Problems with the assessment of performance in practical science: which way now?

Cambridge Journal of Education

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 183-201

  Gott, Richard ^a   Duggan, Sandra ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037754678     PISSN: 0305764X     EISSN: 14693577     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03057640220147540     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. ARCHENHOLD, F., BELL, J., DONNELLY, J., JOHNSON, S., and WELFORD, G., 1988. Science at Age 15: a review of APU survey findings, 1980-1984, London: HMSO.
2. BAXTER, G.P., SHAVELSON, R.J., GOLDMAN, S.R., and PINE, J., 1992. Evaluation of procedurebased scoring for hands-on assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(1): 1–17.
3. BAYLISS, V., 1999. Opening Minds. Education for the 21st century, London: RSA.
4. BENNETT, J., 2001. Practical work at the upper high school level: the evaluation of a new model of assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 23(1): 97–110.
5. BEN-Zvi, R., HOFSTEIN, A., SAMUEL, D., and KEMPA, R.F., 1977. Modes of instruction in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14: 433–439.
6. BROADFOOT, P., 1995. “ Performance assessment in perspective: international trends and current English experience ”. In Evaluating Authentic Assessment, Edited by: TORRANCE, H., Buckingham: Open University Press.
7. BRYCE, T.G.K., McCALL, J., MACGREGOR, J., ROBERTSON, I.J., and WESTON, R.A.J., 1983. Techniques for the Assessment of Practical Skills in Foundation Science, London: Heinemann.
8. COLES, M., 1997. Science education-vocational and general approaches. School Science Review, 79: 27–32.
9. COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTES. 1993. Mapping the Science, Technology and Mathematics Domain, London: CSTI.
10. DAVIS, B.C., 1989. GASP: graded assessment in science project, London: Hutchinson.
11. DFEE/QCA. 1999. National Curriculum for England: Science, London: HMSO.
12. DONNELLY, J.F., BUCHAN, A.S., JENKINS, E.W., and WELFORD, A.G., 1994. Investigations in Science Education Policy. Sc1 in the National Curriculum for England and Wales., Leeds: University of Leeds.
13. DUGGAN, S., and GOTT, R., 1996. Scientific evidence: the new emphasis in the practical science curriculum in England. The Curriculum Journal, 7(1): 17–33.
14. DUGGAN, S., and GOTT, R., 2000. Intermediate General National Vocational Qualification (GNVQ) Science: a missed opportunity for a focus on procedural understanding?. Research in Science and Technological Education, 18(2): 201–214.
15. DUGGAN, S., and GOTT, R., 2002. What sort of science education do we really need?. International Journal of Science Education, in press
16. GIBBONS, M., LIMOGES, C., NOWOTNY, H., SCHWARTZMAN, S., SCOTT, P., and TROW, M., 1995. The New Production of Knowledge, London: Sage.
17. GLADWIN, T., 1973. “ Culture and logical processes ”. In Tinker, Tailor …the myth of cultural deprivation, Edited by: KEDDIE, N., Harmondsworth: Penguin Education.
18. GOTT, R., and DUGGAN, S., 1995. Investigative Work in the Science Curriculum, Buckingham: Open University Press.
19. GOTT, R., and MURPHY, P., 1987. Assessing Investigations at Age 13 and IS. Science report for teachers: 9., London: DES.
20. GOTT, R., FOULDS, K., and JOHNSON, P., 1997. Science Investigations Book 1, London: Collins Educational.
21. GOTT, R., FOULDS, K., and JONES, M., 1998. Science Investigations Book 2, London: Collins Educational.
22. GOTT, R., DUGGAN, S., and JOHNSON, P., 1999a. What do practising and applied scientists do and what are the implications for science education?. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17(1): 97–107.
23. GOTT, R., FOULDS, K., and ROBERTS, R., 1999b. Science Investigations Book 3, London: Collins Educational.
24. GOTT, R., DUGGAN, S., and ROBERTS, S., 2002. Building Success in Sc1: the science investigation CD-workshop, Dunstable: Polens.
25. GRAY, D., and SHARP, B., 2001. Mode of assessment and its effect on children's performance in science. Evaluation and Research in Education, 15(2): 55–68.
26. INSTITUTE OF BIOLOGY. 1998. Biologists look forward to a more scientifically literate world. National Curriculum review. School Science Review, 80(291): 25–28.
27. INSTITUTE OF DIRECTORS. 1999. A plea for the education system to do more to encourage people to think creatively. Policy Issue, 6 June
28. LAWRENZ, F., HUFFMAN, D., and WELCH, W., 2001. The science achievement of various subgroups on alternative assessment formats. Science Education, 85(3): 279–290.
29. OSBORNE, J., and COLLINS, S., 2000. Pupils' and Parents' Views of the School Science Curriculum, London: King's College.
30. ROBINSON, T.J., 1969. Evaluating laboratory work in high school biology. The American Biology Teacher, 34: 226–229.
31. SOLANO-FLORES, G., JOVANOVIC, J., SHAVELSON, RJ., and BACHMAN, M., 1999. On the development and evaluation of a shell for generating science performance assessments. International Journal of Science Education, 21(3): 293–315.
32. SOUTHERN EXAMINATION GROUP. 1999. Making the Grade. GCSE science: students' handbook, Guildford: SEG.
33. STARK, R., 1999. Measuring standards in Scottish schools: the assessment of achievement programme. Assessment in Education, 6(1): 27–41.
34. STERNBERG, RJ., 1988. The Triarchic Mind: a theory of human intelligence, New York, NY: Viking.
35. STERNBERG, R.J., and O'HARA, L.A., 1999. “ Creativity and intelligence ”. In Handbook of Creativity, Edited by: STERNBERG, R.J., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. TAMIR, P., 1972. The practical mode: a distinct mode of performance. Journal of Biological Education, 6: 175–182.
37. TORRANCE, H., 1975. “ Creativity research in education: still alive ”. In Perspectives in Creativity, Edited by: TAYLOR, I.A., and GETZELS, J.W., Chicago: EL, Aldine.
38. TYTLER, R., DUGGAN, S., and GOTT, R., 2000. Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8): 815–832.
39. TYTLER, R., DUGGAN, S., and GOTT, R., 2001. Public participation in an environmental dispute: implications for science education. Public Understanding of Science, 10: 343–364.
40. WATSON, R., GOLDSWORTHY, A., and WOOD-ROBINSON, V., 1999. What is not fair with investigations?. School Science Review, 80(292): 101–106.
41. WELFORD, G., HARLEN, W., and SCHOFIELD, B., 1985. Practical Testing at Ages 11, 13 and 15, London: Department of Education and Science.