Assessment to Promote Equity and Epistemic Justice: A Use-Case of a Research-Practice Partnership in Science Education

• DOI: 10.1177/0002716219843249
• Author: Douglas A. Watkins,William R. Penuel
• Date: 01 May 2019
• Published date: 01 May 2019
• Subject Matter: Toward the Future: Theories of Knowing and Implications for Assessment

ANNALS, AAPSS, 683, May 2019 201

DOI: 10.1177/0002716219843249

Assessment to

Promote Equity

and Epistemic

Justice: A

Use-Case of a

Research-

Practice

Partnership in

Science

Education

By

WILLIAM R. PENUEL

and

DOUGLAS A. WATKINS

843249ANN The Annals of The American AcademyAssessment To Promote Equity and Epistemic Justice

research-article2019

Efforts to align educational assessments with the socio-

cultural foundations of learning and with instruction

are limited because we lack evidence of how such sys-

tems can be developed and maintained in inherently

complex educational settings. Credible use cases are

helpful to developing the evidence base, and we pre-

sent one here: a research-practice partnership between

a university and a large urban school district. The goals

of our codesigned system include supporting the redis-

tribution of educational opportunities in science class-

rooms (equity) and supporting and repairing students’

self-perceptions as agents of knowing and reasoning in

science classrooms and in the community (epistemic

justice). We describe components of the partnership

and educational practices that work together to accom-

plish these aims: curricula with embedded assessments

allowing students to figure out rather than be told core

ideas, exit tickets that elicit students’ classroom experi-

ence, and an instructional guidance system focused on

iterative refinement of teacher learning opportunities

to support student agency.

Keywords: assessment; science; equity; epistemic jus-

tice; research-practice partnerships

A

number of scholars have concluded that

formative assessment (assessments con-

ducted by teachers during lessons) can greatly

improve both instruction and student outcomes

(e.g., Black and Wiliam 1998; Kingston and

Nash 2011), but the scholarly consensus on

formative assessment is weak, because it is

based on theories of action that differ. Some of

Correspondence: william.penuel@colorado.edu

William R. Penuel is a professor of learning sciences

and human development at the School of Education and

the Institute of Cognitive Science at the University of

Colorado Boulder. He is author (with Dan Gallagher) of

Research-Practice Partnerships in Education (Harvard

University Press 2017) and a handbook chapter,

“Assessment and Teaching” (with Lorrie Shepard),

that reviews evidence related to different approaches to

formative assessment for improving learning outcomes.

202 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

the scholarship and classroom interventions are guided by specific theories of

how to support student learning, while others are guided by broad theories of

how organizations can use

data from assessments to guide improvements to

instruction (Penuel and Shepard 2016a). The interventions with the strongest

evidence base with respect to improving student outcomes are those that offer a

social model of how students learn in the disciplines; that is, they emphasize the

way that knowledge and practice develop together through participation in

meaningful classroom activities (Penuel and Shepard 2016b; Mislevy, this vol-

ume; Shepard, this volume).

Some interventions to improve classroom assessment that have shown promise

draw on a sociocultural model of learning. Such models emphasize the ways that

learning entails becoming a certain kind of person, as one joins in, contributes to,

and changes valued social practices (Lave and Wenger 1991; Lave 2012; Rogoff

2003). Sociocultural models of assessment accordingly emphasize how learning

and identity are intertwined (Penuel and Shepard 2016b). They offer a particu-

larly powerful account for helping us to see how eliciting and making use of

students’ interests, concerns, experiences, and identities in instruction can/might

promote equity in classrooms, insofar as they can help us to illuminate ways to

expand our understandings of disciplinary practices and who can take part in

them (Bell etal. 2012; Tan and Calabrese Barton 2012). At the system level, they

may also help to promote justice, defined here as supporting and repairing stu-

dents’ self-perceptions as agents of knowing and reasoning in science classrooms

and in the community by engaging in inclusive instructional practices that explic-

itly link learning opportunities to learners’ identities.

Sociocultural models of assessment are not likely to be implemented fully at

the level of a school, district, or state anytime soon, however. They demand that

new forms of assessment be implemented that would allow teachers to tailor

instruction more readily to students’ interests and experiences (e.g., González

etal. 2001). They demand attention to the way that students’ lived experiences

in classrooms vary and shape learning outcomes, because of how they are posi-

tioned in classrooms with respect to race and gender (e.g., Langer-Osuna and

Nasir 2016). They would demand that we pay closer attention to how, when, and

which students begin to identify as people who can and do appropriate discipli-

nary practices to their own ends or to address broader concerns of communities

and the planet (Nasir and Hand 2008; Penuel 2016). In today’s accountability

regimes that emphasize test score growth over meaningful learning outcomes by

Douglas A. Watkins is the high school science curriculum specialist for Denver Public Schools.

He is affiliated with the Colorado Science Education Network, the National Science Teachers

Association, and the National Science Education Leadership Association.

NOTE: This material is based in part on work supported by the Spencer Foundation, the

Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and the National Science Foundation (Grant Number

DRL-1748757). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this

material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funders. A

special thanks to partnership colleagues Jean Moon and Sarah Michaels for proposing the

framing of our efforts to create inclusive classrooms as engaging in epistemic justice work. Also

thanks to Rich Lehrer, Jim Pellegrino, and David Stroupe, who provided comments on an

earlier draft of this article.