The Learning Sciences in Educational Assessment: An Introduction

Jacqueline P. Leighton; Mark J. Gierl

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511996276.001

1 - The Learning Sciences in Educational Assessment: An Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Jacqueline P. Leighton and

Mark J. Gierl

Show author details

Jacqueline P. Leighton: Affiliation:
University of Alberta
Mark J. Gierl: Affiliation:
University of Alberta

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Victor Hugo is credited with stating that “There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come.” In educational achievement testing, a multi-billion-dollar activity with profound implications for individuals, governments, and countries, the idea whose time has come, it seems, is that large-scale achievement tests must be designed according to the science of human learning. Why this idea, and why now? To begin to set a context for this idea and this question, a litany of research studies and public policy reports can be cited to make the simple point that students in the United States and abroad are performing relatively poorly in relation to expected standards and projected economic growth requirements (e.g., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1993; Chen, Gorin, Thompson, & Tatsuoka, 2008; Grigg, Lauko, & Brockway, 2006; Hanushek, 2003, 2009; Kilpatrick, Swafford, & Findell, 2001; Kirsch, Braun, & Yamamoto, 2007; Manski & Wise, 1983; Murnane, Willet, Dulhaldeborde, & Tyler, 2000; National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983; National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008; National Research Council, 2005, 2007, 2009; Newcombe et al., 2009; Phillips, 2007; Provasnik, Gonzales, & Miller, 2009). According to a 2007 article in the New York Times, Gary Phillips, chief scientist at the American Institutes for Research, was quoted as saying, “our Asian economic competitors are winning the race to prepare students in math and science.”

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Learning Sciences in Educational Assessment
The Role of Cognitive Models
, pp. 1 - 44

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511996276.001 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ainsworth, S. & Loizou, A. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669−681.CrossRef Google Scholar

,American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, C. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing – a revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

Anderson, J.R. (2007) How can the human mind occur in the physical universe?New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Baron, J. (2000). Thinking and deciding (3rd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Baxter, G. & Glaser, R. (1998). Investigating the cognitive complexity of science assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 17, 37–45.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bennett, R.E. & Gitomer, D.H. (2008). Transforming K-12 assessment: Integrating accountability testing, formative assessment, and professional support. ETS Research Memorandum-08–13, 1–30. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar

Birenbaum, M., Tatsuoka, C., & Yamada, T. (2004). Diagnostic assessment in TIMSS-R: Between countries and within-country comparisons of eighth graders' mathematics performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30, 151–173.Google Scholar

Bishop, J. (1989). Is the test score decline responsible for the productivity growth decline?American Economic Review, 79, 178–97.Google Scholar

Bishop, J.H. (1991). Achievement, test scores, and relative wages. In Kosters, M. H. (Ed.), Workers and their wages (pp. 146–186). Washington, DC: The AEI Press.Google Scholar

Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar

Borsboom, D. (2005). Measuring the mind: Conceptual issues in contemporary psychometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Briggs, D.C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 33–63.CrossRef Google Scholar

Carver, S.M. (2006). Assessing for deep understanding. In Sawyer, R.K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 205–221). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Chen, Y-H., Gorin, J.S., Thompson, M.S. & Tatsuoka, K.K. (2008). Cross-cultural validity of the TIMSS-1999 mathematics test: Verification of a cognitive model. International Journal of Testing, 8, 251–271.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chi, M.T.H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271–315.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chi, M.T.H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Skinner's verbal behavior. Language, 35, 26–58.CrossRef Google Scholar

Collins, A., Halverson, R., & Brown, J.S. (2009). Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Corter, J.E. & Tatsuoka, K.K. (2002). Cognitive and measurement foundations of diagnostic assessments in mathematics. College Board Technical Report. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Cronbach, L.J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lange, J. (2007). Large-scale assessment of mathematics education. In Lester, F.K. Jr. (Ed.), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics: Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1111–1142). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Downing, S.M. & Haladyna, T.M. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of test development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Embretson, S.E. (1998). A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests: Application to abstract reasoning. Psychological Methods, 3, 380–396.CrossRef Google Scholar

Embretson, S.E. & Daniel, R.S. (2008). Understanding and quantifying cognitive complexity level in mathematical problem solving items. Psychology Science, 50, 328–344.Google Scholar

Embretson, S.E. & Wetzel, C.D. (1987). Component latent trait models for paragraph comprehension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 175–193.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ericsson, K.A. (2009). (Ed.). Development of professional expertise: Toward measurement of expert performance and design of optimal learning environments. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Ericsson, K.A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P.J., & Hoffman, R.R. (Eds.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Ericsson, K.A. & Simon, H.A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Ericsson, K.A. & Smith, J. (Eds.). (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits. New York: Cambridge Press.

Ferrara, S. & DeMauro, G.E. (2006). Standardized assessment of individual achievement in K-12. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 579–621). Westport, CT: National Council on Measurement in Education and American Council on Education.Google Scholar

Gierl, M.J. (1997). Comparing the cognitive representations of test developers and students on a mathematics achievement test using Bloom's taxonomy. Journal of Educational Research, 91, 26–32.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gierl, M.J., Leighton, J.P., Wang, C., Zhou, J., Gokiert, R., & Tan, A. (2009). Validating cognitive models of task performance in algebra on the SAT®. College Board Research Report No. 2009–3. New York: The College Board.Google Scholar

Gierl, M.J., Zheng, Y., & Cui, Y. (2008). Using the attribute hierarchy method to identify and interpret cognitive skills that produce group differences. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45, 65–89.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gobbo, C. & Chi, M.T.H. (1986). How knowledge is structured and used by expert and novice children. Cognitive Development, 1, 221–237.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gonzalez, E.J. & Miles, J.A. (2001). TIMSS 1999 user guide for the international database: IEA's repeat of the third international mathematics and science study at the eighth grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College.

Gorin, J.S. (2009). Diagnostic Classification Models: Are they Necessary?Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 7(1), 30–33.Google Scholar

Gorin, J.S. (2006). Test Design with cognition in mind. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(4), 21–35.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gorin, J.S. & Embretson, S.E. (2006). Item difficulty modeling of paragraph comprehension items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 394–411.CrossRef Google Scholar

Greeno, J.G. (1983). Forms of understanding in mathematical problem solving. In Paris, S.G., Olson, G.M., Stevenson, H.W. (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp. 83–111). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Greeno, J.G. (2003). Measurement, trust, and meaning. Measurement: Interdisciplinary, Research, and Perspectives, 1, 260–263.Google Scholar

Grigg, W., Lauko, M., & Brockway, D. (2006). The nation's report card: Science 2005 (NCES 2006–466). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

Hanushek, E.A. (2003). The failure of input-based schooling policies. The Economic Journal, 113, 64–98.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hanushek, E.A. (2005). The economics of school quality. German Economic Review, 6, 269–286.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hanushek, E.A. (2009). The economic value of education and cognitive skills. In Sykes, G., Schneider, B. & Plank, D. N. (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 39–56). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hussar, W.J. & Bailey, T.M. (2008). Projections of Education Statistics to 2017 (NCES 2008–078). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Irvine, S.H. & Kyllonen, P.C. (2002). Item generation for test development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983). Mental models. Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Johnson-Laird, P.N. & Bara, B.G. (1984). Syllogistic inference. Cognition, 16, 1–61.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Johnson-Laird, P.N. (2004). Mental models and reasoning. In Leighton, J.P. & Sternberg's, R.J. (Eds.), Nature of reasoning (pp. 169–204). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kane, M. (2006). Validation. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17–64). Westport, CT: National Council on Measurement in Education and American Council on Education.Google Scholar

Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J. & Findell, B. (Ed.). (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kirsch, I., Braun, H., & Yamamoto, K. (2007). America's perfect storm: Three forces changing our nation's future. ETS Policy Information Report. Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar

Klahr, D. & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual search space during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1–48.CrossRef Google Scholar

Koedinger, K.R. & Anderson, J.R. (1990). Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: Elements of expertise in geometry. Cognitive Science, 14, 511–550.CrossRef Google Scholar

Koretz, D.M. & Hamilton, L.S. (2006). Testing for accountability in K-12. In Brennan, R. (Ed.), Educational Measurement (4th ed., pp. 531–578). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. (2001). How do people know?Psychological Science, 12, 1–8.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar PubMed

Larkin, J. & Simon, H. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth 10,000 words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leighton, J.P. (in press). A Cognitive Model for the Assessment of Higher Order Thinking in Students. To appear in Schraw, G. (Ed.), Current perspectives on cognition, learning, and instruction: Assessment of higher order thinking skills. Information Age Publishing.

