Content area
Full Text
In today's science classrooms, students are increasingly required to integrate mastery of core concepts with complex scientific and engineering practices. As a result, teachers must be intentional about selecting scientific practices that align with curricular objectives while also considering how to assess mastery of that practice, a challenge considering that few measurement tools of this nature exist. We believe that developing and utilizing rubrics based on learning progressions is an effective way to build student capacity and measure their progress.
Scientific argumentation, one of eight science and engineering practices outlined in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), provides a salient example as the cognitive complexity of the practice requires students to simultaneously engage in multiple component skills while also exploring important scientific concepts (NSTA 2014). Scientific argumentation is defined by the NGSS as engaging in "reasoning and argument based on evidence" to provide the best explanation of a phenomena or solution to a problem (NRC 2012). For novice learners, scientific argumentation can be difficult to master if the larger practice is not broken down into manageable component skills. The individual skills necessary for practicing scientific argumentation include the ability to comprehend and analyze text, interpret and collect data, and engage with peers through discussion and writing. Therefore, scaffolded supports and accommodations are necessary so that all students in the science classroom can engage in these component skills.
To that end, rubrics comprised of learning progressions are an effective way for teachers to envision the developmental continuum of the component skills necessary for proficient scientific argumentation practices. Learning progressions track students' competency in a specific skill while also accounting for developmental level and instructional scaffolds. A well-developed learning progression for scientific argumentation, like that described by Berland and McNeill (2010), provides a roadmap to mastery of the practice. Further, Osborne and colleagues' (2016) model of a science-focused learning progression ensures that teachers can both build student capacity for complex engagement with scientific argumentation while also maintaining differentiated learning goals for the full range of student abilities in a classroom.
Along with providing formative feedback about levels of mastery, we argue that this type of rubric designed for NGSS science and engineering practices can also serve as a practical resource for providing appropriate instructional contexts, supports, and...