Abstract
The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) involved 47 countries, thousands of students, and their teachers and schools. Included in the battery of tests and other instruments was a Student Questionnaire that was concerned with the personal and school contexts of the students in relation to their mathematics and science learning. Quite late in the planning of this very expensive study, it transpired that no country had considered gathering data on the students’ sense of the relevance of the science topics in the achievement tests, of their science learning, or, their metacognitive awareness of this learning. This paper reports one last minute attempt to collect these data from one group of student in Population 3—the students in the final year of schooling. Like many other aspects of TIMSS, the psychometric dominance in its design meant that this study was logistically very difficult, but some interesting findings are reported.
Keywords
Multiple Choice Question Student Response Science Topic Social Utility School LearningPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). (1998, February).TIMSS, Australian Population 3 Press Release. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
- Baird, J. (1984).Improving learning through enhanced metacognition. Unpublished PhD thesis, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria.Google Scholar
- Fensham, P. J. (1995). STS and comparative assessment of scientific literacy.Research in Science Education, 25(1), 33–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fensham, P. J., & Haslam, F. (submitted). Problems of content in free response items in TIMSS.Research in Science Education.Google Scholar
- Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.),Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 21–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Gunstone, R. F. (1994). The importance of specific science content in the enhancement of metacognition. In P. J. Fensham, R. F. Gunstone, & R. T. White (Eds.),The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (pp. 131–146). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
- Kemmis, S. (1986). Addison Hills: A case study of alienation and transition from school. In P. J. Fensham (Ed.),Alienation from schooling (Chapter 3). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Macdonald, I., & Walsh, M. (1994, November).What year 10 students think about school and learning. Paper presented at annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Newcastle University, Newcastle, Australia.Google Scholar
- Mitchell, J., & Mitchell, I. (1992). Some classroom procedures. In J. R. Baird, & J. R. Northfield (Eds.),Learning from the PEEL experience (pp. 210–268). Melbourne, Victoria: Monash University Printing Services.Google Scholar
- Orpwood, G., & Garden, R. A. (1998).Assessing mathematics and science literacy (TIMSS Monograph No. 4). Vancouver: Pacific Educational Press.Google Scholar
- Roberts, D. (1988). What counts as science education? In P. J. Fensham (Ed.),Developments and dilemmas in science education (pp. 27–54). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
- White, R. T. (1988).Learning science (pp. 98–99). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar