Do Curriculum Outcomes and Assessment Activities in Science Encourage Higher Order Thinking?

REFERENCES

• Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (1994). Really raising standards: Cognitive intervention and academic achievement. London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Airasian, P.W., & Miranda, H. (2002). The role of assessment in the revised taxonomy. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 249–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberta Learning. (2003, updated 2009). Science (7–8–9). Edmonton, AB, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Alberta Learning. (2009). Science (7–8–9). Edmonton, AB, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, L.W. (2002). Curricular alignment: A re-examination. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 255–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science and Education, 11, 361–375.
   Google Scholar
• Bailin, S., & Battersby, M. (2010). Reason in the balance: An inquiry approach to critical thinking. Canada: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
   Google Scholar
• Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J.R., & Daniels, L.B. (1999). Common misconceptions of critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 269–283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyer, B.K. (2001). Teaching thinking skills—Defining the problem. In A.L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (3rd ed., pp. 35–43). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Beyer, C.J., & Davis, E.A. (2008). Fostering second graders’ scientific explanations: A beginning elementary teacher's knowledge, beliefs, and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 381–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloom, B.S., Englehart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95(4), 577–770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bransford, J.D., & Donovan, M.S. (2005). Scientific inquiry and how people learn. In M.S. Donovan & J.D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn: Science in the classroom (pp. 397–413). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2005). Science K to 7: Integrated resource package 2005. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Province of British Columbia.
   Google Scholar
• Brookhart, S.M., & Devoge, J.G. (1999). Testing a theory about the role of classroom assessment in student motivation and achievement. Applied Measurement in Education, 12(4), 409–425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Case, R. (2005). Moving critical thinking to the main stage. Education Canada, 45(2), 45–49.
   Google Scholar
• Case, R., & Daniels, L. (2008). Teaching the tools to think critically. In R. Case & P. Clark (Eds.), The anthology of social studies: Vol. 1. Issues and strategies for elementary teachers (pp. 77–88). Vancouver, BC, Canada: Pacific Educational Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cavagnetto, A.R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinn, C., & Brown, D.E. (2000). Learning in science: A comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 109–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corliss, S.B., & Linn, M. (2011). Assessing learning from inquiry science instruction. In G. Schraw & D.R. Robinson (Eds.), Assessment of higher order thinking skills (pp. 219–243). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (1997). Common taxonomy of science learning outcomes K to 12. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Crooks, T.J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438–481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Teaching and learning for understanding. In L. Darling-Hammond, B. Barron, P.D. Pearson, A.H. Schoenfeld, E.K. Stage, T.D. Zimmerman, … J.L. Tilson (Eds.), Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding (pp. 1–9). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: D. C. Heath and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Duschl, R.A. (2003). Assessment of inquiry. In J.M. Atkin & J.E. Coffey (Eds.), Everyday assessment in the science classroom (pp. 41–59). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ennis, R.H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J.B. Baron & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 1–26). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Ennis, R.H. (2003). Critical thinking assessment. In D. Fasko, Jr. (Ed.), Critical thinking and reasoning: Current research, theory, and practice (pp. 293–313). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. (2005). Teaching children to think. Cheltenham, England: Nelson Thornes Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• FitzPatrick, B., & Schulz, H. (2010). Assessing higher order thinking: What teachers think and do. Paper presented at the 2010 AERA Annual Meeting in Denver, CO.
   Google Scholar
• FitzPatrick, B., & Schulz, H. (2012). How a research-based intervention and teacher learning community supported teachers in teaching and assessing higher order thinking. Paper presented at the Classroom Assessment SIG for the 2012 AERA Annual Meeting in Vancouver, BC.
   Google Scholar
• Gil-Perez, D., & Vilches, A. (2005). The contribution of science and technological education to citizens’ culture. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 5(2), 253–263.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2002). Science elementary curriculum guide. St. John's, NL, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2007, updated 2010). Intermediate science curriculum guide. St. John's, NL, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2010). Intermediate science curriculum guide. St. John's, NL, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Haertel, E.H., Moss, P.A., Pullin, D.C., & Gee, J.P. (2008). Introduction. In P.A. Moss, D.C. Pullin, J.P. Gee, E.H. Haertel, & L.J. Young (Eds.), Assessment, equity, and opportunity to learn (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harlen, W. (2001). Primary science: Taking the plunge (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Herman, J.L., & Webb, N.M. (2007). Alignment methodologies. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 1–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins, F., & Norris, S.P. (2012). CRYSTAL—Alberta: A case of science–science education research collaboration. In S.P. Norris (Ed.), Reading for evidence and interpreting visualizations in mathematics and science education (pp. 3–15). Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J.E. (2002). How well do middle school science program measure up? Findings from project 2061's curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 522–549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 495–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, R. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of the role of evidence in teaching controversial socio-scientific issues. The Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 247–262.
