A Continuum for Assessing Science Process Knowledge in Grades K-6

by

Michael E. Beeth, The Ohio State University

Linda Cross, Highland Park Elementary, Grove City, OH
Christy Pearl, Highland Park Elementary, Grove City, OH
Janice Pirro, Highland Park Elementary, Grove City, OH
Kara Yagnesak, Highland Park Elementary, Grove City, OH
Janette Kennedy, Richard Avenue Elementary, Grove City, OH

Assessing Science Process Knowledge

Assessing elementary school students' science process knowledge, their knowledge about doing science, is essential for several
reasons. First, if students are to increase the depth of their content knowledge as they participate in opportunities to learn
science, teachers need more accurate information regarding what students have learned about scientific processes. Second, more
accurate assessment of content and process knowledge at all grade levels would provide teachers, policy makers, and
administrators with better information on which to make instructional decisions. Third, many constructivist approaches to
learning assume that valid knowledge of students' existing ideas will be communicated to others as a condition of learning.
While the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1998) call for teaching science content in greater depth at each grade
level, they also recognize that students need to learn inquiry processes associated with doing science at all grade levels. More
accurate assessments of science process knowledge would provide teachers, parents and district administrators with information
on the effectiveness of the enacted curricula, and policy makers with information about the effectiveness of the inquiry based
instructional approaches recommended for science teaching and learning. This article reports on the development and
implementation of a rubric for assessing science process knowledge in grades K-6. Excerpts from interviews conducted with
teachers applying this rubric to assess students' science process knowledge are presented throughout to substantiate claims about
the usefulness of the rubric.
In spite of the facts that curricular materials and assessment tools exist for science content or concepts at all grade levels, there is
very little information on how to assess knowledge of processes students are expected to learn as a result of science instruction.
Our efforts are based on previous experiences with the development and use of continua for assessing reading and writing
literacy's (see Appendix A). It is important to note that the science assessment continuum we developed is not designed to
evaluate everything a student should know about science. Knowledge of specific science concepts, for example, is not something
this continuum can assess. Instruments that document learning of specific science content knowledge are generally prepared to
reflect a course of study adopted by a local school district (e.g., the Southwestern City Schools Science Course of Study, n.d.). In
addition, many states have or are developing competency based examinations in science that evaluate unifying concepts such as
systems, constancy and change, and form and function (see Science: Ohio's Model Competency Based Program, 1994). In Ohio,
state sanctioned instruments that assess this type of information are required of all students in grades four, six, and nine.
Frequently, the feedback provided on these types of instruments is "high-stakes" in that it is used as the primary source of data
for evaluating student learning and, in some cases, promotion to the next grade. We, on the other hand, intentionally wrote our
continuum to assess science process knowledge in order to capture a different aspect of learning - the growth of an individual
student's knowledge about processes that we believe are essential to learning about science processes. The continuum for
assessing science process knowledge we developed is capable of assessing changes in a student's knowledge over time rather
than assessing learning at just one moment in time.

The assessment rubric that arose from our efforts to document changes in learning to learn science is presented in Appendix B.
Before describing the development of this continuum, however, it is necessary that we provide the reader with some of our
assumptions about the ability of elementary school teachers to assess science process knowledge. Given that elementary school
teachers who would use this assessment rubric had used a similar continuum for assessing reading and writing in the past, we
assumed they would be able to observe and record information regarding science process skills once they understood the
assessment items on our continuum. A second assumption was that repeated use of the continuum by a teacher would capture
change in a student's science process knowledge over time. Our intent here was to have an assessment rubric that could
document change in knowledge of science processes that may be incremental and not easily captured by one administration of a
'paper and pencil' instrument. Finally, we assumed that any instrument we developed would require few changes to the existing
science course of study for an elementary school or teacher. The point here is that we did not want teachers to think that their
curriculum must change to address the items on our continuum. Rather, we wanted teachers using the continuum to decide if the
items on our rubric caused any changes in their instruction. Before presenting the science continuum we will describe some of
the context that contributed to producing the continuum for assessing science process knowledge in Appendix B.

The context for assessing learning

Construction of the assessment continuum took place at Highland Park Elementary (Southwestern City Schools, Grove City,
OH) through the efforts of four Highland Park teachers, one teacher from Richard Avenue Elementary, and a university science
educator. Highland Park is one of seventeen elementary schools in the Southwestern City School District with approximately
500 students, kindergarten through grade five. Most students live in the surrounding neighborhoods, although some attend by
special request of their parent(s). The children come from a wide range of socio-economic backgrounds. Most of the teachers at
Highland Park have been teaching at this school for more than five years, and most hold a master’s degree in education. The
staff at this child-centered school shares a developmental philosophy of learning that is not linked strictly to a student’s
chronological age. The Highland Park view of learning includes the notions that children are motivated and capable learners
from their first enrollment at the school. Students experience elementary school as only one point on a learning continuum that
begins with their preschool experiences. Students in all grade levels follow their own interests through a curriculum that focuses
on a limited number of thematic units of instruction that are covered in great depth. During instruction, teachers work with
individual students and collaborative groups to ensure that all areas of the curriculum have been covered.

Through their shared teaching experiences at Highland Park, these teachers have found that many children progress through
stages of development that reflect increasingly complex ways of representing what they are learning. These teachers have settled
on describing the progressive development of students as emerging, beginning, developing, advancing or consolidating with
respect to how they represent their thinking on a topic (see the Literacy and Writing sections of Student Progress Reports in
Appendix A). The teacher's task when using our rubric is to assess a student's stage of intellectual development and then expand
upon that student’s knowledge and abilities so that he or she develops competency in specific intellectual abilities as well as
practical skills. In doing so, these teachers explicitly recognize that children learn at different rates and in different ways. They
plan their instruction, both individual and whole class, in response to feedback they receive from applying assessment rubrics
like the ones for reading and writing. Although the methods of instruction at Highland Park differ significantly from other
schools in the Southwestern School District, students in the school are expected to follow the same course of study as other
students in the district.
Applying this philosophy of learning, the Highland Park staff regularly seeks out professional development activities that suit
their needs as teachers. In 1991, the College of Education at Ohio State University selected Highland Park Elementary as a
professional development school (PDS). The model of a PDS at Ohio State is designed to "connect colleges of education with
schools; to establish working partnerships among university faculty, practicing teachers, and administrators that are designed
around systematic improvement in practice; and to serve as settings for teaching professionals to test different instructional
arrangements, for novice teachers and researchers to work under the guidance of gifted practitioners, for the exchange of
professional knowledge between university faculty and practitioners, and for the development of new structures designed around
the demand of a new profession." (Kirschner, 1995).

Highland Park’s involvement in a PDS allowed staff members to initiate and design experiences that contributed to their
professional growth while earning graduate credit from The Ohio State University. In 1991, the Highland Park staff sought out
Dr. Becky Kirschner, an Ohio State University professor, to assist with the coordination of their professional development
interests. Among these interests was an action research project involving two teachers in redesigning the school’s Student
Progress Report (Howlett & Kerstetter, 1995). The intent of this research was to make the assessment of reading and writing
consistent with the Highland Park philosophy of learning. In brief, these teachers wanted to change "the way they assessed
children, both for ongoing instruction and for ‘reporting to parent’ purposes" (Dickinson, Kirschner, & Rogers, 1995, p. 43). In
light of these interests, they wanted to develop an assessment instrument that would communicate developmental aspects of
learning to read and write in addition to answering the most commonly asked question by parents - "Is my child reading/writing
at grade level?" An assessment capable of this would also offer teachers feedback on their instruction, feedback that could be
used when planning future instruction. In the end, these teachers developed a system of documenting student progress that
included portfolios of student work to document growth as learners, a revised assessment instrument that could contribute to
their ongoing instruction, and a revised reporting mechanism for parents (Dickinson, Kirschner & Rogers, 1995). Appendix A
contains samples of the Primary and Intermediate Student Progress Report's that were developed for assessing reading and
writing by the Highland Park Faculty.