Leighton, J.P., Cui, Y., & Cor, M.K. (2009). Testing expert-based and student-based cognitive models: An application of the attribute hierarchy method and hierarchical consistency index. Applied Measurement in Education, 22, 1–26.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leighton, J.P., Gierl, M.J., & Hunka, S. (2004). The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment: A Variation on Tatsuoka's rule-space approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 205–236.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leighton, J.P. & Gierl, M.J. (2007). Defining and evaluating models of cognition used in educational measurement to make inferences about examinees' thinking processes. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26, 3–16.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leighton, J.P., Heffernan, C., Cor, M.K., Gokiert, R., & Cui, Y. (in press). An experimental test of student verbal reports and teacher evaluations as a source of validity evidence for test development. Applied Measurement in Education.

Leighton, J.P. & Sternberg, R.J. (2003). Reasoning and problem solving. In Healy, A.F. & Proctor, R.W. (Volume Eds.), Experimental psychology (pp. 623–648). Volume 4 in I. B. Weiner (Editor-in-Chief) Handbook of psychology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Lohman, D.F. & Nichols, P. (2006). Meeting the NRC panel's recommendations: Commentary on the papers by Mislevy and Haertel, Gorin, and Abedi and Gandara. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25, 58–64.CrossRef Google Scholar

Manski, C.F. & Wise, D.A. (1983). College choice in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mislevy, R.J. (1993). Foundations of a new test theory. In Frederiksen, N., Mislevy, R.J., & Bejar, I.I. (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 19–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R.J. (2006). Cognitive psychology and educational assessment. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 257–305). Westport, CT: National Council on Measurement in Education and American Council on Education.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R.J. & Behrens, J.T., Bennett, R.E., Demark, S.F., Frezzo, D.C., Levy, R., Robinson, D.H., Rutstein, D.W., Shute, V.J., Stanley, K., & Winters, F.I. (2010). On the roles of external knowledge representations in assessment design. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 8(2). http://escholarship.bc.edu/jtla/vol8/2.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R.J. & Haertel, G. (2006). Implications for evidence-centered design for educational assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25, 6–20.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mislevy, R.J., Steinberg, L.S., & Almond, R.G. (2003). On the structure of educational assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1, 3–67.Google Scholar

Murnane, R.J., Willett, J.B., Duhaldeborde, Y. & Tyler, J.H. (2000). How important are the cognitive skills of teenagers in predicting subsequent earnings?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19, 547–68.3.0.CO;2-#>CrossRef Google Scholar

,National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

,National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. U.S. Department of Education: Washington, DC.Google Scholar

,National Research Council (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Committee on the Foundations of Assessment. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., and Glaser, R. (Eds.). Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

,National Research Council. National Research Council (2005). How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom. In Donovan, M.S. & Bransford, J.D. (Eds.), Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar

,National Research Council. National Research Council (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar

,National Research Council. National Research Council (2009). Mathematics Learning in Early Childhood: Paths Toward Excellence and Equity. Committee on Early Childhood Mathematics, Cross, Christopher T., Woods, Taniesha A., and Schweingruber, Heidi, Editors. Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Newcombe, N.S., Ambady, N., Eccles, J., Gomez, L., Klahr, D., Linn, M., Miller, K., & Mix, K. (2009). Psychology's role in mathematics and science education. American Psychologist, 64, 538–550.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Newell, A. & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Times, New York (Nov. 14, 2007), Study compares states' math and science scores with other countries'.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, Pub Law No. 107–110 (2002, January). Retrieved April 11, 2009 from http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/ 107–110.pdf

,Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2003). Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). Author.

,Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2007). PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow's World Executive Summary. Author. Accessed from world wide web on March 26, 2010, at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/13/39725224.pdf.

,Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2009). Education today: The OECD perspective. Author.

