{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022817460317460316, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003968253968253968, 'mean_word_length': 5.467948717948718, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessment at the Intersection of Science and Literacy

The authors of this article, all of whom have been a part of this effort to assess argumentation in literacy-rich science curriculum, have struggled with our attempts to build 3 argument-related assessments—understanding, critiquing, and constructing arguments about scientific phenomena in both oral and written modes. Loosely affiliated with the Seeds of Science/Roots of Reading Project at Lawrence Hall of Science, this effort focused on creating a suite of assessments as models for how middle school science teachers might create their own school-based, curriculum-embedded assessments of science. After reviewing the broad scope and insights derived from a 10-year history of assessments that operate at the intersection of science and literacy, we zoom in on 3 vexing but informative challenges they encountered—and addressed (if not resolved)—as they tried to assess the comprehension, critique, and construction of oral and written arguments.