Developing a continuum for assessing Science Process Knowledge

The Student Progress Report developed in 1995 lumped subjects such as social studies, science, and health remained lumped
together under the heading of "Integrated Curriculum (see Appendix A). In an effort to continue developing the Student Progress
Report, teachers at Highland Park (the co-authors of this paper) contacted a science educator (Dr. Michael Beeth) to construct a
continuum for assessing science that was similar to those already in use for reading and writing. Our joint involvement began in
1996 by sharing each individual’s ideas about what it might mean to be scientifically literate in grades K-6. Next we discussed
processes of science we believed were applicable when learning a wide variety of science content. Among the processes we
identified as necessary for K-6 students were observing physical properties, asking questions, naming and classifying natural
objects, applying science vocabulary to describe details, familiarity with using science equipment, using print, electronic and
human resources, rational thinking, and integrating other disciplines with science. From this list we developed a rationale for
why we thought each component was an important aspect of scientific process knowledge (see Table 1). We did not specify any
particular science content since the teachers using this rubric would need to comply with their District Course of Study.

We then illustrated each component of science with assessment items we felt a student might say or activities they might engage
in that would indicate they were competent with a particular item at each developmental level (see Table 2).

Table 1
Processes of Science

 Observing
Rationale: Scientific questions usually begin with observations of the natural world. Scientists observe objects, properties
of those objects, and phenomena that objects undergo
 Asking questions
Rationale: Scientists ask questions about objects found in the natural world and the phenomena they undergo.
 Naming and classifying natural objects
Rationale: Fundamental to all scientific investigations is communicating about the objects, parts of objects, and
phenomena that occur in the natural world. Scientists give names to objects and phenomena so they can be precise when
talking about the object or phenomena they are interested in studying
 Attending to details
Rationale: Scientists keep careful records of their observations. All scientists collect, organize, and analyze data in many
forms to help answer their questions.
 Familiarity with equipment
Rationale: Scientists use equipment to help them make more precise observations. They must be comfortable with the
technology used in their investigation.
 Using resources
Rationale: Scientists use existing resources to help them think about their current questions. Some of the resources they
consult include people (colleagues or experts in the field), reference books, tables, printed reports of past research, and the
Internet.
 Rational thinking
Rationale: Scientific thinking involves reasoning about data and drawing conclusions. This reasoning may be either
inductive (drawing conclusions based on specific instances) or deductive (establishing generalizations from which
conclusions follow).
 Integrating science
Rationale: Science includes using (and sometimes learning) mathematics, writing, thinking, reading, and working with
others. More often than not, science involves teams of researchers with each member of the team contributing different
strengths to the combined efforts of all. Scientists report the results of their investigations in several ways --orally at
conferences involving their peers and through written media such as journals and the Internet.

Developmental Levels and Science Process Knowledge

Science:Your child’s learning progression as of

Emerging Beginning Developing Advancing Consolidating
Emerging Advancing
-describes the gross physical -describes common physical objects in precise
characteristics of objects detail
-explores the physical capacity of -predicts how an object would behave if you
containers or objects changed the conditions
-knows the names for (un)common -uses science information books or resources
physical objects in the library
-asks questions of a factual nature -extracts useful facts or constants from
-defers explanation to others or reference materials
authorities -recognizes the importance of the data or
Beginning information collected
-asks questions about the characteristics -selects appropriate science equipment to use
of objects and phenomena during an investigation
-explains how an object interacts with its -links events into a chain/sequence of events
surroundings that explain some phenomena
-uses science equipment to collect -describes the outcome of an investigation
information ( rather than as a toy) Consolidating
-understands that phenomena can have -uses scientific vocabulary appropriately and
names accurately
-gives egocentric reasons as an -is comfortable/confident using science
explanation equipment
Developing -gives causal explanations for why something
-understands how to collect and organize happened as it did
data -beginning to reason about events that could
-uses science equipment safely, happen hypothetically
appropriately, and effectively -completes a series of investigations on one
-identifies variables that affect an topic
experiment -writes about questions they would like to
-gives procedures for what was done study next
-explores the research of others -communicates their findings and questions of
-gives increasingly more precise interest to other
descriptions of common physical Nov Jan Mar Jun
objects
-is thinking about objects and physical
event from a perspective other than their
own EFFORT ___ ___ ___ ___
-links explanations for an event with
observations of the event
 Revising the continuum

In spite of our efforts to bring the continuum to this stage of development, our first attempt to use the continuum was met with
several significant problems. First, teachers found that some assessment items could not be assessed from a single interaction
with a student. To address this problem we identified those assessment items that we felt could be evaluated by a single
interaction with (+) and those that need multiple interactions with (_ ). Second, we found that the most frequently recorded
information from students were verbal and written statements. This problem was addressed by adding columns to the right of
each assessment item for observational and pictorial information easily available to a teacher. Information placed in any of these
columns could come from a variety of sources including observation of a student’s behavior, verbal statements, written text or
illustrations. The intent of these columns was to help teachers become aware of multiple ways that students might represent their
understanding of science process knowledge other than through traditional forms of literacy (e.g., reading and writing).

I could see where some kids were based on how they described things. One child could say, "This is wet", and another could
elaborate on why it is wet, another child could write about it. Some kids were more descriptive than other kids. (Second grade
teacher)

Another finding from our first use of the continuum was that several teachers noticed that the students they rated highest on the
science continuum were not necessarily the same students who placed highest on continua for reading and writing.

My placement of students in science and literacy didn't match. A lot of kids were strong on both but there were those kids who
placed higher in science - a strong interest, a strong knowledge, yet they weren't necessarily highest in literacy. I also had some
kids higher in writing who weren't high in science. (Third grade teacher)

The kind of kid who was hard for me to place was someone who was verbally strong. They had scientific language, actions and
behaviors but couldn't reproduce it. So I had to really try to separate [assessment of literacy from assessment of science]. One
student couldn't write. When he would turn in an observation it might look like an Emergent writer [on the literacy continuum]
but I knew him better and I knew if I talked to him he would easily fall into Beginning or Developing [on the science continuum]
because of his verbal comments. (Second grade teacher)
This seemed odd at first because there was an assumed expectation that an accomplished reader and writer should be
accomplished in all subjects. However, as the teachers began to talk about the individual students who they placed highest on the
science continuum, it became clear that evidence sited for competency in science was not exclusively limited to competency
with reading and writing. We believe that assessing across the four categories of observation, verbal comments, written text, and
pictures etc. offers teacher's more contexts within which to assess learning, resulting in more accurate assessment of a student’s
knowledge of the science processes we identified.

One [who placed higher on the science continuum] was actually a non-reader, still in the Emerging level on the reading and
writing continuum. I had another first grader that was actually up to the Developing level in science. He was at the Beginning
level in reading and writing but at Developing in science. (First and Second grade teacher)

Kids that were just curious about life, always asking questions, just jumped right to the top [of a developmental category]. They
were the ones seeking out their own information. They were the ones using science tools properly. (First and Second grade
teacher)

I had to keep telling myself this is not reading and writing. For a lot of kids I ended up going more with observation and verbal
characteristics. I would sit back and think what a student did other than produce something [written]… The kids who were
higher readers and writers might have fallen in the middle of the science continuum. I also had some really low, like
Kindergarten ability students, who were placed pretty high on the science continuum. (Second grade teacher)

To further address the problem we recognized when first using the continuum - what counts as evidence - we continued to add
examples of student's work and anecdotal comments from teachers using the continuum. These "data" were placed on a large roll
of paper as exemplars of student work meeting a particular assessment item. In hindsight, examples of student work served two
critical purposes that would be essential for the teachers who actually used the rubric to assess learning. First, multiple examples
of student work placed on the rolled paper allowed teachers to compare the overall placement of the student they were assessing,
say at the beginning of Emerging, to students placed at the same place by other teachers. In effect, this display of student work
helped teachers validate their placement of a student developmentally by comparison to the data and observations made by their
colleagues, regardless of grade level. These exemplars also included multiple forms of evidence (i.e., observations by a teacher
or written products from a student) that represented a variety of ways to document achievement of a particular assessment item.
This process of standardizing assessment decisions required a considerable amount of time (and is still underway) but helped
many teachers when placing students on the continuum for the first time.

