PISA Test Items and School-Based Examinations in Greece: Exploring the relationship between global and local assessment discourses

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 636-662

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

^a HELLENIC OPEN UNIVERSITY   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY   (Greece)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PELOPONNESE   (Greece)

Author keywords

Achievement; Assessment discourses; Biology; PISA; School Based examinations; Textual modalities

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873957319     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2011.604801     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Adams, R. J. 2003. Response to 'Cautions on OECD'S recent educational survey (PISA)'. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3): 377-389. (doi:10.1080/03054980307445)
2. Bernstein, B. 1990. The structuring of pedagogic discourse, London: Routledge.
3. Bernstein, B. 1996. Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique, London: Taylor and Francis.
4. Bernstein, B. and Solomon, J. 1999. 'Pedagogy, identity and the construction of a theory of symbolic control': Basil Bernstein questioned by Joseph Solomon. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2): 265-279. (doi:10.1080/01425699995443)
5. Boaler, J. 1994. When do girls prefer football to fashion? An analysis of female underachievement in relation to 'realistic' mathematics contexts. British Educational Research Journal, 20(5): 551-564. (doi:10.1080/0141192940200504)
6. Bungum, B. 2008. Images of physics: An explorative study of the changing character of visual images in Norwegian physics textbooks. NORDINA, 4(2): 132-141.
7. Cooper, B. and Dunne, M. 2000. Assessing children's mathematical knowledge: Social class, sex and problem solving, Buckingham: Open University Press.
8. Devetak, I., Vogrinc, J. and Glažar, S. A. 2010. States of matter explanations in Slovenian textbooks for students aged 6 to 14. International Journal of Environmental & Science, 3(3): 217-235.
9. Dimopoulos, K. and Asimakopoulos, A. 2010. Science on the web: Secondary school students' navigation patterns and preferred pages' characteristics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(3): 246-265. (doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9197-8)
10. Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V. and 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. (doi:10.1023/A:1025006310503)
11. Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V. and 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. (doi:10.1007/s11165-004-8162-z)
12. Dimopoulos, K., Matiatos, S. and Koulaidis, V. 2003. Science centers as sites for learning: The case of a Greek environmental center. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies, 8(1): 7-28.
13. Dimopoulos, K., Matiatos, S. and Koulaidis, V. 2002. Science and technology centers as 'texts'. International Journal of Learning, 9(3): 717-735.
14. Dohn, N. B. 2007. Knowledge and skills for PISA-Assessing the assessment. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(1): 1-16. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9752.2007.00542.x)
15. Dossey, J., McCrone, S., Turner, R. and Lindquist, M. 2008. PISA 2003-Mathematical literacy and learning in the Americas. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 8(2): 140-152. (doi:10.1080/14926150802169289)
16. Dowling, P. 1994. "Discursive saturation and school mathematics texts: A strand from a language of description". In Mathematics, education and philosophy: An international perspective, Edited by: Ernest, P. 124-142. London: The Falmer Press.
17. Dowling, P. 1998. The sociology of mathematics education: Mathematical myths/pedagogic texts, London: The Falmer Press.
18. Evans, J., Morgan, C. and Tsatsaroni, A. 2006. Discursive positioning and emotion in school mathematics practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2): 209-226. (doi:10.1007/s10649-006-9029-1)
19. Fontinhas, F., Morais, A. M. and Neves, I. P. 1995. Students' coding orientation and school socializing context in their relation with students' scientific achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5): 445-462. (doi:10.1002/tea.3660320504)
20. Gilbert, J. K. 2005. "Visualization: A metacognitive skill in science and science education". In Visualization in science education, Edited by: Gilbert, J. K. 9-29. Dordrecht: Springer.
21. Gilbert, J. K. 2008. "Visualization: An emergent field of practice and enquiry in science education". In Visualization: Theory and practice in science education, Edited by: Gilbert, J. K., Reiner, M. and Nakhleh, M. 3-25. Dordrecht: Springer.
22. Goldstein, H. and Thomas, S. M. 2008. Reflections on the international comparative surveys debate. Assessment in Education: Principle, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 215-222. (doi:10.1080/09695940802417368)
23. Grisay, A. and Monseur, C. 2007. Measuring the equivalence of item difficulty in the various versions of an international test. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 33(1): 69-86. (doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.01.006)
24. 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.
25. Halliday, M. A.K. and Martin, J. R. 1996. Writing science: Literacy and discursive power, Edited by: Halliday, M. A.K. and Martin, J. R. London: The Falmer Press.
26. es journales internationales sur la communication, l' éducation et la culture scientifiques, techniques et industrielles: Par les mots et par les choses [Proceedings of the XIXth international days on scientific, technological and industrial communication, education and culture: By the words and things], Edited by: Giordan, A., Martinand, J. L. and Raichvarg, D. France: Université Paris VII.
27. Hatzinikita, V., Dimopoulos, K. and Christidou, V. 2008. PISA test items and school textbooks related to science. Science Education, 92(4): 664-687. (doi:10.1002/sce.20256)
28. Holland, J. 1981. Social class and changes in orientation to meaning. Sociology, 15(1): 1-18. (doi:10.1177/003803858101500101)
29. Jarman, R., Mcclune, B., Pyle, E. and Braband, G. 2011. The critical reading of the images associated with science-related news reports: Establishing a knowledge, skills, and attitudes framework. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2011.559961,
30. Koulaidis, V., Dimopoulos, K., Sklaveniti, S. and Christidou, V. 2002. Ta keimena tis techno-epistimis sto dimosio choro [The texts of techno-science in the public domain], Athens: Metaixmio.
31. Koulaidis, V. and Tsatsaroni, A. 1996. A pedagogical analysis of science textbooks: How can we proceed?. Research in Science Education, 26(1): 55-71. (doi:10.1007/BF02356963)
32. Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. 1996. Reading images: The grammar of the visual design, London and New York: Routledge.
33. Lau, K. C. 2009. A critical examination of PISA's assessment on scientific literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(6): 1061-1088. (doi:10.1007/s10763-009-9154-2)
34. Lowe, R. 2000. Visual literacy in science and technology education. Connect: UNESCO International Science and Technology and Environmental Education Newsletter, XXV(2): 1-3.
35. Macdonald, A. and Pálsdóttir, A. 2008. "Writing for science and science textbooks: A case study from Iceland". In In Planning science instruction: From insight to learning to pedagogical practices. Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Research Symposium on Science Education, 35-41. Iceland: University of Iceland, School of Education.
36. Mathewson, J. H. 2005. The visual core of science: Definition and applications to education. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5): 529-548. (doi:10.1080/09500690500060417)
37. McGaw, B. 2008. The role of the OECD in international comparative studies of achievement. Assessment in Education: Principle, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 223-243. (doi:10.1080/09695940802417384)
38. Morais, A. and Antunes, H. 1994. Students' differential text production in the regulative context of the classroom. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 15(2): 243-263. (doi:10.1080/0142569940150206)
39. Morais, A. M. and Miranda, C. 1996. Understanding teachers' evaluation criteria: A condition for success in science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6): 601-624. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199608)33:6<601::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-S)
40. Nardi, E. 2008. Cultural biases: A non-Anglophone perspective. Assessment in Education: Principle, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 259-266. (doi:10.1080/09695940802417467)
41. Nentwig, P., Roennebeck, S., Schoeps, K., Rumann, S. and Carstensen, C. 2009. Performance and levels of contextualization in a selection of OECD countries in PISA 2006. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8): 897-908. (doi:10.1002/tea.20338)
42. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (n.d.). Sample questions: PISA science. Retrieved July 24, 2011, from http://pisa-sq.acer.edu.au/showQuestion.php?testId=2300&questio
43. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2001. Knowledge and skills for life. First results from PISA 2000, Paris: OECD.
44. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2003a. Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow. Further results from PISA 2000, Paris: OECD.
45. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2003b. The PISA 2003 assessment framework: Mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills, Paris: OECD.
46. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2004. Learning for tomorrow's world. First results from PISA 2003, Paris: OECD.
47. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2006. Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006, Paris: OECD.
48. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2009. Take the test-Sample questions from OECD's PISA assessments, Paris: OECD.
49. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2010. PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do. Student performance in reading, mathematics and science, Vol. I, Paris: OECD.
50. Oldham, E. 2006. The PISA mathematics results in context. The Irish Journal of Education, xxxvii: 27-52.
51. Pantidos, P., Valakas, K., Vitoratos, E. and Ravanis, K. 2008. Towards applied semiotics: An analysis of iconic gestural signs regarding physics teaching in the light of theater semiotics. Semiotica, 172(1/4): 201-232.
52. Pinto, R. and Ametller, J. 2002. Students' difficulties in reading images. Comparing results from four national research groups. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3): 333-341. (doi:10.1080/09500690110078932)
53. Pinto, R. and El Boudamoussi, S. 2009. Scientific processes in PISA tests observed for science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16): 2137-2159. (doi:10.1080/09500690802559074)
54. Pitrelli, N., Manzoli, F. and Montolli, B. 2006. Science in advertising: Uses and consumptions in the Italian press. Public Understanding of Science, 15: 207-220. (doi:10.1177/0963662506061126)
55. Prais, S. J. 2004. Cautions on OECD'S recent educational survey (PISA): Rejoinder to OECD's response. Oxford Review of Education, 30(4): 569-573. (doi:10.1080/0305498042000303017)
56. Ratcliffe, M. and Millar, R. 2009. Teaching for understanding of science in context: Evidence from the pilot trials of the twenty first century science courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8): 945-959. (doi:10.1002/tea.20340)
57. Roth, W.-M., Pozzer-Ardenghi, L. and Han, J. Y. 2005. Critical graphicacy: Understanding visual representation practices in school science, Dordrecht: Springer-Kluwer.
58. Sadler, T. and Zeidler, D. 2009. Scientific literacy. PISA, and the socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8): 909-921. (doi:10.1002/tea.20327)
59. Sáenz, C. 2009. The role of contextual, conceptual and procedural knowledge in activating mathematical competencies (PISA). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(2): 123-143. (doi:10.1007/s10649-008-9167-8)
60. Schleicher, A. 2007. Can competences assessed by PIS be considered the fundamental school knowledge 15-year-olds should possess?. Journal of Educational Change, 8: 349-357. (doi:10.1007/s10833-007-9042-x)
61. Shiel, G., Cosgrove, J., Sofroniou, N. and Kelly, A. 2001. Ready for life? The literacy achievement of Irish 15-year olds with comparative international data Summary report, Dublin: Education Research Center, e-Print Limited
62. Shiel, G., Sofroniou, N. and Cosgrove, J. 2006. An overview of the main findings of PISA 2003 in Ireland. The Irish Journal of Education, xxxvii: 5-26.
63. Simola, H. 2005. The finish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative Education, 41(4): 455-470. (doi:10.1080/03050060500317810)
64. Sklaveniti, S. 2002. Ena plaisio analysis sxolikon egxeiridion ton Fysikon Epistimon [A framework for analysing school science textbooks]. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Patras, Patras
65. Smithers, A. 2004. England's education. What can be learned by comparing countries The University of Liverpool, Center for Education and Employment Research
66. Trumbo, J. 1999. Visual literacy and science communication. Science Communication, 20(4): 409-425. (doi:10.1177/1075547099020004004)
67. Unsworth, L. 1997. Scaffolding reading of science explanations: Accessing the grammatical and visual forms of specialised knowledge. Reading, 31(3): 30-42. (doi:10.1111/1467-9345.00061)
68. Unsworth, L. 2001a. Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23: 585-609. (doi:10.1080/09500690010006473)
69. Unsworth, L. 2001b. Teaching multiliteracies across the curriculum: Changing contexts of text and image in classroom practice, Buckingham: Open University.
70. Wang, H.-C. A. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of NARST. San Diego, USA. Science textbook studies reanalysis: Teachers "friendly" content analysis methods?,
71. Wignell, P., Martin, J. R. and Eggins, S. 1996. "The discourse of geography: Ordering and explaining the experiential world". In Writing science: Literacy and discursive power, Edited by: Halliday, M. A.K. and Martin, J. R. 136-165. London: The Falmer Press.
72. William, D. 2008. International comparisons and sensitivity to instruction. Assessment in Education: Principle, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 253-257. (doi:10.1080/09695940802417426)
73. Yip, D. Y., Chiu, M. M. and 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(1): 91-106. (doi:10.1023/B:IJMA.0000026537.85199.36)
74. Zisimopoulos, G., Kafetzopoulos, K., Moutzouri-Manousou, E. and Papastamatiou, N. 2004. Themata didaktikis gia ta mathimata ton Fysikon Epistimon [Science education topics], Athens: Patakis.