   Google Scholar
• Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martone, A., & Sireci, S.J. (2009). Evaluating alignment between curriculum, assessment, and instruction. Review of Educational Research, 79(4), 1332–1361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzano, R.J. (2001). Designing a new taxonomy of educational objectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marzano, R.J., & Kendall, J.S. (2007). The new taxonomy of educational objectives (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R.E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 226–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMillan, J.H. (2010). The practical implications of educational aims and contexts for formative assessment. In H.L. Andrade & G.J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, K.L., & Krajcik, J.S. (2008). Assessing middle school students’ content knowledge and reasoning through written scientific explanations. In J. Coffey, R. Douglas, & C. Stearns (Eds.), Assessing science learning: Perspectives from research and practice (pp. 101–116). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education, Ontario. (2007). The Ontario curriculum Grades 1–8: Science and technology. Toronto, ON, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Moon, J. (2008). Critical thinking: An exploration of theory and practice. London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Moseley, D., Baumfield, V., Higgins, S., Lin, M., Miller, J., Newton, D., … Gregson, M. (2004). Thinking skill taxonomys for post-16 learners: An evaluation: A research report for the Learning and Skills Research Center. Wiltshire, England: Cromwell Press Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Moseley, D., Elliott, J., Gregson, M., & Higgins, S. (2005). Thinking skills frameworks for use in education and training. British Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 367–390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullis, I.V. S., Martin, M.O., Ruddock, G.J., O'Sullivan, C.Y., & Preuschoff, C. (2009). TIMSS 2011 assessment frameworks. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A taxonomy for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nessel, D.D., & Graham, J.M. (2007). Thinking strategies for student achievement: Improving learning across the curriculum, K–12 (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Newton, L.D., Newton, D.P., Blake, A., & Brown, K. (2002). Do primary school science books show a concern for explanatory understanding? Research in Science and Technological Education, 20(2), 227–240.
   Google Scholar
• Nitko, A.J., & Brookhart, S.M. (2011). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, S.P., & Phillips, L.M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). PISA 2015 draft science framework. Paris, France: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul, R.W. (1991). Teaching critical thinking in the strong sense. In A.L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (Revised ed., Vol. 15, pp. 77–84). Arlington, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, R.W., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Pegg, J., & Karuku, S. (2012). Explanatory reasoning in junior high science textbooks. In S.P. Norris (Ed.), Reading for evidence and interpreting visualizations in mathematics and science education (pp. 65–81). Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Pithers, R.T., & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational Research, 42(3), 237–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnick, L.B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Resnick, L.B. (2001). Making America smarter: The real goal of school reform. In A.L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource for teaching thinking (3rd ed., pp. 3–6). Arlington, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Roach, A.T., Niebling, B.C., & Kurz, A. (2008). Evaluating the alignment among curriculum, instruction, and assessments: Implications and applications for research and practice. Psychology in the Schools, 45(2), 158–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., & Clark, D.B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz, H., & FitzPatrick, B. (2013). Formative assessment as part of guided inquiry to develop thinking in grade 6 science. Paper presented at the 2013 AERA Annual Meeting in San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Shepard, L.A. (2006). Classroom assessment. In R.L. Brennan (Ed.): Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 623–646). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel, H. (1997). Rationality redeemed? Further dialogues on an educational ideal. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Smolkin, L.B., McTigue, E.M., Donovan, C.A., & Colemean, C.A. (2008). Explanation in science trade books recommended for use with elementary students. Science Education, 93(4), 587–610.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Underbakke, M., Borg, J., & Peterson, D. (1993). Researching and developing the knowledge base for teaching higher order thinking. Theory Into Practice, 32(3), 138–146.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, N.L. (2002). Alignment study in language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies of state standards and assessments for four states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
   Google Scholar
• White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London, England: The Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woodward, A., & Elliott, D.L. (1990). Textbook use and teacher professionalism. In D.L. Elliott & A. Woodward (Eds.), Textbooks and schooling in the United States (89th ed., pp. 178–193). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, A. (2004). Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students’ learning and teachers’ professional development. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Dori, Y.G. (2003). Higher-order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually conclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar