7 minute read
Element 2: Tracking Student Progress
Using Teacher-Created Targets and Scales and Implementing Routines for
Using Them
Many teachers and school districts choose to construct targets and scales that are more overarching and connect directly to the science and engineering practices (SEPs). In this way, the targets, scales, and routines can transcend a particular unit of study or even grade level. Teachers can then use these targets and scales to demonstrate the recursive nature of the SEPs and CCCs and how they are used to link the science concepts together over the course of a student’s learning experience. For example, using the same general learning outcome noted previously, a teacher could focus on proficiency levels of the science and engineering practice of constructing scientific explanations, as shown in figure 1.4.
Exceeding (4) Meeting (3) Approaching (2) Developing (1)
I can construct an explanation for a scientific phenomenon using all success criteria in unfamiliar contexts or making connections to related science concepts I can construct an explanation for a scientific phenomenon using all success criteria in familiar contexts I can construct an explanation for a scientific phenomenon using some success criteria in familiar contexts I can construct an explanation for a scientific phenomenon in familiar contexts with support
Success Criteria:
• Create an accurate claim • Use multiple valid and reliable sources of evidence • Provide clear and complete reasoning that supports the claim and that clearly connects with science concepts and vocabulary (these can be listed out or not; for example, plant, oxygen, carbon dioxide, sugars, light energy, flow, leaf, photosynthesis, cycle) • Clearly demonstrate a connection to the crosscutting concept
Figure 1.4: Proficiency scale and success criteria for constructing scientific explanations.
In this approach, these same teacher-generated scales and success criteria can be used throughout the course and students’ science experience. Students are then able to reflect on their learning and provide evidence for how their performance matches (or does not match) the proficiency expectations. When asked to thoughtfully review and reflect on their work, students are often able to see where they have not fully met all success criteria (Reibel & Twadell, 2019). For example, following with the same example here for constructing scientific explanations, a student could engage in reflective practices or engage in conversations with peers or the teacher using the format outlined in the section on element 22 (Peer Response Groups, page 95).
For additional success criteria ideas, as well as what to look for in student work at all grade levels, refer to the NGSS Appendix F: Science and Engineering Practices in the NGSS (NGSS, 2013).
Element 2: Tracking Student Progress
Tracking student progress in the science classroom is similar to tracking student progress in any content area: the student receives a score based on a proficiency scale, and the teacher uses the student’s pattern of scores to “provide each student with a clear sense of where he or she started relative to a topic and where he or she is currently” (Marzano, 2017, p. 14). For each topic at each applicable grade level, teachers should construct a proficiency scale (or learning progression). Such a scale allows teachers to pinpoint where a student falls on
a continuum of knowledge and skill, using information from assessments. Figure 1.5 presents the self-rating scale for element 2 (tracking student progress).
Score Description
4: Innovating I engage in all behaviors at the Applying level In addition, I identify those students who are not aware of what they must do to improve and design alternate activities and strategies to meet their specific needs 3: Applying I engage in activities to track student progress without significant errors or omissions and monitor the extent to which students are aware of what they must do to improve their current status 2: Developing I engage in activities to track student progress without significant errors or omissions 1: Beginning I engage in activities to track student progress but do so with errors or omissions, such as not keeping track of the progress of individual students and not making students aware of their individual progress 0: Not Using I do not engage in activities to track student progress
Figure 1.5: Self-rating scale for element 2—Tracking student progress.
This section illustrates the following concrete examples for science instruction associated with strategies about tracking progress. (For all the strategies related to this element, see appendix A, page 149.) • Designing assessments that generate formative scores • Charting student progress and class progress
Frequent formative assessments are crucial in providing valuable learning information to both teachers and students. In Embedded Formative Assessment, Dylan Wiliam (2018) suggests that “an assessment functions formatively to the extent that evidence about student achievement is elicited, interpreted, and used by teachers, learners, or their peers to make decisions about the next steps in instruction that are likely to be better, or better founded, than the decision they would have made in the absence of evidence” (p. 43). In order to view and evaluate evidence, all stakeholders in the process need a defined common approach that establishes performance expectations, lays out indicators of success, and provides a way to evaluate quality with calibrated proficiency scales. In any successful formative feedback loop, teachers and students gain information to inform a change in practice. For students, this may involve a new study approach. For teachers, the information may lead to re-teaching a skill or returning to the skill in a new context.
Proficiency scales, as noted in the previous sections, allow teachers and students to monitor learning and growth over time. Formative assessments must be linked directly to the performance expectation, science and engineering practice, or disciplinary core idea in such a way that a teacher can create an assessment related to the level or depth of knowledge at which the student is showing proficiency. In subsequent chapters, we highlight assessment ideas, such as in element 4 (Using Informal Assessments of the Whole Class, page 23), element 5 (Using Formal Assessments of Individual Students, page 27), and element 19 (Reflecting on Learning, page 88) to illustrate the strategies and assessments that can be used. As readers move through this book, they should be looking for and considering opportunities to assess student learning and provide formative feedback to and with students.
Charting Student Progress and Class Progress
It is imperative that both students and teachers are clear on the proficiency level at which students are performing and how they are growing over time. This monitoring can apply to specific performance expectations or growth in recursive skills such as science and engineering practices. Figure 1.6 shows the progress monitoring both teachers and students could do for an individual performance expectation. Each student should monitor his or her own score, which could have been generated by individual self-reflection or from teacher feedback. In addition, the teacher can track the entire class performance to look for patterns and trends, and plan interventions.
Performance Expectation: 3-PS2-2—Make observations and/or measurements of an object’s motion to provide evidence that a pattern can be used to predict future motion [Clarification statement: Examples of motion with a predictable pattern could include a child swinging in a swing, a ball rolling back and forth in a bowl, and two children on a see-saw ] [Assessment boundary: Assessment does not include technical terms such as period and frequency ]
Student Assessment 1 Assessment 2 Assessment 3 Assessment 4
Billy Trey Unnathi
Wen
Julia Approaching (2) Meeting (3) Approaching (2) Approaching (2) Meeting (3) Meeting (3) Meeting (3) Meeting (3) Approaching (2) Meeting (3) Approaching (2) Meeting (3) Meeting (3) Meeting (3) Approaching (2) Approaching (2) Approaching (2) Meeting (3) Approaching (2) Meeting (3)
Source for standard: NGSS, n.d.b.
Figure 1.6: Student progress over time.
When reviewing scores in this way, the teacher is able to gain insights into student performance by seeing some patterns in the evidence. For example, Trey has demonstrated clear proficiency with each assessment. This could be an opportunity to enrich his learning, such as by asking him to make connections to other learning throughout the year, include more technical terms such as frequency and period in his work, or describe scenarios that haven’t been considered in class. For other students, such as Unnathi, Billy, and Julia, the teacher and student would want to have additional information about why the proficiency scores seem to be moving up and down. This could be due to a need for a deeper understanding of science vocabulary, clarity on the connections to the crosscutting concept, or the accuracy and confidence in making observations or measurements. On the other hand, Wen’s assessment data show a somewhat concerning pattern, possibly indicating that he is losing interest or motivation. He demonstrated proficiency early in the learning but has tapered off to below proficient in his most recent assessments.
In addition to providing insights on individual students and their learning needs, tracking student performance in this way provides insights on the assessments themselves, with a clear pattern of proficiency by all students on assessment 2, and only one student meeting proficiency on assessment 3. This could present insights on the depth of knowledge required on these assessments or, in some cases, the validity of the assessment itself. If these are common assessments used with other teachers in the school, it is helpful to see if similar patterns are observed in those classrooms, making this a learning experience for students and teachers alike.
