A written test for procedural understanding: A way forward for assessment in the UK science curriculum?

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 5-21

  Roberts, Ros ^a   Gott, Richard ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 68149086184     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0263514042000187511     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1967) Science—a process approach (­Washington DC, Ginn & Co)
2. Baxter, GP, Shavelson, RJ, Goldman, SR, and Pine, J. (1992). Evaluation of procedure-based scoring for hands-on assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(1): 1–17.
3. Bryce TGK, McCall J, MacGregor J, Robertson IJ, Weston RAJ, (1983) Techniques for the assessment of practical skills in foundation science (London, Heinemann)
4. Davis BC, (1989) GASP: Graded Assessment in Science Project (London, Hutchinson)
5. DES and Welsh Office (1989) Science in the National Curriculum (HMSO)
6. Donnelly, J. (2000). Secondary science teaching under the National Curriculum. School Science Review, 81(296): 27–35.
7. Donnelly J, Buchanan A, Jenkins E, Welford A, (1994) Investigations in science education policy. Sc1 in the National Curriculum for England and Wales (Leeds, University of Leeds)
8. Duggan, S, and Gott, R. (2000). Intermediate General National Qualifications (GNVQ) Science: a missed opportunity for a focus on procedural understanding?. Research in Science and Technology Education, 18(2): 201–214.
9. Gee, B, and Clackson, SG. (1992). The origin of practical work in the English school science curriculum. School Science Review, 73(265): 79–83.
10. Gott R, Duggan S, (1995) Investigative work in the science curriculum (Buckingham, Open University Press)
11. Gott, R, and Duggan, S. (2002). Problems with the assessment of performance in practical science: which way now?. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2): 183–201.
12. Gott R, Mashiter J, (1991) Practical work in science—a task-based approach? in: B. E. ­Woolnough (Ed.) Practical science (Buckingham, Open University Press)
13. Gott R, Murphy P, (1987) Science report for teachers: 9. Assessing investigations at ages 13 and 15 (HMSO/ASE) 56
14. 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.
15. House of Commons, Science and Technology Committee (2002) Science education from 14 to 19 Third report of session 2001–2, 1 (London, The Stationery Office)
16. Kerr JF, (1964) Practical work in school science (Leicester, Leicester University Press)
17. Kuhn D, Garcia-Mila M, Zohar A, Anderson C, (1995) Strategies of knowledge acquisition Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, Serial no. 245, 60(4) (Chicago, University of Chicago press)
18. Lawrenz, F, Huffman, D, and Welch, W. (2001). The science achievement of various subgroups on alternative assessment formats. Science Education, 85(3): 279–290.
19. Layton D, (1973) Science for the people (London, Allen and Unwin)
20. Layton D, Jenkins E, Macgill S, Davey A, (1993) Inarticulate science? Perspectives on the public understanding of science and some implications for science education (Driffield, Studies in Education)
21. Nuffield Foundation (1966) Nuffield chemistry: introduction and guide (Harlow, Longman/Penguin)
22. Roberts, R, and Gott, R. (2003). Assessment of biology investigations. Journal of Biological Education, 37(3): 114–121.
23. Screen, PA. (1986). The Warwick Process Science project. School Science Review, 72(260): 17–24.
24. 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.
25. Stark, R. (1999). Measuring science standards in Scottish schools: the assessment of achievement programme. Assessment in Education, 6(1): 27–42.
26. Swain, J, Monk, M, and Johnson, S. (1999). A comparative study of attitudes to the aims of practical work in science education in Egypt, Korea and the UK. International Journal of Science Education, 21(12): 1311–1324.
27. Tytler, R, Duggan, S, and Gott, R. (2000). Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 2(8): 815–832.
28. Tytler, R, Duggan, S, and Gott, R. (2001). Public participation of an environmental dispute: ­implications for science education. Public Understanding of Science, 10: 343–364.
29. Watson, R, Goldsworthy, A, and Wood-Robinson, V. (1999). What is not fair with investigations?. School Science Review, 80(292): 101–106.
30. Welford G, Harlen W, Schofield B, (1985) Practical testing at ages 11, 13 and 15 (London, Department of Education and Science)
31. Woolnough BE, (1991) Setting the scene in: B. E. Woolnough (Ed.) Practical science (Buckingham, Open University Press)
32. Woolnough BE, Allsop T, (1985) Practical work in science (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press)