Formal Assessment in STEM Higher Education: A General Analysis and Recommendations for Improvement

William Mistler

doi:10.21061/jts.429

Formal Assessment in STEM Higher Education: A General Analysis and Recommendations for Improvement

Journal of Technology Studies

Volume 50 (2025): Issue 1

By: William Mistler

Open Access

|Jul 2025

Abstract

A recent report by the National Science Foundation (NSF) promulgated the importance of developing classroom-based STEM assessments (Harris et al., 2023). This report highlighted the challenges that STEM educators, particularly those at the tertiary level, face when seeking to introduce STEM-based activities into their classrooms. Assessment is seen by educators and researchers alike as one of the main characteristics that define an educational system (Grangeat, et al., 2021). So as the field of STEM education looks to map out a path forward it is incumbent upon educators, teachers, and researchers alike to help advance knowledge on effective assessment in the classroom. Due to the inherent interdisciplinary nature of STEM education, assessment in this area offers unique challenges that teachers of monodisciplinary subjects may not face. With this stated, our focus in this paper will be to discuss the role and importance of assessment in STEM classrooms and address the challenges of assessment when taking an interdisciplinary approach to STEM education (Gao, 2020). Additionally, our focus will be on the formal assessment of STEM education at the tertiary level.

References

Alonso-Yanez, G., Brown, B., Preciado-Babb, A., & Sengupta, P. (2016). Exploring STEM professional learning: A social network analysis. 4th International STEM in Education Conference, Beijing, China.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Amalina, I. K., & Vidákovich, T. (2022). Assessment in STEM problem-solving: A systematic review. The International Journal of Assessment and Evaluation, 29(2), 63–80. 10.18848/2327-7920/CGP/v29i02/63-80
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2005). Reframing the evaluation of education: Assessing whether learning transfers beyond the classroom. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 295–312). Information Age Publishing. https://web-b-ebscohost-com.proxy.lib.strath.ac.uk/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzQ3MDM4Ml9fQU41?sid=e40e3b58-d0ea-4ca1–8800–36e30084fba6@pdc-v-sessmgr01&vid=0&format=EB&rid=1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Baroody, A. J., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2024). Assessment for Learning. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Beggrow, E., & Sbeglia, G. (2019). Do disciplinary contexts impact learning of evolution? Assessing knowledge and misconceptions in anthropology and biology students. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 12(1). 10.1186/s12052-018-0094-6
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Black, P., & William, D. (2010). Inside the black box raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2). 10.1177/003172171009200119
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Chen, Y. M. (2006). EFL instruction and assessment with portfolios: A case study in Taiwan. Asian EFL Journal, 8(1), 69–96.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational psychology review, 24, 205–249. 10.1007/s10648-011-9191-6
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Drake, S., & Reid, J. (2018). Integrated curriculum as an effective way to teach 21st century capabilities. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 31–50. 10.30777/APJER.2018.1.1.03
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dunn, K., & Mulvenon, S. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 14(7). 10.7275/jg4h-rb87
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
El Sayary, A. (2021). Transdisciplinary STEAM curriculum design and authentic assessment in online learning: A model of cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(3), 493–511. 10.36681/tused.2021.86
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ercikan, K., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2017). Validation of score meaning for the next generation of assessments: The use of response processes. 10.4324/9781315708591
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Furtak, E. M., Heredia, S. C., & Morrison, D. (2019). Formative assessment in science education: Mapping a shifting terrain. In Handbook of formative assessment in the disciplines (pp. 97–125). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315166933-5
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gao, X., Peishan, L., Shen, J., & Sun, H. (2020). Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(24). 10.1186/s40594-020-00225-4
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gaylor, K. L. (2017). High school science teachers’ attitudes toward, beliefs about, and implementation of inquiry-based science methods. Mississippi College.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Grangeat, M., Harrison, C., & Dilot, J. (2021). Developing formative assessment in STEM classrooms. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Harris, C. J., Wiebe, E., Grover, S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (Eds.) (2023). Classroom-Based STEM assessment: Contemporary issues and perspectives. Community for Advancing Discovery Research in Education (CADRE). Education Development Center, Inc.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Herrington, J., & Parker, J. (2013). Emerging technologies as cognitive tools for authentic learning. British Journal of Educational Technology (BJET), 44(4), 607–615. 10.1111/bjet.12048
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Herro, D., Quigley, C., Andrews, J., & Delacruz, G. (2017). Co-measure: Developing an assessment for student collaboration in STEAM activities. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(26). 10.1186/s40594-017-0094-z
