Hong Kong student achievement in OECD-PISA study: Gender differences in science content, literacy skills, and test item formats

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 71-86

  Van Yip, Din ^a   Chiu, Ming Ming ^a   Ho, E S C ^a  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 18844413787     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Blithe, T., Clark, M. and Forbes, S. (1994). The testing of girls in mathematics. Wellington: Victoria University.
2. Bolger, N. and Kellaghan, T. (1990). Method of measurement and gender differences in Scholastic Achievement. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 165-174.
3. Browne, N. and Ross, C. (1991). Girls' stuff, boys' stuff: Young children talking and playing. In N. Browne (Ed.), Science and technology in the early years. Buckingham: Open University Press.
4. Cole, N.S. (1997). Understanding gender differences and fair assessment in context. In W.W. Willingham and N.S. Cole (Eds.), Gender and fair assessment (pp. 157-183). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Gorard, S., Salisbury, J. and Rees, G. (1999). Reappraising the apparent underachievement of boys at school. Gender and Education, 11(3).
6. Gorman, T.P., White, J., Brook, G., Maclure, M. and Kispal, A. (1988). Language performance in schools: Review of APU language monitoring 1979-1983. London: HMSO.
7. Harding, J. (1979). Sex differences in examination performance at 16+. Physics Education, 14, 280-284.
8. Head, J. (1999). Understanding the boys: Issues of behaviour and achievement. London: Palmer Press.
9. Hildebrand, G. and Allard, A. (1993). Transforming the curriculum through changing assessment practices. In S. Haggerty and A. Holmes (Eds.), Transforming the curriculum: Our future depends on it. Waterloo: University of Waterloo.
10. HKPISA (2003). The first Hong Kong PISA report. Hong Kong: Hong Kong PISA Centre.
11. Hoste, R. (1982). Sex differences and similarities on performance in a CSE biology examination. Educational Studies, 8, 141-153.
12. Johnson, S. (1987). Gender differences in science: Parallels in interest, experience and performance. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 467-481.
13. Jovanovic, J., Solano-Flores, G. and Shavelson, R.J. (1994). Performance-based assessments: Will gender differences in science achievement be eliminated? Education and Urban Society, 26, 352-366.
14. Kahle, J.B. and Lakes, M.K. (1983). The myth of equality in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 131-140.
15. Keeves, J.P. (1986). Science education: The contribution of IEA research to a world perspective. In N.T. Postlethwaite (Ed.), International educational research, papers in honor of Torsten Husen. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
16. Keeves, J.P. (1992). Learning science in a changing world, cross-national studies of science achievement, 1970 to 1984. The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
17. Kimbell, R., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A. and Kelly, V. (1991). The assessment of performance in design and technology. London: School Examinations and Assessment Authority.
18. Law, N. (1996). Science and mathematics achievements at the junior secondary level in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: TIMSS Hong Kong Study Centre.
19. Linn, M.C. (1991). Gender differences in educational achievement. In Proceedings of the 1991 ETS Invitational Conference: Sex equity in educational opportunity, achievement, and testing (pp. 11-50). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
20. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
21. Mullis, I.V., Martin, M.O., Beaton, A.E., Gonzalez, E.J., Kelly, D.L. and Smith, T.A. (1998). Mathematics and science achievement in the final year of secondary school. Boston: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation and Educational Policy, Boston College.
22. Mullis, I.V., Martin, M.O., Fierros, E.G., Goldberg, A.L. and Stemler, S.E. (2000). Gender differences in achievement: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
23. Murphy, P. (1991). Gender differences in pupils' reactions to practical work. In B. Woolnough (Ed.), Practical science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
24. Murphy, P. (1996). Gender and assessment in science. In L.H. Parker, L.J. Rennie and B.J. Fraser (Eds.), Gender, science and mathematics: Shortening the shadow (pp. 105-117). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
25. Murphy, P. (1997). Gender differences: Messages for science learning. In K. Harnquist and A. Bergen (Eds.), Growing up with science: Developing early understanding of science. London: Jessica Kingsley.
26. Murphy, P. (1999). Supporting collaborative learning: A gender dimension. In P. Murphy (Ed.), Learners, learning and assessment. London: Paul Chapman Publishing and Open University.
27. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (1978). Science achievement in the schools: A summary of results from the 1976-77 National assessment of Science. Washington, DC: Education Commission of the States.
28. Oakes, J. (1990). Lost talent: The underparticipation of women, minorities and disabled persons in science. Santa Monica: RAND.
29. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results form PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.
30. OECD (2002). Manual for the PISA 2000 database. Paris: OECD.
31. OECD (2003). Knowledge and skills for life: Second results form PISA 2000. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
32. Parker, L.H. and Tims, J.E. (1994). Different modes of assessment in science and mathematics: A systematic interaction with gender. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
33. Rennie, L.J. and Parker, L.H. (1993). Assessment in physics: Further exploration of the implications of item context. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 39, 28-32.
34. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response patter of graded scores. Psychometric Monograph, No. 17.
35. Schmidt, W.H., Raizen, S.A., Britton, E.D., Bianchi, L.J. and Wolfe, R.G. (1997). Many visions, many aims: A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in school science. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
36. Volkoff, J. and Hocevar, D. (1995). Multiple-choice versus performance-based testing and gender. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
37. Warm, T.A. (1985). Weighted maximum likelihood estimation of ability in Item Response Theory using tests of finite length. Technical Report CGI-TR-85-08, U.S. Cost Guard Institute, Oklahoma City.
38. Whitehouse, H. and Sullivan, M. (1992). Girls and year 12 science examinations. Adelaide: Senior Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.