I used the big poster we hung in the lounge with actual samples of student work. I need to see things. So I would go look at the
samples of work in the Beginning section and say 'does this student do work like this'? I tended to mark them higher if I didn't
look at other student's work. But the visual display really helped. (Second grade teacher)

I think that the big poster we developed helped a lot of teachers understand how you place students on the continuum. Without
that poster, it would be incomplete. (First and Second grade teacher)

We believe that standardizing our continuum against actual student work in this public way allowed us to capture the
developmental aspect of learning we built into the continuum. In essence, teachers using the continuum placed students at
appropriate developmental levels as compared to other teachers using the continuum. In particular, because the evidence we
accepted for competency in science is demonstrated through multiple modes of representation in comparison to other students at
similar developmental levels, we believe that our continuum is a more accurate means of assessing changes in how a student is
learning science processes. In the simplest case, some aspects of learning how to learn science (e.g., uses science equipment
safely, appropriately and effectively) must be demonstrated and can not be determined by paper and pencil assessments.
Alternatively, students can effectively communicate aspects of learning such as "describes the outcome of an investigation" in a
variety of ways. We believe our continuum allows students to express their learning in multiple ways and gives teachers a
reasonable process for documenting that learning is occurring.

We then tested the continuum a second time and found it to be not only easier to use but also it provided more information in
terms of effecting instruction. An unexpected benefit of using the revised continuum was that teachers were starting to become
aware of how the science activities they planned for students did or did not allow them to assess items on the continuum.

It made me work harder as a teacher. I could see [the rubric] making me put more thought into 'why are we doing this activity'?
In conjunction with the course of study - how does this curriculum fit in with that assessment? And to be sure I now give students
the opportunities to do things that fit in with the descriptors on the science continuum. I ask myself, what do I have in the
classroom that will help make that happen? (Second grade teacher)
It affected my teaching in that it made me focus on pulling all of the science processes together, with the content. Instead of just
saying 'here is what you need to learn' it gave me different ways to introduce science processes and to explore them … We want
to hit science processes in the District Course of Study really hard. In planning inservice for the teachers [who will use this
continuum] a big component is going to be teaching the teachers how to assess science processes. (First and Second grade
teacher)

While feedback from using this continuum allowed teachers to assess students with more and more accurate information
regarding development as a learner of science, it also allowed the teachers to reflect on the opportunities for learning science
processes in their instruction. The impacts on instruction of the assessment rubric we developed was an unexpected outcome but
one that fits well with the National Science Standard recommendation that there be a "match between the technical quality of the
data collected and the consequences of the actions taken" (NRC, 1998, p.5).

Conclusions

Parents of students attending Highland Park have yet to receive Student Progress Reports that include this science assessment.
However, they have been very receptive in the past to similar information about their child’s development with respect to
reading and writing.

Last year I never had a parent question me [about placing a student on the literacy continuum]. Not once. The thing is though,
you do have to know were you are putting them and why. I mean, when I put kids on a continuum I have to think it through and
look at their work and reflect … and I'm very, very picky about where I start them on a continuum. (Third grade teacher)

Highland Park teachers have reason to believe that many parents use feedback from the literacy portion of the Student Progress
Report to help their children work on specific learning outside of the school setting. For example, if the teacher informed the
parent that their child does not recognize sight words, the parent could work with their child on this at home. Information about
learning like this have been exchanged between teachers and parents during a parent conference with quite good results - the
parents like to know which specific skill they can wok on at home with their child. We anticipate that feedback from the science
continuum will have similar impacts on the parents of these students (e.g., helping a child develop vocabulary that goes beyond
'the gross physical characteristics of an object' for example). It is also our belief that, in combination with district and state level
evaluations of specific science concepts and themes, our continuum does provide a more complete picture of the process skills a
student learns throughout Grades K-6.

Under the old system, if we were studying frogs and the kid knew about frogs he was going to get a good mark. Under the new
system, if we were studying how to make good observations or what is an observation or what is the difference between what you
see and what you believe to be true, and so on and so forth, that could be a whole different thing. It is kind of like if you are
studying addition facts you might do really well but then when you shift to fractions you don't do very well - it looks like your
grade is dropping. No your grade isn't dropping, you are at different places on a continuum. We almost need a continuum for
math. (Second grade teacher)

References

Dickinson, R., Kirschner, N. & Rogers, T. (1995). Teacher-researcher and the creation of new roles for teachers. Ohio Journal of
English Language Arts, 36 (1), 40-47.

Howlett, S, & Kerstetter, K. (1995). Bringing practice into line with philosophy: The development of an alternative reporting
document. Ohio Journal of English Language Arts, 36 (1), 62-68.

Kirschner, B. (1995). Teacher-researcher: New voices and multiple perspectives. Ohio Journal of English Language Arts, 36 (1),
5-10.

National Research Council. (1998). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy.

Science: Ohio's Model Competency-Based Program. (1994). Columbus, OH: State Board of Education.

Southwestern City School Science Course of Study. (n.d.). Available from Southwestern City Schools, 2975 Kingston Avenue,
Grove City, OH, 43123.

About the authors...

Michael E. Beeth is an Associate Professor (Science Education) in the College of Education at The Ohio State University where
he has taught science methods courses for six years. His scholarly interests include understanding the application of conceptual
change models of learning by classroom teachers and supporting teachers who engage in classroom action research.

Linda Cross has taught elementary school for eleven years. She currently teaches all subjects in a second grade classroom. Her
work with the Science Continuum was the basis for an action research project that she submitted as part of her Master of Arts
degree at The Ohio State University.
Christy Pearl has taught grades K-5 for eighteen years in the Southwestern City Schools. Her curriculum always includes a
significant science component. When not teaching, Christy enjoys collecting rocks and turtles.
Janice Pirro has taught elementary school for twelve years. She currently teaches third grade at Highland Park Elementary. Her
interests in learning science first hand lead her to volunteer time at a local archaeological site last summer.
Kara Yagnesak has taught for eight years at Highland Park Elementary. She is currently teaching second grade. She has
continued to develop her personal interests in science teaching and learning by working on the Science Continuum since
completing her Master's of Arts degree in 1997.
Janette Kennedy has been an elementary school teacher for twenty-eight years. Her current teaching assignment is in a third
grade classroom. She serves as a Mentor for a preservice teacher and is the co-author of a Venture Capital Grant (Ohio
Department of Education) that was funded to develop a multiage program of instruction at her school.
 Appendix A
Highland Park Student Progress Report
(Note format for assessing Reading and Writing processes)

