Running Head: BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

!
!
!
!
!
Bridging the Gap: Aligning Classroom Assessment with Inquiry-based Learning Experiences"
Deirdre Bailey"
University of Calgary"

!
!
!
!
!

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

Table of Contents
Abstract"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 3"

Introduction" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 4"

Complexity" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 5"

Conversation" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 10"

Student Autonomy" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 12"

Authenticity" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 14"

Conclusion" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 16"

References"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Page 19

"

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

Abstract"
Inquiry-driven teaching practice is increasingly leading schools in a shift away from
transmission-based pedagogy in an eort to keep pace with the unprecedented growth of a
digitally driven knowledge based economy. With a renewed focus on collaboration, curation,
creation and critique as part of the learning process, measurement focused classroom
assessment practices are becoming increasingly inadequate. As classroom teaching practices
shift, it is imperative that assessment practices change as well in order to align with a new,
more responsive and less standardized approach to teaching and learning. This paper draws
on research literature in the field of education and assessment in order to identify
competencies developed through inquiry-based pedagogy and underlying connections to
classroom assessment practices that support and acknowledge those competencies. Themes
are brought forward not for the purpose of developing a formula for practice, but in order
to suggest how relevant assessment might emerge from, and amplify the worthwhile work
we undertake in inquiry-based classrooms. The ultimate purpose is to inspire consideration
of how classroom assessment might be best framed in order to both support student
learning and honour the outcomes that inquiry-based learning environments develop. "
"
Keywords: inquiry-based pedagogy; 21st-century learning; problem-based learning;
challenge-based learning; assessment; education reform; assessment reform;

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

Bridging the Gap: Aligning Classroom Assessment with Inquiry-based Learning Experiences"
As a growing body of research suggests that industrial models of education are
inadequate preparation for the diversity of opportunities and experiences facing 21st century
graduates (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999), educational institutions around the world
have been actively reconsidering some deeply-held assumptions about teaching and learning.
Teachers are increasingly designing learning opportunities in which students are challenged
to engage actively with peers and experts in order to achieve a variety of authentic
outcomes. These project-, problem-, challenge-, or design-based learning opportunities ask
students and teachers to address topics in ways that are fundamentally dierent from the
prescriptive, transmission-based pedagogies of the industrial age. To date however, there
continues to be a significant lag in the connection between changes in teaching methods
and changes in assessment (Rust, 2002, p. 146). The persisting desire to ascribe arbitrary
values to learning experiences through various units (words, ideas, or points) by allocating
marks poses the greatest risk to meaningful and sustainable education reform."
The term classroom assessment generally brings to mind rows of desks, HB pencils
and multiple choice exams or report cards, sent home as a neatly expressed summary of the
semester. Bulging classrooms, stued schedules and the ecacy of testing students factual
and procedural recall in order to quantitatively summarize their results have left the
streamlined practice of assigning letter or number grades to varying collections of student
work largely unquestioned, even as teaching practice evolves. While inquiry-based pedagogy
invites students to focus on living, interdependent systems (Friesen & Jardine, 2009), to
connect with personal experience, and to question; report cards continue to reduce
unmeasured classroom moments to marks. As a result, learning activities in inquiry-based

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

classrooms are generally not in accord with assessment (Marzano, Pickering, McTighe,
1993). "
This paper addresses the persistent but for the most part unarticulated discomfort
that many educators feel when attempting to reduce the complexity of the work that takes
place in a classroom to a quantitative value. The intent is to identify salient characteristics
of inquiry-based learning and consider how authentic classroom assessment practices might
emerge from within this pedagogical climate of questioning and investigation. The final
themes outlined in this work are the result of a thoughtful analysis and synthesis of reemergent ideas on inquiry and assessment that trace back decades in research literature
connecting diverse disciplines and perspectives. Themes are brought forward not for the
purpose of developing a formula for practice, but in order to inspire further consideration of
how relevant assessment practices might emerge from, and amplify the worthwhile work we
undertake in inquiry-based classrooms."
Complexity
When did we drift into grades of unquestioned provenance becoming the
legitimate currency for the next generation? And why do we succumb to the
notion that because something is easy to calculate it must be pedagogically
sound? (OConnor & Wormeli, 2011, p.44)"
Most adults today are familiar with an industrial model of education. Our
experiences with school revolve around a system conceptualized as a mass assembly line and
the ecient division of labour. By the time we graduate, weve learned to associate learning
with factual and procedural recall, and the process of becoming competent with dividing
things into a very large number of very small steps (Skinner, 1954). The industrial revolution

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

and resulting eciency movement eectively convinced an entire system of educators that
the best way to understand a topic as a whole was to introduce it in parts. "
The reality is that breaking things down might be straightforward and unambiguous,
but it is inauthentic and cognitively counterintuitive (Hale, 2004). Deep understanding is
not developed through exposure to disassembled fragments whose assembly is dictated
according to generic rules of management and surveillance. Topics, as they live in the world,
do not necessarily subdivide into the specific curriculum disciplines as outlined in a Program
of Studies (Friesen & Jardine, 2009, p. 29). Rather, they exist as a network of relations and
can only be authentically understood in relation to the world in which they exist. "
Introducing something uniform or unidirectional inevitably marginalizes students
and misrepresents the profound diversity and complexity of the ecological world we live in
and the disciplines we teach. Greeno (1991) uses the metaphor of learning the landscape to
compare inquiry-based learning to learning to live in an environment; learning your way
around, what resources are available, and how those resources can be used to conduct
activities productively and enjoyably (p.175). Inquiry-based practice allows knowledge to be
explored as an intergenerational, sustaining field of relations that one must inhabit in order
to understand (Friesen & Jardine, 2009, p. 27). As Palmer (1998) writes, good teachers
possess a capacity for [this complexity]. They are able to weave a complex web of
connections among themselves, their subjects, and their students so that students can learn
to weave a world for themselves (p. 11). Teaching that is not hog-tied to rigid specifications
often moves in directions and explores ideas that neither the students nor the teacher could
envision at the outset (Eisner, 1991, p. 46). Teaching practice that acknowledges living
systems to be by their very nature unpredictable is likely to produce learning that while

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

productive and relevant, is unanticipated. The idea that we can presume to dictate, predict
or quantify the fundamental brain shifts associated with exploration of living systems is
therefore, gravely inappropriate. How can we limit assessment to the measurement of a few
particular outcomes when learning is a matter of finding out more and more about an evershifting disciplinary landscape? As Biggs & Tang (2007) suggest, current assessment
practices are as out of place in an inquiry-based environment as measuring sugar in
milligrams, (p. 172) because big decisions about the quality of student work should be made
not on the accumulation of unknowably flawed minor judgments, but on a reasoned and
publicly sustainable judgment about the performance itself (p. 173)."
The critical thinking we expect of students in an inquiry-based environment is not a
generic phenomenon (Friesen & Jardine, 2009, p. 20) that can be assessed formulaically. Just
as the quality of a chef s soup cannot be authentically assessed in a chemistry lab, proper
assessment means giving attention to how a living field of work might make demands on
what it means to think critically within that particular discipline (Friesen & Jardine, 2009).
While the landscape of a topic is inevitably characterized by key landmarks, big ideas,
strategies, or models that can be assessed as students encounter them through exploration, "
these are not sequential, many paths can be taken toward the horizon.... Nor
is the landscape definitive or closed.... New landmarks can appear, and new
paths, uncharted before, can be carved out (Fosnot, & Dolk, 2001, p. 135)."
Reliability is herein a matter of identifying ideas and an approach to investigation
that is authentic to a particular discipline. Validity is a reflection of whether the results of
student investigation into a topic are suciently authentic (isomorphic to some reality,
trustworthy) that [they] may trust [themselves] in acting on their implications (Christians,

