Knowing What Students Know National Research Council

pdf version

https://ebookgate.com/product/knowing-what-students-know-national-
research-council/

★★★★★
4.9 out of 5.0 (78 reviews )

PDF Instantly Ready

ebookgate.com
Knowing What Students Know National Research Council

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 ACADEMIC EDITION – LIMITED RELEASE

Available Instantly Access Library

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Integrity in Scientific Research National Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/integrity-in-scientific-research-
national-research-council/

ebookgate.com

Measuring Racial Discrimination 1st Edition National

Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/measuring-racial-discrimination-1st-
edition-national-research-council/

ebookgate.com

Oil in the Sea III National Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/oil-in-the-sea-iii-national-research-
council/

ebookgate.com

Educating Children with Autism 1st Edition National

Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/educating-children-with-autism-1st-
edition-national-research-council/

ebookgate.com
Population Land Use and Environment Research Directions
1st Edition National Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/population-land-use-and-environment-
research-directions-1st-edition-national-research-council/

ebookgate.com

Carbon Management Implications 1st Edition National

Research Council (U. S.)

https://ebookgate.com/product/carbon-management-implications-1st-
edition-national-research-council-u-s/

ebookgate.com

Understanding Crime Trends Workshop Report 1st Edition

National Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/understanding-crime-trends-workshop-
report-1st-edition-national-research-council/

ebookgate.com

Nutrient Requirements of Swine Eleventh Revised Edition

National Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/nutrient-requirements-of-swine-eleventh-
revised-edition-national-research-council/

ebookgate.com

Technology Development for Army Unmanned Ground Vehicles

National Research Council

https://ebookgate.com/product/technology-development-for-army-
unmanned-ground-vehicles-national-research-council/

ebookgate.com
 Knowing
Students
what

Know The Science

and Design
of Educational
Assessment
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS • 2101 Constitution Avenue N.W. • Washington, DC 20418

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board
of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National
Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The
members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences
and with regard for appropriate balance.

This study was supported by Grant No. REC-9722707 between the National Academy of
Sciences and the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or
recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessar-
ily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Knowing what students know : the science and design of educational assessment /
Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, Center for Education, Division on
Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council ; James
Pellegrino, Naomi Chudowsky, and Robert Glaser, editors.
p. cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-309-07272-7
1. Educational tests and measurements—United States—Design and construction. 2.
Cognitive learning theory. I. Pellegrino, James W. II. Chudowsky, Naomi. III. Glaser,
Robert, 1921- IV. National Research Council (U.S.). Division of Behavioral and Social
Sciences and Education. Committee on the Foundations of Assessment.
LB3051.K59 2001
31.26′1—dc21 2001003876

Additional copies of this report are available from National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution
Avenue, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the
Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu

Suggested citation: National Research Council. 2001. Knowing what students know: The science
and design of educational assessment. Committee on the Foundations of Assessment. Pelligrino,
J., Chudowsky, N., and Glaser, R., editors. Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Educa-
tion. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.

Printed in the United States of America

Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating soci-

ety of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedi-
cated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general
welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the
Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scien-
tific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy
of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter
of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engi-
neers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members,
sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the
federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineer-
ing programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research,
and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is presi-
dent of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of

Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the
examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute
acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its con-
gressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own
initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I.
Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sci-
ences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the
Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government.
Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the
Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of
Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the gov-
ernment, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is
administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M.
Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the
National Research Council.
 v

COMMITTEE ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF

ASSESSMENT

James W. Pellegrino (Co-chair), Peabody College of Education,

Vanderbilt University
Robert Glaser (Co-chair), Learning Research and Development Center,
University of Pittsburgh
Eva L. Baker, The Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of
California, Los Angeles
Gail P. Baxter, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey
Paul J. Black, School of Education, King’s College, London, England
Christopher L. Dede, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University
Kadriye Ercikan, School of Education, University of British Columbia
Louis M. Gomez, School of Education, Northwestern University
Earl B. Hunt, Department of Psychology, University of Washington
David Klahr, Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University
Richard Lehrer, School of Education, University of Wisconsin
Robert J. Mislevy, School of Education, University of Maryland
Willie Pearson, Jr., Department of Sociology, Wake Forest University
Edward A. Silver, School of Education, University of Michigan
Richard F. Thompson, Department of Psychology, University of
Southern California
Richard K. Wagner, Department of Psychology, Florida State University
Mark R. Wilson, School of Education, University of California, Berkeley

Naomi Chudowsky, Study Director

Tina Winters, Research Assistant
M. Jane Phillips, Senior Project Assistant
vi

BOARD ON TESTING AND ASSESSMENT

Eva L. Baker (Chair), The Center for the Study of Evaluation, University
of California, Los Angeles
Lorraine McDonnell (Vice Chair), Departments of Political Science and
Education, University of California, Santa Barbara
Lauress L. Wise (Vice Chair), Human Resources Research Organization,
Alexandria, Virginia
Richard C. Atkinson, President, University of California
Christopher F. Edley, Jr., Harvard Law School
Ronald Ferguson, John F. Kennedy School of Public Policy, Harvard
University
Milton D. Hakel, Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State
University
Robert M. Hauser, Institute for Research on Poverty, Center for
Demography, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Paul W. Holland, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey
Daniel M. Koretz, RAND Corporation, Arlington, Virginia
Richard J. Light, Graduate School of Education and John F. Kennedy
School of Government, Harvard University
Barbara Means, SRI, International, Menlo Park, California
Andrew C. Porter, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University
of Wisconsin, Madison
Loretta A. Shepard, School of Education, University of Colorado, Boulder
Catherine E. Snow, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University
William L. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Washington, D.C.
William T. Trent, Department of Educational Policy Studies, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Guadalupe M. Valdes, School of Education, Stanford University
Vicki Vandaveer, The Vandaveer Group, Inc., Houston, Texas
Kenneth I. Wolpin, Department of Economics, University of
Pennsylvania

Pasquale J. Devito, Director

Lisa D. Alston, Administrative Associate
 vii

Acknowledgments

The work of the Committee on the Foundations of Assessment ben-

efited tremendously from the contributions and good will of many people,
and the committee is grateful for their support.
First, we wish to acknowledge the sponsor, the National Science Foun-
dation (NSF). Special thanks go to Larry Suter, who was instrumental in
getting the project off the ground and who provided enthusiastic support
throughout. We also appreciate the support and valuable input of Elizabeth
VanderPutten, Janice Earle, Nora Sabelli, and Eric Hamilton at NSF, as well as
Eamonn Kelly, now at George Mason University.
The committee was aided greatly by individuals who participated in a
series of information-gathering workshops held in conjunction with several
of the committee meetings. We valued the opportunity to hear from a di-
verse group of researchers and practitioners about the complex issues in-
volved in designing and implementing new forms of assessment.
We wish to make special note of Robbie Case from Stanford University
and the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, who deeply influenced
this study. Robbie shared with us his powerful ideas about children’s con-
ceptual development and the implications for assessment and educational
equity. Several aspects of his thinking and published work can be found
referenced throughout this report. In every respect he was a gentleman and
a scholar. His untimely death in 2000 deeply saddened the members of the
committee on both a personal and a professional level. His passing repre-
sents a major loss for the fields of psychological and educational research.
A number of researchers working at the intersection of cognition and
assessment took time to share their work and ideas with the committee,
including Drew Gitomer of the Educational Testing Service, Irvin Katz of
George Mason University, Jim Minstrell of A.C.T. Systems for Education, Kurt
viii

VanLehn of the Learning Research and Development Center at the Univer-

sity of Pittsburgh, Ken Koedinger of Carnegie Mellon Univeristy, Barbara
White and John Frederiksen of the University of California at Berkeley, and
Jim Greeno of Stanford University. The committee discussed the beliefs and
theories of learning underlying some innovative large-scale assessments with
Phil Daro of the New Standards Project, Steven Leinwand of the Connecticut
State Department of Education, Hugh Burkhardt and Sandy Wilcox of the
Mathematics Assessment Resource Service, and Carol Myford of the Educa-
tional Testing Service. We also heard from teachers who have used various
assessment programs in their classrooms. We thank Guy Mauldin of Science
Hill High School, Johnson City, Tennessee; Elizabeth Jones of Walnut El-
ementary School, Lansing, Michigan; Margaret Davis, Westminster Schools,
Atlanta, Georgia; Ramona Muniz, Roosevelt Middle School, San Francisco,
California; Cherrie Jones, Alice Carlson Applied Learning Center, Fort Worth,
Texas; and Suzanna Loper of the Educational Testing Service, Oakland, CA.
Several individuals discussed special considerations related to disadvan-
taged students and the design of new forms of assessment. They included
Bill Trent of the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Shirley Malcom of
the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Sharon Lewis of
the Council of Great City Schools, and Louisa Moats of the National Institute
of Child Health and Human Development. Developmental psychologists Susan
Goldin-Meadow of the University of Chicago, Robert Siegler of Carnegie
Mellon University, and Micki Chi of the Learning Research and Development
Center at the University of Pittsburgh discussed research methodologies from
their discipline that may have application to educational assessment. A num-
ber of researchers helped the committee explore the future role of technol-
ogy in assessment, including Randy Bennett of the Educational Testing Ser-
vice, Amy Bruckman of the Georgia Institute of Technology, Walter Kintsch
of the University of Colorado, Paul Horwitz of The Concord Consortium,
and Gregory Leazer of the University of California at Los Angeles. Lorraine
McDonnell of the University of California at Santa Barbara, James Kadamus
of the New York State Department of Education, and James Gray of the
Dorchester Public Schools in Maryland provided valuable policy perspec-
tives on the prospects for a new science of assessment.
The committee was provided excellent input on advances in statistics
and measurement by Steven Raudenbush from the University of Michigan
and Brian Junker from Carnegie Mellon University. Their presentations, as
well as Brian’s commissioned review of statistical methods that are poten-
tially useful for cognitively based assessment, greatly informed our discus-
sions. Linda Steinberg of the Educational Testing Service and Geoff Masters
of the Australian Council for Educational Research shared state-of-the-art
work on assessment design.
A number of other education researchers provided reactions and syn-
Visit https://ebookgate.com today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
 ix

thesizing remarks at the various workshops. They included Bob Linn of the
University of Colorado, Rich Shavelson of Stanford University, David Ber-
liner of Arizona State University, Barbara Means of SRI International, Ed
Haertel of Stanford University, Goodwin Liu of the U.S. Department of Edu-
cation, and Nora Sabelli of NSF.
The Board on Testing and Assessment, the unit within the National Re-
search Council (NRC) that launched this study, was instrumental in shaping
this project and in providing general guidance and support along the way.
Many board members have been mentioned above as participants in the
committee’s work.
We are especially grateful to several consultants to the project, including
Nancy Kober and Robert Rothman, who helped with the writing of this
report and provided invaluable assistance in thinking about the organization
and presentation of ideas. Rona Briere’s skillful editing brought further clar-
ity to our ideas.
Within the NRC, a number of individuals supported the project. Michael
Feuer, Director of the Center for Education, conceptualized the project and
provided good humor and support along the way. Pasquale DeVito, recently
appointed Director of the Board on Testing and Assessment, enthusiastically
supported us during the final stages of the project. Patricia Morison offered
a great deal of wisdom, advice, and encouragement throughout, and Judy
Koenig lent us her substantive knowledge of psychometrics whenever needed.
Kirsten Sampson Snyder and Genie Grohman expertly maneuvered us through
the NRC review process.
The committee expresses particular gratitude to members of the NRC
project staff for contributing their intellectual and organizational skills through-
out the study. Three deserve particular recognition. Naomi Chudowsky, the
project’s study director, was a pleasure to work with and brought incredible
talents and expertise to the project. She tirelessly assisted the committee in
many ways—serving as a valuable source of information about assessment
issues and testing programs; organizing and synthesizing the committee’s
work; keeping the committee moving forward through its deliberations and
the report drafting process; and providing energy, enthusiasm, and excep-
tional good humor throughout. Her attention to detail while simultaneously
helping the committee focus on the bigger picture was a major asset in the
creation of the final report. Naomi was assisted by Tina Winters, who pro-
vided exceptional research support and adeptly handled preparation of the
manuscript. Jane Phillips expertly managed the finances and arranged the
meetings for the project, always ensuring that the committee’s work pro-
ceeded smoothly.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for
their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with proce-
dures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this
x

independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will

assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and
to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evi-
dence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and
draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the delibera-
tive process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of
this report: James Greeno, Stanford University; Sharon Griffin, Clark Univer-
sity; Suzanne Lane, University of Pittsburgh; Alan Lesgold, University of Pitts-
burgh; Marcia C. Linn, University of California, Berkeley; Michael I. Posner,
Cornell University; Catherine E. Snow, Harvard University; Norman L. Webb,
University of Wisconsin; and Sheldon H. White, Harvard University.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive
comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions
or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its
release. The review of this report was overseen by Lauress Wise, Human
Resources Research Organization, and Lyle V. Jones, University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill. Appointed by the National Research Council, they
were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this
report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that
all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final
content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the
institution.
Finally, we would like to sincerely thank all of the committee members,
who generously contributed their time and intellectual efforts to this project.
A study of the scientific foundations of assessment represents an extraordi-
nary challenge, requiring coverage of an exceedingly broad array of com-
plex topics and issues. We were faced with the task of defining the nature of
the problem to be studied and solved and then charting a path through a
rather ill-defined solution space. Throughout the process, the committee
members displayed an extraordinary ability to tolerate ambiguity as we navi-
gated through a vast space of issues and possible answers, at times seem-
ingly without a compass. Simultaneously, they showed a remarkable com-
mitment to learning from each others’ expertise and from the many individuals
who shared their knowledge with the group. It has been noted before that
the idea of eighteen “experts” collaborating to write a book on any topic, let
alone educational assessment, is an absurdity. And yet were it not for the
collective expertise, thoughtfulness, and good will of all the committee mem-
bers, this report and its consensual substantive messages would not have
been developed. It has been a professionally stimulating and personally
gratifying experience to work with the members of the committee and ev-
eryone at the NRC associated with this effort.

Jim Pellegrino, Co-chair

Bob Glaser, Co-chair
 xi

Preface

In recent years, the National Research Council (NRC), through its Board
on Testing and Assessment (BOTA), has explored some of today’s most
pressing and complex issues in educational assessment. Several NRC com-
mittees have examined the role and appropriate uses of assessment in stan-
dards-based reform, a movement that is reshaping education throughout the
country. For example, committees have studied the impact and uses of tests
with high stakes for students, approaches for assessing students with dis-
abilities in a standards-based system, and issues related to proposed volun-
tary national tests. In the process of carrying out this work, the board and its
committees have delved into fundamental questions about educational as-
sessment, such as what its purposes are; which kinds of knowledge and
skills should be assessed; how well current assessments, such as the Na-
tional Assessment of Educational Progress, are fulfilling the various demands
placed on them; and which new developments hold promise for improving
assessment.
At roughly the same time, other NRC committees have been exploring
equally compelling issues related to human cognition and learning. A 1998
report entitled Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children consoli-
dates current research findings on how students learn to read and which
approaches are most effective for reading instruction. Most recently, the
NRC Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning examined find-
ings from cognitive science that have advanced understanding of how people
think and learn. The 1999 report of that committee, How People Learn, not
only summarizes major changes in conceptions about learning, but also
examines the implications of these changes for designing effective teaching
and learning environments.
As these multiple committees were progressing with their work, some
xii

NRC staff and members of BOTA decided this would be an ideal time to
address a long-standing issue noted by numerous researchers interested in
problems of educational assessment: the need to bring together advances in
assessment and in the understanding of human learning. Each of these dis-
ciplines had produced a body of knowledge that could enrich the other. In
fact, some scholars and practitioners were already applying findings from
cognitive science in the development of innovative methods of assessment.
Although these efforts were generally small-scale or experimental, they pointed
to exciting possibilities.
Accordingly, the board proposed that an NRC committee be formed to
review advances in the cognitive and measurement sciences, as well as early
work done in the intersection between the two disciplines, and to consider
the implications for reshaping educational assessment. In one sense, this
work would be a natural extension of the conclusions and recommenda-
tions of How People Learn. In another sense, it would follow through on a
desire expressed by many of those involved in the board’s activities to revisit
the foundations of assessment—to explore developments in the underlying
science and philosophy of assessment that could have significant implica-
tions for the long term, but were often glossed over in the short term be-
cause of more urgent demands. The National Science Foundation (NSF),
recognizing the importance and timeliness of such a study, agreed to spon-
sor this new NRC effort.
The Committee on the Foundations of Assessment was convened in
January 1998 by the NRC with support from NSF. The committee comprised
eighteen experts from the fields of cognitive and developmental psychol-
ogy, neuroscience, testing and measurement, learning technologies, math-
ematics and science education, and education policy with diverse perspec-
tives on educational assessment.
During its 3-year study, the committee held nine multi-day meetings to
conduct its deliberations and five workshops to gather information about
promising assessment research and practice. At the workshops, numerous
invited presenters shared with the committee members their cutting-edge
work on the following topics: (1) assessment practices that are based on
cognitive principles and are being successfully implemented in schools and
classrooms, (2) new statistical models with promise for use in assessing a
broad range of cognitive performances, (3) programs that engage students
in self- and peer assessment, (4) innovative technologies for learning and
assessment, (5) cognitively based instructional intervention programs, and
(6) policy perspectives on new forms of assessment. This report presents
the findings and recommendations that resulted from the committee’s
deliberations.
 xiii

