YEAR 5 SCIENCE: BEHAVIOUR OF LIGHT

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

Ashley Rowan
2016

This formative assessment program is designed to precede the Year 5 science Twilight
Garden authentic summative task, which aims to determine students’ understanding of
phenomena associated with the transfer of light, by applying scientific knowledge in the design
of a light and shadow display. In this task, students are assessed on their ability to develop
explanations of the behaviour of light based on data they have gathered by testing predictions,
and applying this knowledge to solve a problem.

Tools & Methods

The formative assessment program is designed to elicit evidence of student achievement

in relation to criteria designated in the summative assessment task, and as such as is aligned to
these specific goals and broader curriculum outcomes. The program incorporates a range of
formative assessment strategies that engage learners in order to gather, evaluate, monitor and
report on student learning achievement in relation to the assessable criteria in the summative
task. The strategies aim to develop students’ metacognitive skills and to provide effective
feedback to enhance teaching pedagogy and progress students’ learning.

The first method to be utilised in the assessment program is concept mapping and/or
drawing. Within these tasks, students record all words and ideas related to a particular topic, and
show the links between these. Alternatively, students may feel more comfortable drawing
annotated images to represent their thinking. Students will be required to represent their
developing understandings of the behaviour of light at both an early and later stage of the unit of
study. Subsequent to initial teaching activities regarding the behaviour of light and shadows,
students will be asked to demonstrate their thinking by creating a text and/or visual
representation of their current understandings of the creation of shadows. This early formative
assessment will be peer-assessed, with students encouraged to engage in dialogue and
constructive commenting on peer work. Students will use the method of traffic-lighting to make

Ashley Rowan 2016

assessments of peer work. From these peer appraisals the teacher may gather data on students’
emerging individual understandings, identifying students who are having difficulty, and adjust
the next lesson to review and clarify the behaviour of light and shadows.

Students will be asked to represent their thinking again following learning activities
which focus on the reflection and refraction of light. Annotated ray diagrams provide the ideal
method to represent these concepts, and students will be scaffolded in this task through exposure
to a number of exemplars, diagrams and visual aids which provide not only the content
knowledge and scientific language of the unit of study, but also demonstrate ways that these
concepts may be represented. As with the earlier use of these methods, peer-assessment will be
undertaken, with students receiving traffic-light and verbal feedback from peers. Once again, the
teacher may identify any gaps in student comprehension and plan future learning accordingly. If
students express limited understanding of the concepts of reflection and refraction, an additional
mini-lesson may be planned to clarify these ideas.

Another tool used in the assessment program is an investigative planner. Specifically, this
tool assesses students’ content knowledge regarding the behaviour of light, in addition to
allowing for practice of the science inquiry skills required for the summative assessment piece.
In order to investigate the behaviour of light in relation to translucent, transparent and opaque
materials, students will be provided with a planner in which they will record their experiences of
predicting, observing, gathering data, and developing explanations. Students will initially make
and record predictions regarding the behaviour of light when shone at different materials, then
undertake an investigation in collaborative learning teams into these concepts. Teams will gather
data in a provided table and classify materials as either transparent, translucent or opaque.
Following discussion of their findings, students will provide definitions and further examples of
these types of materials using scientific language. Peer assessment will be undertaken as a class,
with groups presenting their evidence and findings and receiving verbal feedback from peers. In
observing these appraisals, the teacher may make note of gaps in both scientific knowledge and
process skills. Further use of exemplars, and opportunities to refine scientific inquiry skills
would be beneficial in the case of misunderstandings and misconceptions.

Another assessment tool is an online quiz undertaken through the Socrative website
(www. socrative.com). The quiz consists of both multiple choice and true/false questions, which
are devised with reference to Bloom’s taxonomy. Students will be asked a number of questions
regarding the science of light of graduated cognitive loading, ranging from more basic

Ashley Rowan 2016

remembering and understanding questioning – “Light travels in straight lines” True or false? – to
higher order application and analysis questions – “Another instance of refraction is…“. The quiz
will be made available to students towards the end of the unit of work, prior to the summative
assessment piece. The quiz may undertaken both at school and home, and provides immediate,
recordable feedback to both the student and teacher.

As a means of eliciting evidence of student capacity to apply scientific knowledge to a

design, students will design a ‘mirror maze’ in collaborative learning teams, in which students
must solve the problem of lighting a specific area using reflection. This will consist of a labelled
ray diagram and accompanying explanation, and will assess students’ understanding and
application of scientific concepts.

