Informal formative assessment in inquiry-based science lessons

Correia, C.F., Nieminen, P., Serret, N. ORCID: 0000-0002-8105-1699, Hähkiöniemi, M., Viiri, J. and Harrison, C., 2016. Informal formative assessment in inquiry-based science lessons. In: J. Lavonen, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, A. Uitto and K. Hahl, eds., Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2015 Conference: Science Education Research: Engaging Learners for a Sustainable Future, Part 11, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland, 31 August - 4 September 2015. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, pp. 1782-1791. ISBN 9789515115416

[img]
Preview
Text
12529_a1316_Serret.pdf - Published version

Download (285kB) | Preview

Abstract

This paper is focused on the characterization of informal formative assessment conversations (i.e., interactions on-the-fly) from a methodological perspective. Interactions on-the-fly are unexpected teachable moments in which the teacher tries to probe students’ understanding and use that information to support their inquiry process. One of the coding systems used (ESRU framework) was adopted from the research literature (Ruiz-Primo & Furtak, 2007). Two other systems described here were developed and previously reported in two papers written by the authors (Correia, Nieminen, Serret, Hähkiöniemi, Viiri, & Harrison, in press; Nieminen, Hähkiöniemi, Leskinen, & Viiri, 2016). This paper presents these three coding systems together and discusses their features to characterize interactions on-the-fly. Examples for coding interactions on-the-fly from Finnish and English physics lessons are presented. For example, on the one hand, on-the-fly discussion proceeds as follows: The teacher initiates an on-the-fly episode by eliciting information using an open-ended (divergent) question, as the discussion progresses the teacher starts narrowing down the discussion using a closed-ended question (convergent), and closes the discussion by giving a short mini lecture. On the other hand, when guiding students’ inquiry, the teacher can collect information rapidly (quick interpretation) or he/she can use series of probing questions (further probing). In the former, the guidance is more authoritative as it is based on correspondence of the students’ and the teacher’s ideas. In the latter, guidance is based more on the student’s ideas representing more dialogic way to support learning.

Item Type: Chapter in book
Alternative Title: Formative assessment in inquiry-based science education using interactions on-the-fly
Creators: Correia, C.F., Nieminen, P., Serret, N., Hähkiöniemi, M., Viiri, J. and Harrison, C.
Publisher: University of Helsinki
Place of Publication: Helsinki
Date: 2016
Volume: 11
Divisions: Schools > School of Education
Depositing User: Jonathan Gallacher
Date Added: 26 Nov 2018 14:20
Last Modified: 12 Mar 2019 14:59
URI: http://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/35127

Actions (login required)

Edit View Edit View

Views

Views per month over past year

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year