Pashler, H., Rohrer, D., Cepeda, N. & Carpenter, S. (2007). Enhancing learning and retarding forgetting: Choices and consequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 187–193.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Pellegrino, J.W., BaxterG.P., G.P., & Glaser, R., (1999). Addressing the “Two Disciplines” problem: linking theories of cognition and learning with assessment and instructional practice. Review of Research in Education, 24, 307–352.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1967). The child's conception of space. New York: W. W. Norton &Co.Google Scholar

Phillips, G.W. (2007). Expressing international educational achievement in terms of U.S. performance standards: Linking NAEP achievement levels to TIMSS. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.Google Scholar

Polikoff, M. (2010). Instructional sensitivity as a psychometric property of assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29, 3–14.CrossRef

Provasnik, S., Gonzales, P., & Miller, D. (2009). U.S. Performance Across International Assessments of Student Achievement: Special Supplement to The Condition of Education 2009 (NCES 2009–083). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Resnick, L.B. (1983). Toward a cognitive theory of instruction. In Paris, S.G., Olson, G.M., Stevenson, H.W. (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp. 5–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Russell, J.F. (2005). Evidence related to awareness, adoption, and implementation of the standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. The Journal of Technology Studies, 31, 30–38.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rupp, A.A. (2007). The answer is in the question: A guide for describing and investigating the conceptual foundations and statistical properties of cognitive psychometric models. International Journal of Testing, 7, 95–125.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rupp, A.A. & Templin, J.L. (2008). Unique characteristics of diagnostic classification models: A comprehensive review of the current state-of-the-art. Measurement, 2, 219–262.Google Scholar

Sawyer, R.K. (Ed.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Shute, V.J., Hansen, E.G., & Almond, R.G. (2008). You can't fatten a hog by weighing it – or can you? Evaluating an assessment for learning system called ACED. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18, 289–316.Google Scholar

Shute, V.J., Masduki, I., Donmez, O., Kim, Y.J., Dennen, V.P., Jeong, A.C., & Wang, C-Y. (2010). Modeling, assessing, and supporting key competencies within game environments. In Ifenthaler, D., Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Seel, N.M. (Eds.), Computer-based diagnostics and systematic analysis of knowledge (pp. 281–310). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar

Siegler, R.S. (2005). Children's learning. American Psychologist, 60, 769–778.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Schmeiser, C.B. & Welch, C.J. (2006). Test development. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 307–353). Westport, CT: National Council on Measurement in Education and American Council on Education.Google Scholar

Shrager, J. & Siegler, R.S. (1998). SCADS: A model of children's strategy choices and strategy discoveries. Psychological Science, 9, 405–410.CrossRef Google Scholar

Slotta, J.D. & Chi, M.T.H. (2006). Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 261–289.CrossRef Google Scholar

Snow, R.E. & Lohman, D.F. (1989). Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement. In Linn, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 263–331). New York: American Council on Education, Macmillan.Google Scholar

Stanovich, K.E. (2009). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Tatsuoka, K.K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 345–354.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tatsuoka, K.K. (1985). A probabilistic model for diagnostic misconceptions in the pattern classification approach. Journal of Educational Statistics, 10, 55–73.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tatsuoka, K.K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. In Nichols, P. D., Chipman, S. F.., & Brennan, R. L. (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessment (pp. 327–359). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Tatsuoka, K.K. (2009). Cognitive assessment. An introduction to the rule space method. New York City, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Tatsuoka, K.K., Corter, J.E., & Guerrero, A. (2004). Coding manual for identifying involvement of content, skill, and process subskills for the TIMSS-R 8th grade and 12th grade general mathematics test items (Technical Report). New York: Department of Human Development, Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar

Tatsuoka, K.K., Corter, J.E., & Tatsuoka, C. (2004). Patterns of diagnosed mathematical content and process skills in TIMSS-R across a sample of 20 countries. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 901–926.CrossRef Google Scholar

Thomas, D., Li, Q., Knott, L., & Zhongxiao, L. (2008). The structure of student dialogue in web-assisted mathematics courses. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 36, 415–431.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tubau, E. (2008). Enhancing probabilistic reasoning: The role of causal graphs, statistical format and numerical skills. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 187–196.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tversky, B. (2002). Some ways that graphics communicate. In Allen, N. (Editor), Words and images: New steps in an old dance, (pp. 57–74). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar

,U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2008). Digest of education statistics, 2008, Chapter 6 (NCES 2008–022).

Wilson, M. & Sloane, K. (2000). From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 181–208.CrossRef Google Scholar

Zhou, L. (2009). Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: School Year 2006–07 (Fiscal Year 2007). (NCES 2009–337). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.