Finally, students will be provided with an “I can…” checklist following initial study on
the behavior of light, through which they may track their learning progress. Students may use
this to record their understandings of the subject matter, using the traffic-light system to self-
assess at different points in their learning and indicate areas in which they may be struggling.
From this data the teacher may see the progression of, and gaps in, student learning, and adjust
their teaching accordingly.

Ashley Rowan 2016

 Formative Assessment Rationale

Queensland curriculum documents express that an assessment program should guide and
support the learning and teaching cycle. The program should clarify learning needs, provide
regular feedback and provide evidence of learning from which judgements of quality may be
made against achievement standards (QSA, 2015, p. 25). The assessment tools are used to
provide ongoing and reliable records of student learning progression, data which is vital to
producing relevant and informative feedback that meets learning needs and supports self-
regulation of students’ learning (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, p. 14). Within this program a
range of varied approaches and techniques to assessing student progress are incorporated, as a
means to ensure students are provided with opportunities to demonstrate their learning, in
addition to becoming familiarised with specific assessment techniques (CERI, 2008, p. 9; QSA,
2015, p. 25).

A range of strategies are available which engage students in formative assessment for
learning, focusing on establishing where students are in relation to their learning, where they are
going, and determining the next steps to get them there (Ramaprasad, 1983 in Black & Wiliams,
2009, p. 4; QCAA, 2014). Theories of learning provide the basis for the assessment program.
The constructivist perspective conceptualises ‘learning’ as achieving understanding, and
assessment from this perspective is most effectively undertaken through experimentation and
inquiry-based tasks, with an emphasis on self-assessment and reflection (Readman & Allen,
2013, p. 10). Specifically, science pedagogy from this view builds from students’ existing ideas
and involves providing students with experiences, evidence, and reasoning skills to enable them
to construct scientific ideas (Harlen 2009, in AAS, 2012, p. 100).

A social-constructivist perspective similarly conceptualises ‘learning’ as gaining

understanding, however a greater emphasis is placed on peer collaboration and dialogue in the
construction of new ideas and generation of feedback. Interactive environments that support
sharing and peer feedback are central, and students may also be involved in the design of
assessment tasks (Readman & Allen, 2013, p. 10). The role of the learner within this learning
theory involves active learning, dialogue and communication with peers, reasoning with
evidence, and modifying ideas having considered this evidence. According to Harlen (2009, in
AAS, 2012), this approach provides the basis for effective science pedagogy, with an emphasis
on inquiry, formative assessment, and the role of communication and language in learning (p.
100). Within this inquiry pedagogy students develop skills such as prediction and observation,

Ashley Rowan 2016

and collecting and reporting on evidence to discuss ideas consistent with this evidence. Also
important is students’ reflections on the processes and outcomes of their learning (Harlen, 2009,
in AAS, 2012, pp. 111-2)

Peer dialogue is integral to collaborative knowledge construction, and enables students to

discuss ideas prior to suggesting answers to the class as a whole (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, p. 11).
Learners are encouraged to listen and respond to others’ ideas and explain their own using
appropriate scientific language (Harlen, 2009, in AAS, 2012, p. 124), and develop a shared
understanding of ideas through informal and exploratory talk between peers and teacher (AAS,
2012, p. 123). Peer discussion can be motivational in encouraging persistence in students,
providing them with alternative perspectives and strategies, allowing them to negotiate and
modify their understandings and constructions of new knowledge (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick,
2006, p. 11).

Providing students with explicit learning goals and success criteria is an important aspect
of formative assessment for learning. Making these expectations transparent allows students to
realise the purpose and goals of their work (Black & Wiliams, 2009, pp. 3-5; Harlen, 2015, p. 4;
Readman & Allen, 2013, p. 83). This allows students to effectively direct their efforts and track
their progress towards these learning goals (CERI, 2008, p. 8; Harlen, 2015, p. 41). These
provided standards clearly explain the knowledge and skills to be assessed in the task and
identify the characteristics of high quality responses (QCAA, 2014). These achievement
standards and criteria are aligned to curriculum outcomes and provide reference points for the
expected qualities of student work, focusing on valued aspects of the task (Readman & Allen,
2013, p. 92; QSA, 2015, p. 24). By identifying characteristics which exemplify a high standard,
these samples make these standards and goals explicit and provide an external reference point
from which students’ may model and compare their own work (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, p. 4;
Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, pp. 2, 8; Readman & Allen, 2013, p. 93; QCAA, 2014).