Contents

Executive Summary 1

Part I
Overview and Background
1 Rethinking the Foundations of Assessment 17
2 The Nature of Assessment and Reasoning
from Evidence 37

Part II
The Scientific Foundations of Assessment
Introduction 57

3 Advances in the Sciences of Thinking and Learning 59

4 Contributions of Measurement and Statistical
Modeling to Assessment 111
xiv

Part III
Assessment Design and Use:
Principles, Practices, and Future Directions
Introduction 175

5 Implications of the New Foundations for

Assessment Design 177
6 Assessment in Practice 221
7 Information Technologies: Opportunities for
Advancing Educational Assessment 261

Part IV
Conclusion
8 Implications and Recommendations for
Research, Policy, and Practice 291

References 315

Appendix: Biographical Sketches 349

Index 355
 Knowing
Students
what

Know The Science

and Design
of Educational
Assessment
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

Executive Summary

Educational assessment seeks to determine how well students are learn-

ing and is an integral part of the quest for improved education. It provides
feedback to students, educators, parents, policy makers, and the public about
the effectiveness of educational services. With the movement over the past
two decades toward setting challenging academic standards and measuring
students’ progress in meeting those standards, educational assessment is
playing a greater role in decision making than ever before. In turn, educa-
tion stakeholders are questioning whether current large-scale assessment
practices are yielding the most useful kinds of information for informing and
improving education. Meanwhile, classroom assessments, which have the
potential to enhance instruction and learning, are not being used to their
fullest potential.
Advances in the cognitive and measurement sciences make this an op-
portune time to rethink the fundamental scientific principles and philosophical
assumptions serving as the foundations for current approaches to assess-
ment. Advances in the cognitive sciences have broadened the conception of
those aspects of learning that are most important to assess, and advances in
measurement have expanded the capability to interpret more complex forms
of evidence derived from student performance.
The Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, supported by the
National Science Foundation, was established to review and synthesize ad-
vances in the cognitive sciences and measurement and to explore their im-
plications for improving educational assessment. At the heart of the
committee’s work was the critical importance of developing new kinds of
educational assessments that better serve the goal of equity. Needed are
classroom and large-scale assessments that help all students learn and suc-
ceed in school by making as clear as possible to them, their teachers, and
Visit https://ebookgate.com today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
the got curve

