Assessment of biology investigations

Journal of Biological Education

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 114-121

  Roberts, Ros ^a,b   Gott, Richard ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assessment; Biology investigations; Concepts of evidence; Fieldwork; Procedural understanding

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038266868     PISSN: 00219266     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00219266.2003.9655865     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Baxter G P, Shavelson R J, Donnelly J, Johnson S and Welford G (1988) Evaluation of procedure-based scoring for hands-on assessment. Journal of Educatonal Measurement, 29, 1 - 17.
2. Bencze J L (1996) Correlational studies in school science: breaking the science-experiment-certainty connection. School Science Review, 78, 95 - 101.
3. DfEE/QCA (1999) The Science National Curriculum. London, UK: DfEE/QCA.
4. Donnelly J (1995) Curriculum development in science: the lessons of Scl. School Science Review, 76, 95 - 103.
5. Donnelly J (2000) Secondary science teaching under the National Curriculum. School Science Review, 81, 27 - 35.
6. Gott R and Duggan S (2002) Problems with assessment of performance in practical science: which way now? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 183 - 201.
7. Gott R and Mashiter J (1991) Practical work in science - a task-based approach? in Practical Science. Woolnough, BE (ed). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
8. House of Commons, Science and Technology Committee (2002) Science education from 14 to 19. London, UK: The Stationery Office.
9. Keiler L S and Woolnough B E (2002) Practical work in school science: the dominance of assessment. School Science Review, 83, 83 - 88.
10. Nott M and Wellington J (1999) The state we're in: issues in Key Stage 3 & 4 science. School Science Review, 81, 13 - 18.
11. QCA (2002) National Curriculum Assessments from 2003. Letter from QCA to all Heads of Science June 2002.
12. Ruiz-Primo M A and Shavelson R (1995) Rhetoric and reality in science performance assessment: an update. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, San Fancisco, USA.
13. Roberts R (2001) Procedural understanding in biology: the thinking behind the doing. Journal of Biological Education, 35, 113 - 117.
14. Roberts R and Gott R (1999) Procedural understanding: its place in the biology curriculum School Science Review, 81, 19 - 25.
15. Roberts R and Gott R (2000) Procedural understanding in biology: how is it characterised in texts? School Science Review, 82, 83 - 91.
16. Solano-Flores G, Jovanovic J, Shavelson R J and Bachman M (1999) On the development and evaluation of a shell for generating science performance assessments. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 293 - 315.
17. Watson J R, Goldsworthy A and Wood-Robinson V (1999a) What is not fair with investigations. School Science Review, 80, 101 - 106.
18. Watson J R, Wood-Robinson V and Goldsworthy A (1999b) Improving investigations. Education in Science, November 1999.
19. Watson J R, Goldsworthy A and Wood-Robinson V (2001) Scl: beyond the fair test. In (Eds) Sears J and Sorensen P, Issues in science teaching, London, UK: Routledge Farmer.
20. Welford G, Harlen W and Schofield B (1985) Practical testing at Ages 11, 13 and 15. London, UK: Department of Education and Science.