KEY
for Levels of Achievement for
LITERACY
INTEGRATED CURRICULUM,
MATH, ART, MUSIC, & PHYSICAL READING Your child’s learning progression as of
EDUCATION Emerging Beginning Developing Advancing Consolidating
1-Applies skills and concepts
independently Emerging Advancing
2-Is exploring skills and concepts -enjoys books and being read to -is a confident reader
3-Is successful when assisted -reads from pictures rather than print -uses a variety of strategies successfully
4-Is experiencing difficulty -tells a familiar story while turning the pages -responds to literature and text
(Blank Space) Not applicable at this-knows that books have a front and a back -expresses opinions and can support them
time -recognizes that print contains meaning with evidence from a book
-responds positively to being read to -uses books to get information
KEY Beginning - has a wide reading vocabulary
for EFFORT and SOCIAL -is building confidence as a reader Consolidating
DEVELOPMENT -is increasing ability to use reading strategies -is an accomplished reader
-demonstrates knowledge of the conventions -can manipulate texts
of print -responds to literature texts in a variety of
O Outstanding I Improving -responds to stories ways
Needs -recognizes sight words -gathers information and ideas from texts
S Satisfactory N Developing -has an expanded vocabulary
Improvement
-is achieving confidence as a reader Nov Jan Mar Jun
-is developing the ability to use a variety of
EFFORT
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT strategies
-knows more print conventions
Nov Jan Mar Jun
- responds to stories
Works independently -uses basic reference skills
Works well with -is increasing sight vocabulary rapidly
others WRITING Your child’s learning progression as of
Listens attentively Emerging Beginning Developing Advancing Consolidating
Accepts responsibility Emerging Advancing
for actions -understands that language can be written -is a fluent, confident writer
Can cooperate and -knows some print conventions -is consistently using most steps in the writing
compromise -may try to read own writing process
Follows direction Beginning -writes appropriately for different audiences
-is building confidence as a writer -controls more forms of writing
Follows rules -is becoming aware of steps in the writing -spelling is generally accurate
Organizes time, work, process -punctuation is generally accurate
and belonging -tries limited forms of writing Consolidating
-forms letters correctly -is an accomplished writer
Works carefully and -applies some spelling knowledge -is effectively using all steps in the writing
neatly -uses some punctuation process
Completes work in a Developing -writes for a wide range of purposes
reasonable time -demonstrates growing confidence as a writer -knows that the purpose and audience for
Effectively -is beginning to use steps in the writing writing will dictate the form
communicates ideas process -spelling and punctuation are highly accurate
orally -begins to consider audience for each piece Nov Jan Mar Jun
-is trying different forms of writing
EFFORT
-writes legibly in print and cursive
ART -is increasing spelling knowledge
Understands key -uses more punctuation
ideas/demonstrates
skills
Participates in
activities
MUSIC
Understands key
ideas/demonstrates
skills
Participates in
activities
PHYSICAL EDUCATION
Demonstrates
appropriate motor
skills development
Participates in
activities/demonstrates
sportsmanship
 Appendix B
Rubric Sheets for Assessing Science Process Knowledge
Emerging (Grades K-1-2)

+ assessed by one observation, relatively easy to assess

_ assessed by more than one observation, adequately assessed over time

+ _ Assessment item Observe Verbal Text Picture, etc.

sorts and states writes draws a
describes gross classifies obvious descriptive picture that
physical objects based physical comments resembles an
+ characteristics of on physical characteristic about an object -
an object characteristics - object - the colors a bear
the bear is brown bear brown
brown has big teeth
compares writes about
explores the pours differing the number
physical capacity of water/rice/sand volumes - of objects
+ containers from one combines two (i.e.,
container to or more counting
another volumes into bears) that fit
one container in a
container
 gives names
knows the names to objects - labels or
for (un)common this is a names
_ physical objects kangaroo, a objects in a
crystal, the drawing
root of a
plant
asks questions of a questions can
factual nature be answered
with an
_ undisputed
fact _ How
many ...?
What are the
parts of ...?
_ defers explanation Defers cites the
to explanation ideas of
others/authorities to others - my others - in
parent said... the book it
said ...

Beginning (Grades 1-2-3)

+ assessed by one observation, relatively easy to assess
_ assessed by more than one observation, adequately assessed over time

Assessment item Observe Verbal Text Pictures, etc.

+ asks questions about asks questions writes
the characteristics of about the questions as
 objects and properties of hypotheses -
phenomena an object - We wanted to
Why is this know why this
rock shiny? rock is shiny.
What makes We wanted to
thunder? know why
Which objects things sink
sink/float? and float.
+ _ mentions the
explains how an interaction of constructs a draws before
object interacts with two or more concept or and after
its surroundings objects - the idea map pictures
plant needed
sunlight to
grow
+ _ uses science gradually
equipment to collect spends more
information (rather time working
than as a toy) with (than
playing with)
equipment
_ understands that
phenomena can have
names
_ gives egocentric
reasons as an
explanation

Developing (Grades 2-3-4)

+ assessed by one observation, relatively easy to assess
_ assessed by more than one observation, adequately assessed over time

Assessment item Observe Verbal Text Pictures, etc.

