Assessment
How should course-based research be graded?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
CRE instructors describe assessment models that prioritise being a scientist, procedural knowledge, or project ownership rather than only skill checklists.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cross-sectional — SEA CRE instructor survey plus workshop refinement of assessment models
- N
- N=72 · 72 of 105 respondents provided full answers (330 instructors invited)
- Population
- Science Education Alliance course-based research experience instructors
- Outcome
- Assessment models prioritizing scientist identity, procedural knowledge, or project ownership
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Key findings
Instructors reported high familiarity with many assessment approaches and articulated distinct models: assessing being a scientist and generating data; assessing procedural knowledge; and assessing facilitation of project ownership. The models are meant to align grading with authentic CRE goals rather than only externalised skill inventories.
Methodology
Researchers surveyed SEA course-based research experience instructors about assessment familiarity, self-efficacy, aims, and practices, then refined three assessment models with instructor cohorts in workshop and validation sessions.
Limitations
Faculty self-reports do not measure student learning gains under each model. The SEA network sample may not represent all CRE programmes, and community-checking sessions lacked demographic data.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Course-based research experiences need explicit classroom assessment models if inquiry teaching is to produce trustworthy evidence of learning.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
SEA course-based research instructors reported high familiarity with many assessment approaches and articulated three grading models (being a scientist and generating data; procedural knowledge; facilitating project ownership). Faculty self-reports do not measure student learning gains under each model.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
What a survey can claim depends on whether ratings are linked to anything outside the form. The lecture-mode study ties 13,585 complete surveys to exam grades and finds almost no mode–grade link. The emergency-remote, self-efficacy and Jesuit blended papers report challenges, satisfaction and success-factor ratings without those outcome links. Instructor CRE assessment models are faculty accounts of practice, not student performance. Treating all six as one 'engagement survey finding' mixes different questions.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Open questions
Tensions this paper is part of
From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.
What a survey can claim depends on whether ratings are linked to anything outside the form. The lecture-mode study ties 13,585 complete surveys to exam grades and finds almost no mode–grade link. The emergency-remote, self-efficacy and Jesuit blended papers report challenges, satisfaction and success-factor ratings without those outcome links. Instructor CRE assessment models are faculty accounts of practice, not student performance. Treating all six as one 'engagement survey finding' mixes different questions.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.