns skills related to providing feedback to students”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006
In the citing paper
“AfL also requires certain ICT skills as indicated in four studies, for example, with regard to how to use certain digital assessment systems and tools”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006
In the citing paper
“Aschbacher and Alonzo (2006) found that without sufficient content knowledge, teachers are not able to provide students with accurate and complete feedback on their learning and achievement.”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Aschbacher and Alonzo (2006)
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, too much social pressure sometimes led to overly prescriptive feedback, where the students were required to directly copy information from the blackboard”
From Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice (2020) · cites this paper as Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006
3 more claims about this paper
Create a free account to see every claim other papers make about this one.
Citations
Cites
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Alonzo, A. C. & Aschbacher, P. R. (2005, April). Factors which contribute to teachers' adoption of science notebooks as a formative assessment tool. In A. Alonzo (Chair), Teachers' use of formative assessment in science classrooms: Factors in the development of expertise. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
- American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Aschbacher P. R., 1994, Educational Policy, 8, 202, 10.1177/0895904894008002006 · DOI
- Aschbacher, P. R. (Chair). (2002, April). Comparing hands-on inquiry science to textbook-based science in elementary classrooms. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
- Aschbacher, P. R. & Roth, E. J. (2002, April). What's happening in the inquiry science elementary classroom and why? In L. Suter (Chair), Policy levers for urban systemic mathematics and science reform: Impact studies from four sites. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
- Baxter G. P., 1994, International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 279, 10.1016/S0883-0355(06)80020-0 · DOI
- Black, P. (1998). Testing: Friend or foe? London: Falmer Press.
- Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
- Chi, M. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual process of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 161-238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1990 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
- 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199912)36:10<1065::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-I · DOI
- National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N. & Glaser, R. (Eds.). (2001). Knowing what students know. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
- 10.1002/1098-237X(200009)84:5<566::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-U · DOI
- Ruiz-Primo, M. A. & Furtak, E. M. (2004, April). Informal assessment of students' understanding of scientific inquiry. In A. Alonzo (Chair), Assessment for reform-based science teaching and learning. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
- Shepardson D. P., 1997, Science and Children, 34, 13
- 10.2307/1164544 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1991.tb00171.x · DOI
- Stiggins R. J., 2002, Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 758, 10.1177/003172170208301010 · DOI
Cited by
Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice
Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602 · Cited by 330
Metadata
- Authors
- Aschbacher, P., & Alonzo, A.
- Affiliations
- California Institute of Technology (US)
- ORCID
- Alonzo, Alicia
- Venue
- Educational Assessment
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-11-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 179-203
- ISSN
- 1062-7197 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2057761971
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 13.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational Assessment (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- California Institute of Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Keywords
- science notebooks, formative assessment, elementary school science, conceptual understanding, circuits, electricity unit, teacher professional development, student feedback, learning objectives
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