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

2005, p. 120). Strong assessment practices in an inquiry-based environment thus require a

fundamentally hermeneutic judgement; that is, an understanding of the whole in light of
the parts (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 184). As Rubin (1991) writes, "
to judge a curriculum purely on the basis of its anatomy - is to err.... It would
be absurd to assume that anyone who used the same oils, palette, brushes and
canvas as Picasso could produce paintings of equal greatness. The excellence
of a work of art or an instructional program depends upon something greater
than the sum of these individual components. (p. 57)"
Failure to acknowledge the inherent complexity of inquiry-based learning outcomes
by reducing them instead to isolated segments, rating each independently, and aggregating
them to get a final score under some false conception of reliability, validity or eciency is
counter-productive. Its like examining architects on the number of bricks their designs
use, never mind the structure, the function or the aesthetic appeal of the building
itself (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 175). If all we ever assess are the number of bricks, we cannot
expect students to invest in quality of design, structure, or function of their wall. Students
are much less likely to spend an entire semester exploring broad disciplinary landscapes if
they know that at the end of the term we will only acknowledge whether they have reached
one landmark in particular (Marzano, Pickering, & McTighe, 1993, Biggs & Tang, 2007). "
Conversation
What really matters in the new age isnt information at all. What is really
significant is the relationships between people, and between people and
organizations, that are made possible by the new modes of
communication (Gilbert, 2005 pp.120-121). "

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

Inquiry-based practice acknowledges that learning is most eective if embedded in

social experience (Gilbert, 2005; Jardine, Cliord & Friesen, 2008; Black & Wiliam, 2004).
Students engaged in inquiry-based learning typically discuss ideas by talking, and
sometimes arguing, with each other and with the teacher in order to develop new or deeper
understandings of a given topic (Smith, Lee & Newman, 2001, p. 12). Students and teachers
alike are invested in finding the best way to communicate about what has been achieved and
what to work on next (Black & Wiliam, 2004). From the teaching perspective, this means: "
making space for the other, being aware of the other, paying attention to the
other, honoring the other. It means not rushing to fill our students silences
with fearful speech of our own and not trying to coerce them into saying
things that we want to hear. It means entering emphatically into the students
world so that he or she perceives you as someone who has the promise of
being able to hear another persons truth. (Palmer, 1998, p. 46)"
Conversation strengthens student voice, improves communication between students and
teachers and challenges students to think critically about their own arguments. Students are
regularly expected to explain their thinking orally, learn to develop answers in their entirety
without being prompted, and cultivate an ability to make sound judgments about the
intellectual quality of their work. Students become more active as participants and come to
realize that learning may depend less on their capacity to spot the right answer and more on
their readiness to express and discuss their own understanding (Black & Wiliam, 2004, p.
27). "
As students share their stories in words, as they reflect and explain themselves to
others, they are forced to create and acknowledge meaning through discourse. To reach an
understanding in a dialogue is not merely a matter of putting oneself forward and

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

10

successfully asserting ones own point of view, but of being transformed into a communion
in which we do not remain what we were (Gadamer, 1989, p. 379). Questions such as why
do you think that?, or how might you express that?, orin the devils advocate style
you could argue that extend students thinking and generate immediate feedback on
their work (Black & Wiliam, 2004, p. 27). They learn to be accountable to one another and
to their learning. "
Authentic assessment in this environment engages the student with functioning
knowledge in its context and asks them to articulate their appreciation of it. The ability to
make professional judgments about this kind of complex classroom conversation cannot be
standardized or quantified without dulling the dialogue. Assessment practices that respect
the unique and often unexpected outcomes and conversations of inquiry-based learning
must provide time and space for students to reflect and share their ideas openly. Students
must feel comfortable articulating their thinking, not in spite of the fact that they might
wrong, but because they might be wrong. This requires that they recognize that intelligence
is malleable and can be developed through education and hard work (Dweck, 2007, p. 2).
Students need to share their ideas because they have a desire to learn and recognize that
conversation will support that process. As Palmer (1998) writes, learning demands
community - a dialogical exchange in which our ignorance can be aired, our ideas tested, our
biases challenged, and our knowledge expanded (p. 79). Inquiry-based pedagogy equips
students to seek feedback from their environment (peers, sources) in a wide range of
settings and a variety of circumstances, (Boud, 2010) and cultivates the confidence to admit
error and seek to have it corrected. Disregarding or flattening conversation as part of the