The development of metacognitive strategies is a central focus of the assessment plan,

with one goal of formative assessment being to equip students with the strategies, language and
tools to assist their development of ‘learning to learn’ or metacognitive skills. By emphasising
the learning and teaching process, these tasks help students to understand their own learning, and
actively involve students in this process. Metacognition, or ‘thinking about thinking’, refers to
awareness of one’s own thinking processes and strategies for learning, particularly when
considering concepts. A students’ clear perception of how they learn enables them to more

Ashley Rowan 2016

effectively develop learning goals and strategies, and evaluate their own learning process (CERI,
2008, p. 10). It assists students in actively building on their understanding of new subject matter
and assimilate these ideas within a larger context (CERI, 2008, p. 3). Reflecting on engagement
with learning tasks and the assessment of progress generates cumulative internal feedback on
cognitive, motivational and behavioural levels (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, pp. 2- 4), and
involves the concept of self-regulation, or the degree to which students are able to regulate these
levels during learning (Pintrich and Zusho, 2002, in Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, p. 2).

Strategies which promote the metacognitive processes involved in self-regulation include

the discussion and reflection of clearly-defined criteria and standards, and peer-assessment in
relation to these standards. According to Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick (2006), self-regulated
learners are more persistent, resourceful, and confident learners, and are able to take control of
their learning with less dependence on teacher direction (pp. 7-8).

One method to be utilised in the assessment program is concept mapping and drawing.
Concept mapping and drawing promote metacognitive development and are effective tools for
formative self-assessment in the primary science classroom. Completing concept maps and
drawings both during and after the teaching period is useful in identifying misconceptions and
shifts in thinking, as both students and teacher are able to monitor student progress, and utilise
this data to facilitate future learning monitor the development and progression of learning (AAS,
2012, p. 131; Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, pp. 6, 9).

According to Hodgson and Pyle (2010), students may have difficulty expressing ideas in
words, and require opportunities for alternate modes of representation (p. 22). Providing students
with the opportunity to communicate their understandings in ways alternative to traditional text
responses is consistent with Gardner’s notion of multiple intelligences. Drawing is particularly
effective for students who possess visual-spatial capacities and intelligence, who may learn most
effectively through visual representations, and for promoting participation for students with
dyslexia (Gardner, 2006, p. 143).

Students are provided with extensive feedback in effective formative assessment. They
must be aware that feedback comprises an evaluation of their work in context, and comments are
not judgements of the student themselves. Drawing attention away from the task may have a
detrimental effect on students’ self-esteem and subsequent attitude and performance (Nicol &
MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, p. 12).

Ashley Rowan 2016

 Undertaking peer and self-assessment is a central tenet of formative assessment for
learning (Black & Wiliams, 2009, pp. 3-4; Harlen, 2009, in AAS, 2012, p. 139; Readman &
Allen, 2013, p. 83). Students are encouraged to be reflective on both the task and the way they
learn (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, p. 7). An advantage of these strategies is that students consider
themselves partners in the learning and teaching process, and are able take responsibility for their
own learning (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, pp. 4-5).

Self-assessment is integral to assessment for learning, directing students’ activites

towards their learning goals and promoting student engagement, autonomy, and learning
outcomes (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, p. 4; Readman & Allen, 2013, p. 95). Structured opportunities
are provided for self-monitoring and reflection of progress towards learning goals (Nicol &
MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, p. 8). As noted earlier, the feedback generated through formative
assessment aims to ‘close the gap’ in student learning (Cowie, 2005, p. 138) Consistent with this
social-constructivist perspective, peer assessment conceptualises learning as a product of social
interaction (Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, p. 5). Through identifying and commenting on areas in
peers’ work, students are able to assess their own understanding of a topic (Hodgson & Pyle,
2010, pp. 5-6)

Quality feedback promotes learning is essential for effective learning cycles. Effective
feedback is goal referenced, tangible and transparent, actionable, user-friendly, timely, ongoing
and specific (Wiggins, 2012, pp. 12-3). Three conditions are identified by Sadler (1989, in Nicol
& MacFarlane-Dick, 2006) in order for students to benefit from this feedback, which are
consistent with Stiggins’ et. al. (2004, in QCAA, 2014), and Black and Wiliam’s (2009) key
questions for effective formative assessment. Students must understand what constitutes good
performance, know how current achievement relates to this good performance, and understand
how to ‘close the gap’ between these states (p. 6). In addition, students may be more amenable to
accepting critique and feedback from peers as opposed to teachers (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick,
2006, p. 11).

Comments are used instead of assigning grades to students’ formative assessment

responses. Comment-only marking has been shown to increase students’ interest and success in
progressing their learning, more effectively than evaluative comments, marks and percentages.
This feedback is most effective when it provides specific comments about how to progress
learning. Additionally, grading responses may result in students comparing themselves to others,

Ashley Rowan 2016

as opposed to focusing on ways in which they may improve (Cowie, 2005; Harlen, 2015, p. 41;
Hodgson & Pyle, 2010, p. 6; Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, p. 12)

The technique of traffic lighting may be employed in both peer-assessment and self-
evaluation, and provides an opportunity for students to communicate thoughts on their own
learning. When undertaken as a private activity, students are more inclined to be honest in their
responses, as result are seen only by the student and teacher. The teacher is therefore made aware
of any areas in which students require further assistance, and students are actively involved in
evaluating their own performance and developing skills of metacognition (Hodgson & Pyle,
2010, p. 6).

Finally, in reference to the online quiz undertaken by students on the Socrative website, a
constructivist approach advocates these interactive discovery environments, which allow for self-
testing (Readman & Allen, 2013, p. 10). The advantage of online tests is that they are able to be
accessed at any time both in the classroom and from students’ own computers or device, and
provide immediate feedback to the student (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006, p. 10).

Ashley Rowan 2016

References

Australian Academy of Science [AAS] (2012). Teaching Primary Science: Trial-teacher

feedback on the Implementation of Primary Connections and the 5E model. Retrieved
September 3, 2015, from www.science.org.au/primaryconnections

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2015). The Australian
Curriculum, v. 8.1. Australian Government.

Black & Wiliam (2009). Developing a theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment,
Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), pp. 5-31. DOI: 10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5

Centre for Educational Research and Innovation [CERI] (2008). Assessment for Learning:
Formative Assessment. Paper presented at the OECD/CERI International Conference:
“Learning in the 21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy”. Retrieved January 15,
2016, from http://www.oecd.org/site/educeri21st/40600533.pdf

Cowie, B. (2005). Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2),
pp. 137-151.

Davis, B., Sumara, D. & Luce-Kapler, R. (2005). Carol Dweck’s fixed vs. growth mindset.
Engaging Minds: Cultures of Education and Practices of Teaching, 3rd edn. Routledge,
London & New York, pp. 100-101.

Dweck, C. (2014). Teachers’ mindsets: “Every student has something to teach me”. Educational
Horizons, December 2014/January 2015, pp. 10-15.

Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons. Basic Books, U.S.

Harlen, W. (ed.) (2015). Working with Big Ideas of Science Education. Science Education
Programme. Retrieved December 29, 2015, from
http://www.ase.org.uk/documents/working-with-the-big-ideas-in-science-education/

Hodgson, C. & Pyle, K. (2010). A Literature Review: Assessment for Learning in Science.
National Foundation for Educational Research. Retrieved January 25, 2016, from
https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/AAS01/AAS01.pdf

Ashley Rowan 2016

Nicol, D. J. & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A
model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education,
31(2), pp. 199-218.

Readman, K. & Allen, B. (2013). Practical Planning and Assessment. Oxford University Press,
South Melbourne, VIC, pp. 10-17; 80-98.

Queensland Studies Authority [QSA] (2015). Year 5 Science — Australian Curriculum in

Queensland. Queensland Government, South Brisbane, QLD.

Queensland Studies Authority [QSA] (2014). P-12 Assessment Policy. Queensland Government,
South Brisbane, QLD.

Queensland Studies Authority [QSA] (2012). Reporting Student Achievement and Progress in
Prep to Year 10: Advice on implementing the Australian Curriculum. Queensland
Government, South Brisbane, QLD.

Queensland Studies Authority [QSA] (n.d.). Australian Curriculum: Assessment for Learning.
Queensland Government, South Brisbane, QLD. Retrieved December 28, 2015, from
https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au

Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Feedback for Learning, 70(1), pp. 10-16.

Ashley Rowan 2016