This is a study of assessment of the work of creative problem-solving groups in sixth-grade social studies. We test the proposition that providing students with specific guidelines as to what makes an exemplary group product (evaluation criteria) will improve the character of the discussion as well as the quality of the group product. To assess the group's potential for successful instruction, we examine the character of the group conversation as well as the quality of the group product. We present a statistical model of the process of instruction that connects the use of evaluation criteria, group discussion, creation of the group product, and average performance on the final written assessment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramP. L., ScarlossB., HolthuisN. C., CohenE. G., LotanR. A., & SchultzS. E. (2002). The use of evaluation criteria to improve academic discussion in cooperative groups. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22, 16–27.
2.
BrykA. S., & RaudenbushS. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3.
CohenE. G. (1994). Designing groupwork: Strategies for heterogeneous classrooms (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
4.
CohenE. G., & LotanR. A. (Eds.). (1997). Working for equity in heterogeneous classrooms: Sociological theory in practice.New York: Teachers College Press.
5.
CosseyR. (1997). Mathematics communication: Issues of access and equity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
6.
DornbuschS. M., & ScottW. R. (1975). Evaluation and the exercise of authority.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
FrederiksenJ. R., & CollinsA. (1989). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18, 27–32.
8.
GardnerH. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century.New York: Basic Books.
9.
McColskeyW., & McMunnN. (2000, October). A lapse in standards: Linking standards-based reform with student achievement. Phi Delta Kappan, 115–120.
10.
PophamJ.W. (1999). Where large scale education assessment is heading and why it shouldn't. Educational Measurement, 18, 13–17.
11.
ScarlossB. (2001). Sensemaking, interaction, and learning in student groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
12.
SchultzS.E. (1999). To group or not to group: Effects of groupwork on students’ declarative and procedural knowledge in science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
13.
SchultzS. E., ScarlossB., LotanR.A., AbramP. L., CohenE. G., & HolthuisN. C. (2000, April). Let's give ‘em somethin’ to talk about: Teacher's talk to students in open-ended group tasks. Paper presented to the AERA Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.
14.
ShepardL. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Education Researcher, 29, 4–14.
15.
SolomonP.G. (1998). The curriculum bridge: From standards to actual classroom practice.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