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

11

assessment process is not only unhelpful but results in surface learning and decreased
motivation to improve (Dweck, 2006, Chappuis, 2009). "
Student Autonomy
Student voice is integral to inquiry-based learning. It acknowledges that students are
at the heart of the learning experience and the teacher cannot do the learning for the
learner. Inquiry intentionally helps students to restructure their knowledge in order to build
dierent and more powerful ideas (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Wood, 1998).
Students are encouraged to adapt their prior knowledge to each investigation, (Barrow,
2006, p. 275) making personal connections within and beyond the discipline and as a result
can often be found working on dierent tasks during the same class period (Smith et al.,
2001, p. 12). While the prospect of managing the diversity of 20-plus individual voices in one
classroom can be overwhelming, this anxiety stems more from the expectation that our role
as educators is to direct, supervise and measure individual learning at all stages. The reality
is that when teachers plan every inch and outcome of a lesson, the only real answer to a
question of how to proceed comes from the teacher. Assigning students roles in which they
are responsible solely for waiting to be told what to do is completely contrary to the idea of
cultivating student voice through dialogue, investigation, and accountability to a particular
discipline (Palmer, 1998; Jardine, Cliord & Friesen, 2008). "
The cultivation of student autonomy in an inquiry-driven space suggests that
students should both understand their learning goals and be able to assess what they need to
do to reach them (Chappuis, 2009, Black & Wiliam, 2004). Inquiry-based classrooms
provide students with the opportunity to discern what is good evidence of deep
understanding by being themselves actively involved in selecting it (Friesen, 2009, Biggs &

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

12

Tang, 2007). Self-assessment must be fundamentally embedded in the learning process. As

Grumet (1976) writes, knowledge of self becomes knowledge of self as knower of the world,
not just as a passive recipient of stimuli from the objective world, not as an expression of
latent subjectivity, but as a bridge between these two domains, a mediator (p. 38). "
In order for assessment to recognize and honour the diversity of student voices and
aptitudes in an inquiry-based classroom, we need to actively cultivate opportunities for
students to learn and perform under dierent conditions. The question of whether students
have been able to meet the criteria necessary for doing dicult work within a discipline isnt
answered by comparing students because some work better under pressure, others need
more time [and] as in professional work itself, there are often many ways of achieving a
satisfactory outcome (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 178). "
When one seeks not uniformity of outcome, but productive diversity, the
need to create forms of evaluation that can handle the uniqueness of outcome
becomes increasingly apparent.... When we cease putting all children on the
same statistically derived distribution, we have to think and judge, we have to
interpret what it is that they have done (Eisner, 1991, p. 47)."
For assessment to respect the emergence of learning outcomes such as creativity,
collaboration and originality, it must acknowledge them as part of the assessment process. "
Authenticity
An inquiry-based approach cultivates meaningful learning experiences that are personally
constructed in relation to particular situations, particular places, in community with others
(Cliord & Friesen, 2008b, p. 181). Understanding is negotiated in relation to historical
perspectives and as representative of larger ideas (Perkins, 2009). Inquiry-based pedagogy

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

13

reminds us that numbers, letters, theories and formulas are not original truths but secondorder representations of the world as directly experienced (Merleau-Ponty, 1962). Reliability
and validity are not the exclusive domains of number crunchers (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 193).
Inquiry acknowledges that understanding is always subject to personal history and past
experiences (Abram, 1996; Kincheloe, McLaren & Steinberg, 2005) and that to treat
everyone the same when people are so obviously dierent from each other is the very
opposite of fairness (Elton, 2005,). "
Objectivity in authentic inquiry-based assessment is understood as striving to
achieve a greater consensus or consonance within the disciplinary community (Abram,
1996). Plausibility, credibility and relevance are not assessed in terms of any set of external
or foundational criteria but require social judgments whose meanings are arrived at through
consensus and discussion (Altheide & Johnson, 2011)."
The situation of the person "applying" the law [is thus]: in a certain instance
[situation] he will have to refrain from applying the full rigor of the law [think
'the full rigor of the rubric']. But if he does, it is not because he has no
alternative, but because to do otherwise would not be right. In restraining the
law, he is not diminishing it but, on the contrary, finding a better law. The law
[rubric] is always deficient, not because it is imperfect in itself but because
human reality is necessarily imperfect in comparison to the ordered world of
law, and hence allows of no simple application of the law. (Gadamer, 1989, p.
318)"
Ultimately, the real criterion of understanding in inquiry-based classrooms has to involve
thoughtful professional judgement on performance relative to what is expected within a
particular discipline. Students must have the opportunity to demonstrate their

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

14

understanding by thinking and acting flexibly with what they know about it, not just
through the regurgitation of information and execution of routine skills (Perkins, 2009)."
Conclusion
Much of what has developed in assessment and education practices today is
reflective of a time when speed and surface comprehension were the most highly valued
characteristics of a successful learner. In no instance is there any talk about what is being
learned. In no instance is any credence or attention given to the living, interrelated,
patterned disciplines of work within which, for example, one might apply critical thinking
skills (Friesen, 2009, p. 20). In a system that equates grades with quality of understanding,
students often choose to avoid intellectual risks for fear of their impact on the accuracy of
their information recall. When the score is the important thing, not how it is comprised,
the strategy is to focus on the easy or trivial items (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 174). Surface
learning is the inevitable result and as Perkins (2009) notes, a huge body of research
demonstrates that learners generally show very limited understanding, bedeviled by a range
of misconceptions about what most ideas really mean (p. 6)."
For decades, teachers have fielded questions such as when will I ever have to use
this?, or is this going to be on the test? from students. These questions stem from students
embodiment of the separation of schooling from their worldly context. An inquiry approach
to teaching and learning for both teachers and students bridges this gap. Inquiry places
the root of academic planning and designing with the learner (the student) and their
questions and learning needs. From this beginning, all teaching considerations that follow
will always be real; nothing could possibly be artificial."

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

15

The inquiry process not only connects real knowledge to school knowledge, it
dismantles this distinction and orients learners and teachers around a new culture of
schooling that values all knowledge as relevant, meaningful and lasting. Assessment is
substantive, specific and contextual. It should rely on an understanding of how knowledge is
assessed within the living discipline in question (Friesen, 2009) and should not punish
students in ways that make recovery from failure impossible (Guskey, 2013). Feedback to
learners should not only assess current achievement but also indicate next steps for their
learning (Black & Wiliam, 2004). Cultivating 21st century thinkers leaves no space for
assigning grades as a way of either assessing or improving their learning process. "
If we believe that schools should build a community in which students are
encouraged to engage intellectually and think critically about real issues for extended
periods, if we believe that failure is part of learning, if we believe that students are not all
alike and that schools should teach them how to capitalize on their individual strengths and
those of their classmates as they discover who they are, then traditional assessment
practices need an overhaul. Quantitative assessment too often sends unfortunate messages
to students about the nature of knowledge and draws them away from deep engagement in
creative, original and worthwhile work. In order to sustain meaningful education reform,
decisions about student work should be made on a reasoned and publicly sustainable
judgment about how the specifics are tuned to create an overall structure or impact (Biggs &
Tang, 2007). Children are not flat, anonymous, trainable beings. Neither are they
measurable entities, and every time we treat them as such we sell them short.

