PISA test items and school textbooks related to science: A textual comparison

Science Education

Volumn 92, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 664-687

  Hatzinikita, Vassilia ^a   Dimopoulos, Kostas ^b   Christidou, Vasilia ^c  

^a HELLENIC OPEN UNIVERSITY   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PELOPONNESE   (Greece)

^c UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 47049100338     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20256     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Apostolou, A. (2007). Philosophikes kai Paidagogikes Antilipseis ton Ekpaideftikon ton Physikon Epistimon: Mia Empiriki Meleti [Science Teachers' Philosophical and Pedagogical Beliefs: An Empirical Study]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece.
2. Baker, R., & Jones, A. (2005). How can international studies such as TIMMS and PISA be used to inform practice, policy and future research in science education in New Zealand. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 145-157.
3. Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Taylor and Francis.
4. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. ( 1993). The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. London: The Falmer Press.
5. Corten, R., & Dronkers, J. (2006). School achievement of pupils from the lower strata in public, private government-dependent and private-independent schools: A cross-national test of the Goleman-Hoffer thesis. Educational Research and Evaluation. 12(2), 179-208.
6. Dimopoulos. K. (2001). I "icona" tis epistimis kai tis technologias ston elliniko imerisio typo (The "image" of science and technology in the Greek daily press]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Patras, Putras, Greece.
7. Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V., & Sklaveniti, S. (2003). Towards an analysis of visual images in the school science textbooks and the press' articles about science and technology. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 189-216.
8. Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V., & Sklaveniti, S. (2005). Towards a framework of socio-linguistic analysis of science textbooks: The Greek case. Research in Science Education, 35(2/3), 173-195.
9. Duru-Bellat, M., & Suchaut, B. (2005). Organisation and context, efficiency and equity of educational systems: What PISA tell us. European Educational Research Journal, 4(3), 181-194.
10. Entorf, H., & Minoiu, N. (2005). What a difference immigration policy makes: A comparison of PISA scores in Europe and traditional countries of immigration. German Economic Review, 6(3), 355-376.
11. Evans, J., Morgan, C., & Tsatsaroni, A. (2006). Discursive positioning and emotion in school mathematics practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 209-226.
12. Georgiadou, T., Kafetzopoulos, K., Provis, N., Spyrelis, N., & Heniades, D. (1997). Chimia B Gymnasiou [Chemistry for the 2nd grade of lower secondary school]. Athens, Greece: OEDB.
13. Gorard, S., & Smith, E. (2004). An international comparison of equity in education systems. Comparative Education, 40(1), 15-28.
14. Güzel, C. I., & Berberoglou, G. (2005). An analysis of the programme for international student assessment 2000 (PISA 2000). Mathematical literacy data for Brazilian, Japanese and Norwegian students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31, 283-314.
15. Halliday, M. A. K. (1996). On the language of physical science. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 54-68). London: The Falmer Press.
16. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (Eds.). (1996). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.
17. Hvistendahl, R., & Roe, A. (2004). The literacy achievement of Norwegian minority students. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 307-324.
18. Kapsalis, A., & Charalambous, D. (1995). Scholika eghiridia: Thesmiki exelixi kai synchroni problimatiki [School textbooks: Institutional evolution and modern problematic]. Athens, Greece: Ekfrasi.
19. Karapanagiotis, V., Papastamatiou, N., Fertis, A., & Haletsos, H. (1998). Fysiki B Gymnasiou [Physics, for the 2nd grade of lower secondary school]. Athens, Greece: OEDB.
20. Kelly, J. G., & Takao, A, (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342.
21. Keys, C. W. (1999). Language as an indicator of meaning generation: An analysis of middle school students' written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1044-1061.
22. Kjǽrnsli, M., & Svein, L. (2004). PISA and scientific literacy: Similarities and differences between Nordic countries. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 271-286.
23. Koulaidis, V., & Dimopoulos, K. (2003). Science education in primary and secondary level: An analysis of the discursive transitions across different modalities of the pedagogic discourse, International Journal of Learning, 10, 3263-3274.
24. Koulaidis, V., & Tsatsaroni, A. (1996). A pedagogical analysis of science textbooks: How can we proceed? Research in Science Education, 26, 55-71.
25. Koulaidis, V., Dimopoulos, K., Sklaveniti, S., & Christidou, V. (2002). Ta keimena tis techno-epistimis sto dimosio choro [The texts of techno-science in the public domain). Athens, Greece: Metaixmio.
26. Koulaidis. V., Papadakis, N., & Dimopoulos, K. (2006). Programma PISA: Apotimisi kai prokliseis [The PISA programme: Evaluation and challenges]. Comparative and International Educational Review, 6, 33-57.
27. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.
28. Lehtonen, M. (2000). The cultural analysis of texts. London: Sage.
29. Linnakylä, P, Malin, A., & Taube, K. (2004). Factors behind low reading literacy achievement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 231-249.
