Abstract: BIOLOGY teachers have been bombarded with information regarding the need for hands-on science. Articles directed to biology teachers have been written on the subject (Leonard 1988). A blue ribbon panel authored a recent book on reform in biology and included a large section on the role laboratory instruction should play in biology classrooms (Fulfilling the Promise: Biology Education in the Nation's Schools, 1990). Recently, a new twist has been added, and the topic is called Hands-on/Minds-on science. Part of a recent issue of the Kappan was devoted to this very issue (Gough 1990). Padilla (1980) stated that many texts and programs use the term hands-on quite freely in order to sell their programs without regard to its real meaning. Like many terms in educational practice, these terms are not often used with a standard definition that has one meaning for all practitioners. What then do these terms mean? Are they sufficiently comprehensive and meaningful for the science teacher to find useful? In the process of answering these questions, we propose a new organization that is more comprehensive and useful than previous descriptions. If effective lab instruction is a goal, then clarity of these terms is necessary. In general, hands-on science is defined as any science lab activity that allows the student to handle, manipulate or observe a scientific process. Hofstein and Lunetta (1982) defined hands-on science laboratory activities as "contrived learning experiences in which students interact with materials to observe phenomena" (pp. 201-202). Hands-on science lab activities may be differentiated from other common methods of instruction, such as lecture and demonstration, by the criterion that students interact with materials. According to Hofstein and Lunetta, lab activities do not include demonstrations, museum visits or diffused field trips. A minds-on science activity includes the use of higher order thinking, such as problem solving, to the hands-on activity. Recent calls have been made to reform hands-on laboratory instruction in secondary biology. A distinguished panel of biology educators iterated the fact that current modes of biology laboratory instructional strategies have failed to meet the goals of laboratory instruction (Fulfilling the Promise: Biology Education in the Nation's Schools, 1990). This panel recommended that hands-on lab activities should be capable of producing "conceptual changes necessary for intellectual development and understanding" (p. 37). Higher level cognitive skill development was also stressed by the panel. Weiss (1987) reported that the use of hands-on lab activities by secondary teachers has dropped from 59 percent in 1977 to 39 percent in 1985-86. Recent researchers who reviewed popular high school biology textbooks revealed that the written lab activities of these texts are not capable of meeting the laboratory goals of problem solving and higher level inquiry (Lumpe & Scharmann, in press). It is evident that a clearer picture of the biology laboratory is needed so that reforms may be effectively employed.

Abstract: This article presents the problem of arriving at common indicators of instructional quality and student achievement in social studies, given great diversity between classes and schools in what is taught. A study of more than 70 classes in 11 high schools showed that generic qualities of classroom thoughtfulness were not associated with the persuasiveness of student writing on a constitutional issue. However, since the impact of classroom thoughtfulness on higher order thinking in the subjects that teachers actually taught was not assessed, the results do not justify dismissing the significance of generic qualities of classroom thoughtfulness for promoting students' thinking.

Abstract: Abstract This article presents the problem of arriving at common indicators of instructional quality and student achievement in social studies, given great diversity between classes and schools in what is taught. A study of more than 70 classes in 11 high schools showed that generic qualities of classroom thoughtfulness were not associated with the persuasiveness of student writing on a constitutional issue. However, since the impact of classroom thoughtfulness on higher order thinking in the subjects that teachers actually taught was not assessed, the results do not justify dismissing the significance of generic qualities of classroom thoughtfulness for promoting students' thinking.

Abstract: Problem solving is an important yet elusive educational goal. This article briefly reviews the research on the components of problem solving and two mechanisms for fostering the transfer of problem-solving strategies--low-road transfer and high-road transfer. The interactions between these two mechanisms and two types of content (domain-specific knowledge and higher order thinking) are then discussed. Exploratory research on one of the interactions (low-road transfer of higher-order thinking) is summarized, with a particular focus on the performance of students with disabilities. Finally, some implications for curriculum and instruction are outlined.

Abstract: One of the root problems in assessing communications skills in writing is the wide variety of definitions, often unstated, that lead to different conceptions of what is being measured These different definitions emerge from the complicated sequence of learning writing The young child must learn such matters as the formation of letters, the system of writing from left to right on the line, and the spelling of words Later on, the student will increase vocabulary, learn more complex sentence structures, create poems or stories, and begin to write about ideas Still later, more advanced students construct paragraphs, essays, and research papers ; learn to evaluate other peoples' ideas and incor porate them into their own arguments; and use writing as a cen tral means of learning through discovery and criticism All the earlier skills are necessary as part of the more developed skills Yet, as the learner advances, the skills do not merely de velop; they take on a different shape and a wholly different source The early skills are basically imitative: we must learn to spell and punctuate the way other people do, and we are taught the language forms of people we want to emulate That is, the less sophisticated communication skills are a form of etiquette, based on the need to conform, and dependent upon socializa tion But the more sophisticated skills depart from imitation and conformity We do not want original spelling or punctua tion (though we often get them, at all levels), but we do want original thinking and independent critical problem solving as part of higher-order thinking skills This difference between

Abstract: Designing appropriate content area instruction for secondary students with learning disabilities is a challenging endeavor. Even if these students are mainstreamed into algebra, history, or science classes, special educators are likely to expect only a minimal grasp of the material. To go beyond this, to teach higher order thinking through these subjects, would be regarded by most practitioners as too labor-intensive. The authors of this article argue that, through a comprehensive revision of traditional materials, secondary students with learning disabilities can learn content area subjects--earth science and introductory chemistry, particularly--in an integrated manner. These students can achieve a firm understanding of the subject, as well as learn how to solve complex, domain-specific problems. For this kind of integrated instruction to be feasible, the curriculum must be designed and field-tested by professional curriculum developers.

Abstract: Conceptual foundations of a process for assessing higher-order thinking are reviewed, and a viable model for carrying out the process is presented The first section of the paper formulates 21 criteria that shoild be met by any process adequate to the task The second section outlines the basic concept of critical thinking on which the paper is based and explains how a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking, grounded in research, provides a plausible foundation for accomplishing the 21 objectives offered in response to the criteria The third section explicates the following four domains essential to critical thinking: (1) elements of thought; (2) macro-abilities, or basic modes of reasoning; (3) traits of the mind (affective dimensions); and (4) universal intellectual standards The fourth section contains recommendatIons for a process and a time-table for assessing higher order thinking skills at the postsecondary level Six figures illustrate the discussion, and two appendices provide supplemental information A 20-item list of recommended readings is provided Also provided are critiques by L Boehm, P A Facione, and R K Hambleton (SLD) *********t************************************************************* * Reproductions supplied by EDRS re the best that can be made * * from the original document * **************************************************1********************

Abstract: Cognitively-based writing instruction for educationally disadvantaged students is examined, focusing on epistemic writing. The object of epistemic writing is to inquire into a particular topic and to familiarize/persuade the reader with the fruits of the investigation. In reviewing the distinctions between novice and expert writers, two models of competence in written composition are apparent: the knowledge-telling approach of novice writers, and the knowledge-transforming strategies of expert writers. To foster a shift from the novice to expert, research suggests that the higher order thinking skills that underlie epistemic writing must be fostered. A specific writing environment, Monitoring Instruction plus Strategic Execution (MUSE), was designed for 31 tenth-graders in Canadian classes for normally achieving and learning-disabled students. Specific portions of instructional time were spent in modeling expert-like thinking strategies. Posttest results suggest the potential of the strategy for bringing students closer to the expert position, the writing-to-learn process. Implications for instruction of at-risk students are discussed. Two figures and a 35-item list cf references are included. The paper's discussant is Harvey A. Daniels in a training section entitled "Teaching Writing to At-Risk Students". (SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** TEACHING WRITING TO STUDENTS AT RISK FOR ACADEMIC FAILURE Mary Bryson University of British Columbia Marlene Scardamalia Ontario Institute for Studies in Education BEST COPY AVAILABLE U.S. L IPARTMANT OF EDUCATION Office of Ethcationalf *search and Improvement EOL'CATION L RES( URCES INFORMATION 'ENTI R (ERIC) )(This d...-umes hr s been reproduced as received II.e person or organization originating it CI Minor chances have been made to improve reproduct.al quality Poirv.s of view or opinicns stated inthis docu. ry.nt do not necessarily represent official OERt position or policy TEACHING WRITING TO STUDENTS AT RISK FOR ACADEMIC FAILURE In North America, writing is increasingly likely to be conceptualized as a learning tool that should constitute an integral part of the school curriculum at each stage in a student's development. Willinsky (1990) refers to this view of writing as "the New Literacy," and suggests that this pedagogical model represents a major shift from the way that educators have traditionally defined and implemented writing instruction. One might venture to say that in enlightened educational environments, students are encouraged to "write to learn" through a set of intellectual activities that integrate curricular strands, rather than to "learn to write" as an isolated practice engaged in for its own sake. Writing to learn is about composing texts in rich social contexts for personally defined goalstexts that actively involve students in coming to terms with saying something meaningful, irrespective of whether the particular task involves ( Instructing a reflective argument, telling a story, composing a poem, or describing something interesting to a pen pal. Needless to say, any specific discussion of "writing" means calling attention to a restricted range of activities and resultant products, both of which vary considerably across cultures and historical periods (De Castel! & Luke, 1983). In this paper, we focus on a particular kind of writing that we refer to as "epistemic," the object of which is both to inquire into a particular topic and also to familiarize and/or to persuade one or more readers of the fruits of an investigation. Such tasks might include descriptive, opinion, or informative types of assignments. Evidence abounds that there is a huge gap between current pedagogical inte lions with regard to epistemic writing and their execution in classroom instruction (Applebee, 1981). In a similar vein, large-scale evaluations of students' writing indicate that by secondary school, only a minority of normally achieving learners acquire a level of expertise in written composition that extends beyond functional literacy (Kirsch & Jungeblut, 1986). For students deemed "at risk for academic failure" (e.g., learning disabled, minority, or poor children), the picture is even more bleak. Writing instruction for chronic low achievers typically focuses on techniques for remediating so-called "basic" skills such as spelling, grammar, and handwriting. A central assumption made by many educators of low-achieving students is that the acquisition of so-called "low-level" text production skills is a necessary prerequisite to the acquisition of composing skills associated with writing as a powerful tool for personal learning, such as problem-solving strategies and rhetorical knowledge. A direct consequence of this 'bottom-up" approach to writing instruction is that the achievement gap increases as students move through school, and at-risk learners become progressively more disadvantaged because of a systematic lack of instruction in the higher-order skills that underlie epistemic writing. Accordingly, a (IN more equitable and socially conscious use of the term at risk would be to characterize

Abstract: This paper offers an empirical analysis of the association between organizational features and classroom thoughtfulness. The findings yield a mixed message. On the one hand, no association was found between classroom thoughtfulness and the organizational features of class size, total numbers of students, amount of planning time and number of courses for which teachers had to prepare. On the other hand, there seemed to be a positive association between levels of thoughtfulness and departmental common visions, curricular revision and instructional improvement programs to promote higher order thinking. While only an exploratory analysis, the evidence from this study suggests that what departments do within extant structures may contribute more to improving the level of classroom thoughtfulness in high school social studies than the mere presence or absence of specific organizational structures.

Abstract: The effective use of writing in science instruction may open the way for students to grow in their ability to exercise higher order thinking skills (Bland & Koppel, 1988). Scinto (1986) makes a compelling case for writing as a means of stimulating thinking when he states:

Abstract: The development of a process to assess higher order thinking skills associated with thinking in real world situations raises que!stions about the domain of assessment, the skills and dispositions to be assessed, and the purpose of the assessment It is argued that existing critical thinking courses and instruments may be of limited value in designing the assessment Atteation should be given to an assessment of the skills and dispositions of practical intelligence, and assessment measures should incorporate the key characteristics of practical thought, including the social nature The process of designing the assessment should be a dynamic one, being informed by as many participants representin; as many areas of expertise as possible The assessment process should be seen as a way to further the dialogue among these experts for the goal of improving teaching and learning A 31-item list of references is included Reviews by J Chaffee, P A Facione, and R K Hambleton of this position paper are provided (Author/SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document *********************************************e*************************

Abstract: Excerpt] Concern about slackening productivity growth and deteriorating competitiveness has resulted, in many nations, in a new public focus on the quality and rigor of the elementary and secondary education received by the nation's front line workers. Higher order thinking and problem solving skills are believed to be in particularly short supply so much attention has been given to mathematics and science education because it is thought that these subjects are particularly relevant to their development.

Abstract: Ray W. Karras teaches history at Lexing ton High School, Lexington MA. Multiple-choice tests are like Mark Twain's weather: everyone com plains about them but no one does anything about them. They are said to trivialize learning and stifle thinking; they do not seem to evaluate much worth knowing. Yet, like the weather, multiple-choice tests are pervasive. Most teachers, at some time or other, give them, and almost all of us have taken them for grades, to get into colleges and graduate schools, even to get jobs. Multiple-choice tests do have good features. They can at least approach the important goal of objectivity, can tell something about the knowledge of the test taker, are easy to grade, and are statistically manageable. They do count. And still, they do not test what we teach. Historians teach that history is an unending argument about the past, but multiple-choice tests in these areas seem to do little more than ask for mindless rote recall. We should be able to do better. These worries came upon me when I started teaching high school history twenty years ago. I wanted the good things and none of the bad things that multiple-choice testing could do for my students and me. I wanted tests that could simultaneously iden tify both concrete factual knowledge and interpretation of that knowledge, and en able students to demonstrate their ability to relate facts to higher order thinking skills. Of course, any such testing would have to be objectively fair; groups of knowledge able people answering my questions would have to arrive at the same answers. Twenty years ago the inquiry approach of Edwin Fenton and his associates was

Abstract: In an attempt to determine the level of questioning according to Bloom's taxonomy, generated by test items that accompany selected fifth-grade science textbooks, an analysis of the tests provided by three of the most commonly used elementary science textbooks was completed. Additionally this analysis examined the extent to which each series emphasized the higher levels of questioning and what significant differences, if any, existed between the old and new publications in the number of knowledge-level and above-knowledge-level test items included in end-of-chapter tests. One hundred items from end-of-chapter tests were analyzed from each edition (old and new) of the textbook series (200 per series), which represented a total sample consisting of 600 items. Interrater agreement on training materials reached the 96% level. The 600 items were randomly selected and categorized by the researchers and one experienced classroom teacher, according to the six major categories included in Bloom's taxonomy: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Based on the assumption that the three science textbooks selected for study are representative of all science books, one conclusion is that higher order thinking skills are not elicited by end-of-chapter tests that accompany science textbooks. The lack of emphasis on applicatn, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation levels of questioning indicates a gan between the stated goals of elementary science textbooks and actual published material. (KR) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** NIL Levels of Questioning in Current Elementary Textbooks: What the Future Holds Prepared by: Gregory P. Risner Janice I. Nicholson Janice G. Myhan Presented to 1991 Annual Meeting of Mid-South Educational Research Association Lexington, Kentucky PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Gregory P. Risner ro THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC).U.S. !APARTMENT OF EDUCiTION Office of Educational Research and improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) IC This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it 1' Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality Points of view or opinions stated in this docu mant do nol necessarily represent official Om position or policy Levels of Questioning in Current Elementary Textbooks: What the Future Holds by: Gregory P. Risner Janice I. Nicholson Janice G. Myhan Critical thinking maintains a prominent position among desired learning outcomes in elementary science. Since the textbook method is the primary instructional strategy for teaching science, students' thinking most often parallels the cognitive level(s) of the textbooks being used. Questioning has beeit labeled by Hilda Taba as the "most influential teaching act," and research verifies the role of higher-cognitive questioning in eliciting critical thinking (Andre, 1979; Doak, 1970; Hunkins, 1968; Redfield and Rousseau, 1981; Taba, Levine, and Elzey, 1964). Because teachers use textbooks as the primary source of instruction (Smith, 1980, cited by Mechling & Oliver, 1983), it is necessary to analyze elementary science textbooks and their accompanying resource materials (e.g., published tests) to determine their capacity to develop higher-level thinking skills. Textbook publishers provide a wide variety of accompanying materials such as study guides, chapter and unit tests, posters, parent letters and other materials. Many textbook publishers include scope and sequence charts which emphasize the fact that the text and accompanying materials emphasize divergent, open-ended questions which facilitate critical thinking skills. Most of the research studies related to questioning have been limited to questions contained in textbooks, and teachers' manuals. The research literature does not contain studies concerning the cognitive levels of test items that accompany elementary science textbooks. This research study compares the levels of questions from science tests accompanying textbooks published in the 1980s to those that will be used in schools in the 1990s. ANALYZING TEXTBOOK TESTS In an attempt to determine the level of questioning according to Bloom's (1956) taxonomy, generated by test items that accompany selected fifth-grade science textbooks, an analysis of the tests provided by three of the most commonly used elementary science textbooks was completed. Additionally this analysis examined the extent to which each series emphasized the higher levels of questioning and what significant differences, if any, existed between the old and new publications in the number of knowledgelevel and above-knowledge-level test items. Moreover, it was hypothesized that there would be no significant difference between the old and new textbook editions in the distribution of knowledgelevel and above-knowledge-level test items included in end-ofchapter tests. PROCEDURES Textbook adoption information was obtained from the state departments of education of Alabama, California, Tennessee, and Texas to obtain a rank ordering of the fifth-grade series used most frequently for all states combined. Three of the most widely used

Abstract: Assessment of higher order literacy skills encounters three initial problems aside from assessment methods: (1) definition of literacy; (2) range of skills to assess; and (3) whether or not higher order literacy can be assessed independently of a particular content area. Regarelless of definitions, the general performance areas to be covered must be decided. Issues to be resolved are the question of.how many lower-level literacy skills to include in a higner-level assessment and the degree to which a pure literacy assessment can be separated from any particular content. The cognitive base for assessment of.adult literacy is thin, and that dealing with higher-level skills is almost non-existent. In the future, text-based tasks might be developed from analyses of basic reading comprehension processes. These tasks might be aligned with the Delphi classification of corn critical thinking skills. To be compatible with the basic directions of critical thinking and communications research, it is suggested that literacy assessment be built around a definition of human expertise, confined primarily to reading and writing, and integrated with content-area assessments, at least for areas where text-based information must be integrated with information previously acquired. Three figures illustrate the discussion, and a 52-item list of references is included. Reviews by R. Calfee, M. A. Miller, and M. Scriven of this position paper are provided. (SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************Ik*************** U.t DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of EduCfoonil Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IERICI (D4his document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it 0 Minor changes have been made to improve foloproduChon quality Pomts of vow or opmionsstated on this documint do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy Assessing Higher Order Thinking and Communication Skills: Literacy Richard L Venezky University of Delaware September 30, 1991 Position paper prepared for the National Center on Educational Statistics Workshop on Assessing Higher Order Thinking and Communication Skills in College Graduates, November, 1991. Do not quote without permission.

Abstract: What has been learned from the study of relationships between abilities aAd outcomes learned in college and those abilities as they are performed at work is summarized to infer principles that should inform a national system to assess the higher order thinking ant': communications skills of college graduates In support of the National Education Goal of Literacy and Adult Learning. It is argued that abilities can be assessed in ways that connect education and work as long as abilities are defined in ways that make sense to both spheres. Abilities can be assessed in ways that enable judgments of graduates' effectiveness and in ways that help determine the effectiveness of college learning for work. It will be necassary to identify the abilities involved in effective work and citizenship, but this information can be collected directly from college graduates in work and service roles. Accountability and improvement agenda can be met in the same system. Seven figures illustrate the discussion, and a 101-item list of references is included. Seven appendices provide specific information about the assessment approaches of Alverno College in Milwaukee (Wisconsin). Reviews by R. L. Larson, T. Marchese and B. Wright, and R. G. Swanson of this position paper are provided. The author's response is included. (SLD) ********************************************************t************** * Reprodtmtions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * *****************************************************t*****************

Abstract: Evaluation of student learning and achievement in multicultural art programs should reflect the learning styles of students from diverse ethnic, racial, and class backgrounds. Traditional standardized tests measure factural knowledge and memorization skills never higher order thinking skills. Some authentic assessment moasures include exhibitions, performances, process portfolios, and profiles of stuMent characteristics. Many art educators advocate using socio-anthropological bases to study art works from diverse cultures. These bases are derived from anthropological methods such as interviews, observations, questionnaires, note-taking, and diary-keeping. If such anthropological methods are authentic for studying multicultural art, then they should be suitable for evaluating students progress and achievements. However, in order to implement such methods in the clasroom pre-service and in-service teacher education programs need to be developed to help teachers create the necessary assessment models. (K)!) ************************************************,********************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************

Abstract: The transition to elementary school spans several years in a child's life. For children to progress during this critical period, they must have learning opportunities that are appropriate to their changing developmental levels. Unfortunately, measurement technology that currently dominates assessment practice does not lend itself well to the task of promoting development. Assessment instruments designed to serve teaching and learning initiatives must meet three criteria: they must assess children's abilities, they must be capable of reflecting development during the long transition period, and they must provide information that can be used to plan developmentally appropriate learning opportunities. Norm-referenced and criterion-referenced achievement tests do not meet these criteria. However, the path-referenced approach provides developmental information by referencing a child's performance to a position on a path of development. The Measurement and Planning System, a measurement based on the path-referenced approach, emphasizes social competence, higher order thinking skills, and includes empirically validated developmental progressions that reflect a movement from simple to more complex forms of knowledge. In the 1987-1988 program year, the Ford Foundation allocated funding for a series of studies to examine the role of the Measurement and Planning System in facilitating the transition of Head Start children to the elementary school. The studies found that the Measurement and Planning System in kindergarten had a positive effect on ability during kindergarten. (Contains 23 references.) (MM) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERICI :This docment has been reproduced as received Iron, the person or organizatinn originating it 111( Minor changes have been made lo improve reo(Oduclion quality Points of view or opinions slated in thiS docu men? do not necessarily represent official OERI p05110,, Or policY TAC B-299 Path-Referenced Assessment in the Service of Teaching and Learning: The Role of Assessment In Home, Preschool, and School Initiatives to Promote an Effective Transition to Elementary School John R. Bergan The University of Arizona The transition to elementary school covers a period spanning several years in children's lives. During this period, children encounter a rapidly changing educational environment imposing a vast array of new expectations and challenges that have profound effects on their future development. In order for children to progress during this critical period, they must have learning opportunities that are appropriate to their changing developmental levels. There is now wide recognition that assessment in the service of teaching and learning can play an important role in assisting socializing agents to provide appropriate learning opportunities to promote children's development (e.g., National Association for the Education of Young Children and the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments ofEducation, 1991). Unfortunately, measurement technology that currently dominates assessment practice does not lend itself well to the task of promoting development. Norm-referenced instruments, which describe children's performance in terms of position in a norm group provide no information about a child's developmental level (Bergan & Feld, 1991). Similarly, criterion-referenced instruments, which describe performance in terms of the masteryof instructional objectives, offer no information about development. This paper describes ttansition research involving an approach to assessment in the service of teaching and learning using path-referenced assessment (Bergan, 1981; Bergan, Stone, & Feld, 1985; Bergan & Feld, 1991). The path referenced approach provides developmental information by referencing children's performance to position on a path of development. The Need for a New Approach to Assessment Assessment instruments designed to serve teaching and learning initiatives must meet three criteria: First, they must assess children s abilities, not merely performance on specific test items. Second, they must be capable of reflecting development during the long transition period. More specifically, they must reveal the ordered progression of capabilities reflecting changes In children's level of ability. Finally, they must provide information that can be used by parents and teachers to plan developmentally appropriate learning opportunities to promote children's growth. Norm-referenced and criterion-referenced achievement tests typically used to evaluate achievement do not meet these criteria. Norm-referenced instruments claim to assess ability rather than performance on specific test items. However, when these tests are used as barometers of instructional effects, there is serious doubt that they do measure ability. Under increasing pressure to raise test scores, teachers have aligned the curriculum to the tests (e.g., Mehrens & Kaminski, 1989). As a result, school systems across the country are reporting test results above the national average. This state of affairs has come to be known as the Lake Wobegon effect, in reference to Garrison Keillor's mythical midwestern community where all of the children are above average. The Lake Wobegon effect has caused many scholars to question whether standardized test scores reflect ability or merely the efforts of teachers to preparestudents to pass specific test items (Haladyna, Nolan, & Haas, 1991; Mehrens & Kaminski, 1989). Concern that achievement tests are not reflecting abilities has been accompanied by growing recognition that assessment instruments should be designed to test what is taught (Cohen & Hyman, 1991; Frederiksen & Collins, 1989; Keating, Nickerson, 1989; Sternberg, 1990). This view has been supported by the Department of Education (National Goals of Education, 1990) and by the National Association for the Education of Young Childr.tn and the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education (1991). These organizations have published guidelines calling for a ban on standardized testing prior to the third grade. Criterion-referenced assessment has long been regarded as the procedure of choice for assessment

Abstract: Issues in the development of assessments of higher order thinking skills for college graduates are discussed in the order in which they were presented when this series of papers was commissioned. With regard to Issue 1, it is generally agreed that the develolment of these skills is a desirable goal, buz there is little consensus on how they should be assessed and less agreement on how they should be taught or measured. The next step in development of large-scale assessments will be the use of scoring protocols that are developed to provide diagnostic information for instruction. The development of extended free response items for large-scale assessments is discussed, with reference to existing national surveys such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress and.the National Adult Literacy Survey. The setting of performance standards as posed in Issue 2 is discussed. The only currently relevant database, as questioned by Issue 3, is the Graduate Record Examination database assembled for the National Science Foundation, which could serve as a beginning and a model for development of national assessment data. A six-item list of references is included. Reviews by L. Boehm, J. L. Herman, and M. Scriven of this position paper are provided. (SLD) *********************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are tho best that can be made * * from the original document. * *********************************************************************** DEVELOPMENT OF A PROCESS TO ASSESS HIGHER ORDER THINICING SKILLS FOR COLLEGE GRADUATES

