Letter pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Comment on “Analyzing the Role of Science Practices in ACS Exam Items” James T. Laverty,*,† Sonia M. Underwood,‡ Rebecca L. Matz,§ Lynmarie A. Posey,∥,§ Justin H. Carmel,∥ Marcos D. Caballero,§,⊥,¶ Cori L. Fata-Hartley,# Diane Ebert-May,∇ Sarah E. Jardeleza,● and Melanie M. Cooper§,∥ †
Department of Physics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas 66506, United States of America Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry and STEM Transformation Institute, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199, United States of America § CREATE for STEM Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, United States of America ∥ Department of Chemistry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, United States of America ¶ Department of Physics and Centre for Computing in Science Education, University of Oslo, N-0316 Oslo, Norway ⊥ Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48864, United States of America # College of Natural Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, United States of America ∇ Department of Plant Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, United States of America ● University Analysis, Reporting, and Assessment, Salisbury University, Salisbury, Maryland 21801, United States of America ‡
ABSTRACT: This letter is a response to a recent article in this Journal (Reed, J. J.; Brandriet, A. R.; Holme, T. A. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 3−10) about characterization of the presence of scientific practices in assessment items. KEYWORDS: Chemical Education Research, Testing/Assessment, First-Year Undergraduate/General, Second-Year Undergraduate, Upper-Division Undergraduate
W
is this component that was missing in our earlier version of the protocol which provided an “implicit” characterization of assessment items. Finally, we caution that the presence of a representation does not necessarily engage students in the practice of modeling. We are encouraged by the interest of our research community in developing, using, and analyzing assessments that engage students in scientific practices; we look forward to continuing this work together.
e are writing in response to the recently published paper by Reed, Brandriet, and Holme.1 This paper uses an early version of the Three-Dimensional Learning Assessment Protocol (3D-LAP), which we developed as part of a transformation initiative at Michigan State University. The 3D-LAP is now published2 and is somewhat different from the version used by the authors of the J. Chem. Educ. paper. The earlier version of the 3D-LAP contained a characterization of the “implicit” presence of a scientific practice, which we later removed because we felt that it did not best reflect the intent of A Framework for K−12 Science Education.3 We found that questions in which the practice was “implicit” do not have the potential to elicit evidence of student reasoning. We want to clarify and encourage the use of the 3D-LAP in its published form. For example, in the 3D-LAP, we claim that a question can only elicit evidence of the practice Developing and Using Models if it has all of the following features, the last being most important in our view: (1) Question gives an event, observation, or phenomenon for the student to explain or make a prediction about. (2) Question gives a representation or asks student to construct a representation. (3) Question asks student to explain or make a prediction about the event, observation, or phenomenon. (4) Question asks student to provide the reasoning that links the representation to their explanation or prediction.2 We find that the reasoning component is most often absent from the typical assessment tasks that we ask of students, and it © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
James T. Laverty: 0000-0001-5788-8539 Lynmarie A. Posey: 0000-0001-7713-0637 Justin H. Carmel: 0000-0001-9281-3751 Melanie M. Cooper: 0000-0002-7050-8649 Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest. Received: February 28, 2017 Revised: April 6, 2017
A
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00170 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
■
Letter
REFERENCES
(1) Reed, J. J.; Brandriet, A. R.; Holme, T. A. Analyzing the Role of Science Practices in ACS Exam Items. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (1), 3− 10. (2) Laverty, J. T.; Underwood, S. M.; Matz, R. L.; Posey, L. A.; Carmel, J. H.; Caballero, M. D.; Fata-Hartley, C. L.; Ebert-May, D.; Jardeleza, S. E.; Cooper, M. M. PLoS One 2016, 11 (9), e0162333. (3) National Research Council. A Framework for K−12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
B
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00170 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