30. Lynch, M. (1990). The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 153-186). Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
31. Marks, G. N. (2006). Are between- and within-school differences in student performance largely due to socio-economic background? Evidence from 30 countries. Educational Research, 48(1), 21-40.
32. Martin, J. R. (1997). Analysing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 3-39). London: Cassell.
33. Nash, R. (2003). Is the school composition effect real?: A discussion with evidence from the UK PISA data. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14(4), 441-457.
34. Naumann. J. (2005). TIMSS, PISA, PIRLS and low educational achievement in world society. Prospect, 15(2), 229-248.
35. OECD. (1999). Measuring student knowledge and skills-A new framework for assessment, Paris: OECD.
36. OECD. (2000). Measuring student knowledge and skills: The PISA 2(KK) assessment of reading, mathematical, and scientific literacy, Paris: OECD.
37. OECD. (2001). Knowledge and skills for life. First results from PISA 2000, Paris: OECD.
38. OECD. (2002). Sample tasks from the PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy, Paris: OECD.
39. OECD. (2003a). Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow. Further results from PISA 2000, Paris: OECD.
40. OECD. (2003b). The PISA 2003 assessment framework: Mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills, Paris: OECD.
41. OECD. (2004). Learning for tomorrow's world. First results from PISA 2003, Paris: OECD.
42. OECD. (2006a). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy - A framework for PISA 2006. Paris: OECD.
43. OECD. (2006b). Programme for international student assessment: Student performance in an international comparison. Retrieved September 25, 2006, from http://pisa.ipn.uni-kiel.de.
44. OECD. (n.d.). Sample questions: PISA science. Retrieved May 2, 2006, from http://pisa-sq-acer.edu.au.
45. Olsen, R. V. (2004). The search for descriptions of students' thinking and knowledge: Exploring nominal cognitive variables by correspondence and homogeneity analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 325-341.
46. Papanastasiou, E., Zembylas, M., & Vrasidas, C. (2003). Can computer use hurt science achievement? The USA results from PISA. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 325-332.
47. Pitrelli, N., Manzoli, F., & Montolli, B. (2006). Science in advertising: Uses and consumptions in the Italian press. Public Understanding of Science, 15, 207-220.
48. Robin, I. (2002). L'enquête PISA sur les compétences en lecture des élèves de 15 ans: Trois biais culturels en question. VEI Enjeu, 129, 65-91.
49. Simola, H. (2005). The finish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative Education, 41(4), 455-470.
50. Sklaveniti, S. (2002). Ena plaisio analysis sholikon eghiridion tvn fysikon epistimon [A framework for analysing school science textbooks]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
51. Solomon, J., & Gago, J. M. (Eds). (1994). Science in school and the future of scientific culture in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: DG Research, European Commission.
52. Thorpe, G. (2006). Multilevel analysis of PISA 2000 reading results for the UK using pupil scale variable. School Effectiveness and Research, 48(3), 325-341.
53. Tiberghien, A., Veillard, L., Le Maréchal, J. F., Buty, C., & Millar, R., (2001). An analysis of labwork tasks used in science teaching at upper secondary school and university levels in several European countries. Science Education, 85(5), 483-508.
54. Turmo, A. (2004). Scientific literacy and socio-economic background among 15-year-olds-A Nordic perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 287-305.
55. Unsworth, L. (2001). Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 585-609.
56. van Dijk, T. (1987). Episodic models in discourse processing. In R. Horowitz & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language (pp. 161-193). New York: Academic Press.
57. van Langen, A., Bosker, R., & Dekkers, H. (2006). Exploring cross-national differences in gender gaps in education. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(2), 155-177.
58. Vlachos, I. (2004). Allazontas tis praktikes ton ekpaideftikon. H periptosi tis epilogis ton thematon ton proagogikon kai apolitirion exetaseon sta mathimata ton fysikon epistimon sto gymnasio [Changing teachers' practices: The case of final examinations in scientific subjects in lower secondary schools]. Didaskalia ton Fysikon Epistimon: Erevna kai praxi, 10, 34-46.
59. von Collani, E. (2001). OECD PISA - An example of stochastic illiteracy? Economic Quality Control, 16(2), 227-253.
60. Wignell, P., Martin, J. R., & Eggins, S. (1996). The discourse of geography: Ordering and explaining the experiential world. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 136-165). London: The Palmer Press.
61. Williams, T., Williams, K., Kastberg. D., & Jocelyn, L. (2005). Achievement and affect in OECD nations. Oxford Review of Education, 31(4), 517-545.
62. Willms, J. D. (2006). Variation in socio-economic gradients among cantons in French- and Italian-speaking Switzerland: Findings from OECD PISA. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(2), 129-154.
63. Wößmann. L. (2005). The effect heterogeneity of central examinations: Evidence from TIMSS, TIMSS-repeat and PISA. Education Economics, 13(2), 143-169.
64. Yip. D. Y. Chiu, M. M., & Ho, E. S. C. (2004). Hong Kong achievement in OECD - PISA study: Gender differences in science content, literacy skills, and test item formats. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2, 91-106.