ABSTRACT
The U.S. priority on testing and accountability challenges school administrators to adopt, adapt or develop assessment systems that provide concrete evidence in particular subject matter areas such as science. Curricular programs emphasizing constructivist learning approaches and complex reasoning such as scientific inquiry are often not well matched to the assessment instruments used to evaluate them, such as standardized or off-the-shelf tests. As a result, educational researchers are sometimes torn between supporting curricular activities that promote complex reasoning and supporting high-stakes tests designed to emphasize facts and conceptual knowledge development over higher-order reasoning. This paper presents results from the first year of a research program to develop and evaluate curricular/assessment systems emphasizing complex reasoning in science. Results provide information for new models of assessment systems that complement high-stakes tests as they address the question, what constitutes evidence of complex reasoning in science?