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Karakaya, F., & Yilmaz, M. (2022). Teacher’s views on assessment and evaluation methods in STEM education: A science course example. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(2). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1339685.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Keiler, L. S. (2018). Teachers’ roles and identities in student-centered classrooms. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, 1–20. 10.1186/s40594-018-0131-6
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kubsch, M., Czinczel, B., Lossjew, J., Wyrwich, T., Bednorz, D., Bernholt, S., Fiedler, D., Strauß, S., Cress, U., Drachsler, H., Neumann, K., & Rummel, N. (2022). Towards learning progressive analytics – developing learning environments for the automated analysis of learning using evidence centered design. Front. Educ., Sec. STEM Education, 7. 10.3389/feduc.2022.981910
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kwietniewski, K. (2017). Literature review of project based learning. [Career & technical education theses, Buffalo State]. https://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/careereducation_theses/1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Maki, P. L. (2023). Assessing for learning: Building a sustainable commitment across the institution. Routledge. 10.4324/9781003443056
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Manduca, C. A., Iverson, E. R., Luxenberg, M., Macdonald, R. H., McConnell, D. A., Mogk, D. W., & Tewksbury, B. J. (2017). Improving undergraduate STEM education: The efficacy of discipline-based professional development. Science Advances, 3(2), e1600193. 10.1126/sciadv.1600193
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
McNair, S., Bhargava, A., Adams, L., & Edgerton, S. (2003). Teachers speak out on assessment practices. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(1). 23–31. 10.1023/A:1025180617689
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Miller, R. (1981). Varieties of interdisciplinary approaches in the social sciences: A 1981 overview. Issues in Integrative Studies: An Occasional Publication of the Association for Integrative Studies, (1982), 1–37.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mohd Al Hamad, N., Adewusi, O., Unachukwu, C., Osawaru, B., & Chisom, O. (2024). A review on the innovative approaches to STEM education. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 11(1), 244–252. 10.30574/ijsra.2024.11.1.0026
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moreno, K. A. (2018). Stem educators’ integration of formative assessment in teaching and lesson design. College of Saint Elizabeth.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mueller, J. (2005). The authentic assessment toolbox: Enhancing student learning through online faculty development. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 1(1). http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/whatisit.htm
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nicolescu, B. (2002). Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity. State University of New York Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peterson, B., & Hippie, B. (2020). Formative assessment in hands-on STEM education. Virginia Tech. 10.4018/978-1-7998-0323-2.ch009
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rapoport, A. (1986). General system theory: Essential concepts & applications. CRC Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Reynolds, et al. (2020). How can educators identify and address potential barriers when designing instruction? Page 5: Assessments. Iris Center. https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/udl/cresource/q2/p05/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sanders, N. (2015). Forecasting fundamentals. Business Expert Press, ProQuest Ebook Central. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ncsu/detail.action?docID=4742536
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Saxton, E., Burns, R., Holveck, S., Kelley, S., Prince, D., Rigelman, N., & Skinner, E. (2014). A common measurement system for K-12 STEM education: adopting an educational evaluation methodology that elevates theoretical foundations and systems thinking. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 40, 18–35. 10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.11.005
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Slavinec, M., Aberšek, B., Gačević, D., & Flogie, A. (2019). Monodisciplinary in science versus transdisciplinarity in STEM education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(3), 436. 10.33225/jbse/19.18.435
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tan, H., & Kidman, G. (2021). Authentic assessment in STEM education: An integrative review of research. In T. Barkatsas & T. McLaughlin (Eds.), Authentic assessment and evaluation approaches and practices in a digital era. (pp. 24–52). Brill. 10.1163/9789004501577_002
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tom, M. (2015). Five Cs Framework: A Student-centered approach for teaching programming courses to students with diverse disciplinary backgrounds. Journal of Learning Design, 8(1). https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/4e1305f5-db0d-4b63–9f89–16717cda2705/content
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Xu, W., & Ouyang, F. (2022). The application of AI technologies in STEM education: a systematic review from 2011 to 2021. The International Journal of STEM Education, 9(59), 10. 10.1186/s40594-022-00377-5
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, S. C., Yung Jong, M. S., Istenic, A., Spector, M., Liu, J., Yuan, J., & Li Y. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2020. 10.1155/2021/8812542
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article