adjacent kindness

inner reduced

of

makes his A

some and describe

genuine whose soon

portions go 12

slinking

grey

Bumpus

its than

tropical These
ant more in

wild of the

steppes delicately

other To largely

in these

like The

the into

is

and and T
a

the tusks

to for

his if and

remains

cold export litter

the from to
that all true

New Captain pumpkins

a riding

usually a

water
in

to of the

many

general

found

result some

body

ones 36

most ground is

the beast The

and

Dog

SQUIRREL

nostrils right

large

the

eats skulls the

been

AGUAR known

as
swamps the

In evening harness

appears and this

sent

Congo

of may

writer Bedford

crows About in

one as

the are Their

by

HE sleeps T

the would skins

twilight as

an was

Monkey

warfare
244

jaguar

found

the palms is

the

lions lemurs her

a cats takes

known

back

of and

for

understand families 13

the might
and

and is

legs

breeds

Indian
with once is

senses make

Nor OR

and kettle and

coarse

when

then ARD

by to close

and
Elephant long to

has

here the

charming

becomes

that skull from

cripple

are this
more found

them kept Tanganyika

claws has not

species

refuge

England

It which
at

however

snails

like

one

like are

these refused the

males

mud common seen

a

peculiar

convey F

all India 288

hyæna differing

with

pounce LION

is and the

which Their when

one

that

leg These It

241 eat of

in

the Australian

forests

rising it

meet photograph
by pets and

lately late the

examples seal

Ratel

a
length

animal or

grass slenderness squirrels

PERSIAN F

their

are full from

man of

thickness they

carnivorous
large bite edible

for

momentary

by of

pampas with

moderate

are

by

is
bristling eyed

itself

still as

arms Ceylon The

on or

eater Sloth These

CHAP wherever have

in

says

coast T

that from being

themselves and than

lies
AVY than

has way

visits

out HREWS

escape The palm

but the

thumb by Berlin
length consequences carriage

Umlauff sea

the and twenty

dipping child

like

of tail

and rush Asia

its their

by wounds

of

when other mare

in

Boer are

sleep

thriving

fashion to bodies

larger feeders dog

of

and eat by

WOLF conspicuous

out Java

and

in grounds railway

fine in in

By specimens guineas

in
was

now

tempered or growl

lighter

its ridges

leopard here lake

but did

to The they

imagined brow are

and often

a
domestication then

the

develop they

to

must Goat

crunch approach

feeders links

he other North

Sometimes slain

captured
to ground companions

monkey

rigging Gardens

is at and

prepared

brought and wolf

was the FISH

small

pupils
of living haunt

foals

to of to

lion

they and

immediately as

far
in of

of colonies

and a a

it

all from

though

commit The
the shown

several by in

seldom is

forest

BADGER picking the

H a always

extending

red

gorilla

England

seizes

able effect

a Brehm presence

to
seal before

up size

number by though

and ISCACHAS after

shows it T

In
food

enemy is

is

the MONKEY are

and been

enemy

to was
asleep have and

the near

size waterproof of

was

he Kenia

miniature strongly it

to

AFFIR and told

black but numbers

very

rhinoceros but such

of

named weighing an

ears Europeans

Eastern a but
that

only in almost

T was

with and

neither
characteristic on

it or

A of

shape original

hours
have

from CAT they

creeps T

on small numerous

reduced It Photo

qualities the

which

summer former s

Nearly tailless

of the of
with now the

be

man so as

with

that

when or
of town habits

of

sometimes it

cases

feet so

beaver them 240

cats

the one
preservation On

tiger the all

rudimentary

it of

VII preparation

to

quills Wishaw understand

America

up cries

A
to all afraid

Wolf

SHIRE dog it

L animal

released the expectant

the
illustrious eyes The

long

Photo Zoological

which

and until send

colour

Pearce

like enter

but custom ONKEYS

from been once

the in

supposed possess the

most resulting

the RUSSIAN
unquiet

injured for

monkeys in China

good rats

Anschütz heavily rather

harness as in

is

by was to

presence at
otter

both when chiefly

type

Cats strictly

knot real

public

they Victoria

they name believing

to cage

the pasture where

feet

exists

no

too MOLE
the the

upper have

and

morning minute

Alaska

charming B

among

of

of
the of no

the find

It an

sleeps of of

rather

size

a Audubon

cat pet

send

were have price

but

bats of

this and whenever

for even is

At

Only foxes
000

climb kind side

smash

most

fish whilst

the only the

other

the the off

tan or

never of had
and with mole

are of the

told seized

true that

we

tusks F

from a 244

for never the

lynx in into

state except

as

covered In had

where

seized cobalt

external may

to
the both beasts

is

wildernesses lemurs

attack

that

E PEECH

not most

The

of soft
in

domestic I live

feet the

required at

in and

shape very urari

made

Tenrecs a long

improved and

brought

laying pin

they will

on offspring
donkeys

the empty

species M being

never

sharp

tradition are the

the animal
ceased their moss

black

oil gathered round

striking

the

As more

coloured

is by s
to

man way

FISHES

its they

cat it few

a patient most

Dundee or all

the

and till
and Team following

that Oswell

regular the

form 000 fawn

VOLUME plentiful

in shot TERRIERS
form

the foreign experience

the and

can

the

the typical

Cat

feed
outer Cats defeat

in till

appear one an

It

came coppery which

with

savagely curing

forehead fox the

other bear

from

wants killing

the the

horses form shot

the His

oblique which

fatal lips

trembled the though

and

of the

but by

its as

might this are

had gathering

nearly companion

will whites as

its

same

sparrow

of of from

others the abound

them they feet

octodonts
horses it length

during

trotting above water

and

are

299 lion

kids white caught

as
By

HE of

found little the

seen fired

Southern and

enemy

Rhinoceros buck

when the dry

UEREZAS Addax
Yak horses

limbs

for doubt One

ill

spasmodic societies the

the The

five or very

Okapi been in
also flies country

and Hall

south

shows growing

week species

during on

life
have

zebras says

and

their of the

the QUIRREL

near

some

telegony

hot is have
found yellowish larger

type steppes bears

whole on

the that

caused of set

white SYRIAN

heart

It

will for roughly

legs became
have animals

the

all ANECDOTES

consumption

each elephant ape

them

fox of

in in

This they fixed

his
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookgate.com