understands how to includes a provides a
collect and organize summary of title and
+ _ data data as part labels the
of a lab axis of a bar
report - graph, pie
includes a chart or
chart, graph drawing
or drawing
uses science uses writes about
equipment safely, equipment to how
+ _ appropriately, and extend senses equipment
effectively - uses a helped them
magnifying extend their
glass, balance senses - we
or eye measured
dropper to exactly five
make precise drops of
observations water...
or
measurements
identifies variables states which writes about
that affect an variable(s) the
experiment they might variable(s)
investigate - and control
+ we could group they
investigate plan to
 the effects of investigate -
water or we studied
light or soil how much
water plants
need to grow
well by...
gives procedures for states writes
what was done procedures procedures -
+ in sequential Step 1:
order - first prepare soil.
we... then Step 2: plant
we... seeds just
under the
soil.
+ _ explores the consults identifies the cites
research of others existing questions information
resources - that were gleaned from
reads books, important to more than
explores the an one source in
Internet investigator - a lab report -
resources these Smith
investigators said...and
wanted to Jones said...
know...
_ gives increasingly knows the describes the labels a
more precise names for functions of drawing of
descriptions of common parts of an an object -
common physical parts - the object - the labels the
objects parts of a root absorbs parts of a
plant are the water, the
 root, stem, leaf makes plant
leaf, and food for the accurately
flower plant
_ is thinking about explains how illustrates
objects and physical other might objects that
event from a see an event are beyond
perspective other - if you were their
than their own on the sun, immediate
the earth perception -
would draws
revolve objects seen
around you through a
microscope
or the
planets in
our solar
system
_ links explanations relates an explains how
for an observation they think
event with to an something
observations of explanation - happened -
the event the puddle the red dye
dried up went through
when the sun the Celery
came out and and into the
made the leaves
water
evaporate

Advancing (Grades 3-4-5)

+ assessed by one observation, relatively easy to assess
_ assessed by more than one observation, adequately assessed over time

Assessment item Observe Verbal Text Pictures, etc.

describes common uses precise describes labels
physical objects in terminology objects in precise
+ precise detail - this is the detail - the details in a
femur crystals are drawing -
clear, labels the
triangular, filament,
and shiny anther,
stigma, style,
and ovary
predicts how an tests a states a writes about
object would behave prediction - prediction - the results
if you changed the puts hot water if I put hot that came
conditions and cold in a and cold from testing
_ freezer to see water... a prediction
which turns - we put hot
solid first and cold
water in the
freezer and...
+ uses science locates refers to an uses incorporates
information books resources information information illustrations
or resources in the such as resource from from science
library atlases, they used - resources in information
encyclopedias, we found this written resources in
and field is in.. reports - written
guides includes a reports
 bibliography
in a report
_ extracts useful facts includes new
or constants from facts in a
reference materials concept or
idea map
_ recognizes the reports on summarizes
importance of the data data - the
data or information collected - data we
collected the sample of collected
water we tells us that...
looked at
had..
+ selects appropriate chooses
science equipment equipment to
to use during an measures
investigation precise
volume, mass,
etc.
states events
in a
sequence
that explains
how a event
happens -
_ links information water, writes a
into a warmed by sequence
chain/sequence of the sun, that explains
events that explain evaporates how a event
some phenomena into the happens
 atmosphere,
condenses
around a
dust particle,
precipitates
as rain, snow
or dew, and
runs back to
the ocean
talks about
an
investigation
in several
describes the ways - to writes about
outcome of an describe the what,
_ investigation procedures, when, where,
persuade and how of
peers, an
summarize experiment
data, etc.

Consolidating (grades 5-6+)

+ assessed by one observation, relatively easy to assess
_ assessed by more than one observation, adequately assessed over time

Assessment item Observe Verbal Text Pictures, etc.

+ uses scientific
vocabulary
appropriately and
accurately
 + _ is
comfortable/confident
using science
equipment
gives causal
explanations for why
_ something happened
as it did
+ beginning to reason
about events that
could happen
hypothetically
completes a series of
investigations on one
_ topic
writes about
questions they would
_ like to study next
communicates their
findings and
_ questions of interest
to others

Back to the EJSE