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

16

References"
Abram, D. (1996). The spell of the sensuous. New York: Vintage Books."
Altheide, D.L., & Johnson, J.M. (2005). Reflections on interpretive adequacy in qualitative
research. In Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative
research. (4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage."
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2004). The Formative Purpose: Assessment Must First Promote
Learning. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 103(2), 20-50. doi:
10.1111/j.1744-7984.2004.tb00047.x"
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (3rd
ed.). Buckingham, GBR: Open University Press"
Boud, D. (2010). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society.
Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167. doi:10.1080/71369572"
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press."
Chappuis, J. (2009). Seven strategies of assessment for learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education,
Inc."
Christians, C. G. (2005) Ethics and Politics in Qualitative Research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S.
Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.) (pp. 165 - 182).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage."
Cliord, P., & Friesen, S. (2008a). A curious plan: Managing on the twelfth. In. D. Jardine, P.
Cliord & S. Friesen. (2008). Back to the Basics of Teaching and Learning: Thinking the
World Together (pp. 15-36). New York, NY: Routledge."

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

17

Cliord, P., & Friesen, S. (2008b). Landscapes of loss: On the original diculty of reading
and interpretive research. In. D. Jardine, P. Cliord & S. Friesen. (2008). Back to the
Basics of Teaching and Learning: Thinking the World Together (pp. 179-192) New York, NY:
Routledge."
Dweck, C.S. (2007). The secret to raising smart kids. Scientific American Mind, November 28,
2007. Retrieved from: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-secret-to-raisingsmart-kids&print=true"
Dweck, C.S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House."
Friesen, S. (2009). Inquiry-based learning: Three Alberta schools that know what it takes.
Education Canada, 49(5), 8-14. Retrieved from: http://www.cea-ace.ca/sites/default/
files/EdCan-2009-v49-n5-Friesen.pdf"
Friesen, S. & Jardine, D. (2009). 21st Century Learning and Learners. Western and Northern
Canadian Curriculum Protocol. Retrieved from: http://galileo.org/21st-century-learningand-learners/"
Fosnot, C., & Dolk, M. (2001). Young mathematicians at work: Constructing multiplication and
division. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann."
Elton, L. (2005) Designing assessment for creativity: an imaginative curriculum guide. Retrieved
from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/resource_database/id559_elton"
Gadamer, H.-G. (1989). Truth and method. New York: Continuum. "
Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the knowledge wave? The knowledge society and the future of education.
Wellington, NZ: NZCER Press."

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

18

Greeno, J. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptual domain. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education. 22(3). 170-218"
Guskey, T. R. (2013). The Case Against Percentage Grades. Educational Leadership, 71(1),
68-72. Retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca"
Hale, B. (2004). School neuropsychology: A practitioners handbook. New York: The Guildford
Press."
Jardine, D., Cliord, P. & Friesen, S. (2008). Back to the Basics of Teaching and Learning:
Thinking the World Together. New York, NY: Routledge."
Kincheloe, J.L., McLaren, P., & Steinberg, S.R. (2005). Critical pedagogy, and qualitative
research: Moving to the bricolage. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage
handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.) (pp. 165 - 182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage."
Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance
assessment using dimensions of learning model. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development"
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. Great Britain: Routledge "
OConnor, K. & Wormeli, R. (2011). Reporting student learning. Educational Leadership,
69(3), 40-44."
Palmer, P. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teachers life. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass."
Perkins, D. (2009). Making learning whole: How seven principles of teaching can transform
education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. "

BAILEY - BRIDGING THE GAP "

19

Rubin, L. (1991). The arts and artistic curriculum. In G. Willis & W. H. Shubert (Eds.),
Reflections from the heart of educational inquiry (pp. 49-59). Albany, NY: State University
of New York Press. "
Rust, C. (2002). The impact of assessment on student learning: How can the research
literature practically help to inform the development of departmental assessment
strategies and learner-centered assessment practices? Active Learning in Higher
Education. 3(2), 145 - 158. doi: 10.1177/1469787402003002004"
Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational
Review, 24(2), 86-97."
Smith, J., Lee, V., & Newman, F. (2001). Instruction and achievement in Chicago elementary
schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago."
Wood, D. (1998). How children think and learn: The social contexts of cognitive development (2nd
Edition). Oxford, UK: Blackwell."