Abstract: Nineteen teachers participated in a single-group pretest-posttest design to explore the relationship between essential and higher order teaching skills. The teachers were observed on both occasions using an instrument designed to measure essential teaching skills (FPMS) and an instrument designed to measure teaching of higher order thinking skills (THOT). Teachers' participation in a training program in the teaching of higher order thinking resultea in substantial incre_4ses in the THOT scores, but no increases in the FPMS scores. Additionally, nonsignificant correlations were obtained between the two scores on both occasions. The results were interpreted in terms of implications for teacher education and teacher evaluation. Empirical research on teaching has shown that specific teacher performance variables such as use of time, handling of materials, questioning, and maintaining discipline, are related to improvement in student achievement and conduct. In addition, students' acquisition of higher-order thinking skills has been related to specific teacher performance that leads students to (a) identify subject-related problems and variables, (b) hypothesize and test hypotheses, and (c) validate generalizations. Improvements in student achievement and conduct, and student acquisition of higher-order thinking skills are high priorities of education. This claim is supported by the emphasis given to basic academic instruction in the early 1980's, an emphasis resulting in large part from the finding in A Nation at Risk (1983) that standardized achievement test scores were dropping. Further support is given by the recent emphasis on developing skills in reasoning, thinking critically, and problem-solving suggested by Educating Americans for the 21st Century (1984). In their pursuit of improvements in student achievement, conduct, and higher-order thinkimr, educators may seek improvements in facilities, equipment, curriculum, or teacher performance. Although all of these factors may affect the desired improvements, the perfoImance of teachers is probably the most important. Empirical research (Evertson, 1980; McDonald, 1976; Soar, 1968; Stallings, 1981) supports the primacy of teacher performance as a predictor of student learning. The empirical research on teacher effectiveness provides a solid basis on which to define effective teaching, examine current practice, attempt to improve practice, and evaluate the results of such attempted improvements. The purposes of this study were (a) to examine the relationship between teacher performance that is related to student achievement and conduct, and teacher performance that is related o student acquisition of higher order thinking skills; and (b) to examine the effects of a training program in teaching

Abstract: Like the novelist Kundera (1988) describes, the scholar must select and define central terms with care and precision. As Robert Merton (1967, pp. 143–146) says, “[t]he specification and clarification of key concepts is an indispensable phase of theoretic work, ” not just for reasons of theory but also in order “to institute observable indices of the social data with which empirical research is concerned. ” Even so, as Mills (1959, p. 34) points out, definitions are more definite than they are definitive. This first chapter, then, may be seen as a long quest for a definition of abstraction. It considers various meanings of the term and points out some important distinctions and contrasts; it reviews theoretical, psychometric, and cognitive approaches to abstraction from the literature of psychology; it provides examples of abstraction that show it to be a common rather than an esoteric mode of thought; it examines the relevance of abstraction to topics of educational importance, such as the value of higher order thinking, the teaching of such skills, and the issue of cognitive transfer; and finally, it refines the definition of abstraction by relating it to its twin opposites—concrete thinking and stereotype thinking—within a conceptual framework of generalization processes.

Abstract: Editor's Comment: The articles in this special series on curriculum make significant contributions, first, by proposing that the curriculum employed for all students, including those with learning disabilities, should emphasize thinking, problem solving, and reasoning, a point few would disagree with, given the complexities of life in this postindustrial-information age. The authors also provide some evidence that students with learning disabilities can learn and apply sophisticated concepts, rules, and strategies. Furthermore, the authors describe one instructional process that emphasizes higher order thinking, that is, "sameness analysis." This process facilitates the integration of concepts, rules, strategies, schema, systems, heuristics, and algorithms. The authors believe that sameness analysis fosters a holistic understanding of a content area. Over the last several years this journal has contained numerous articles that cogently argued for a more holistic approach to education. Sameness analysis is...

Abstract: Based on interviews with teachers, department chairs, principals and staff developers, observations of hundreds of lessons, and a perusal of the social studies and broader, school change literature, dominant barriers to the promotion of thinking were identified. Six barriers emerged: instruction as knowledge transmission, a curriculum of coverage, teachers' low expectations of students, large numbers of students, lack of planning time, and a culture of teacher isolation. The way in which each barrier negatively impacts the promotion of students' higher order thinking is explained, combining analytic arguments with quantitative and qualitative research findings.