The Development of Authentic Assessments to Investigate Ninth Graders’ Scientific Literacy: In the Case of Scientific Cognition Concerning the Concepts of Chemistry and Physics

  • Shu-Nu Chang
  • Mei-Hung Chiu
Open Access


Scientific literacy and authenticity have gained a lot of attention in the past few decades worldwide. The goal of the study was to develop various authentic assessments to investigate students’ scientific literacy for corresponding to the new curriculum reform of Taiwan in 1997. In the process, whether ninth graders were able to apply school knowledge in real-life problems was also investigated. Over the course of our two-year study, we developed authentic assessments to investigate a stratified random sampling of 1,503 ninth graders’ levels of scientific literacy, including scientific cognition, process skills, application of science, habits of mind, nature of science, and attitude towards science. The purpose of this article is to discuss three different formats of authentic assessments: multiple-choice, open-ended, and hands-on test items, which we developed to investigate scientific cognition. To validate the three formats of authentic assessments, students’ performance on these three assessments were compared with the science section of Taiwan’s Academic Attainment Testing (STAAT), and the values of Pearson correlation coefficient were all at the significant level, ranging from 0.205 to 0.660 (p<0.01). We found that our three authentic assessments were better in evaluating students’ authentic abilities in science than standardized tests (such as STAAT). Further authentic assessments, particularly the hands-on activity, benefited low-achieving students. Concerning the common themes tested in the authentic assessments, students performed better in a multiple-choice test than an open-ended test on electricity and heat and temperature. In addition, two themes of chemical reactions and reactions of acid and base with indicators were performed best in a hands-on test than in the other two tests. In this article, we provide evidence that authentic assessments could be developed in different formats to investigate students’ scientific cognition as part of the national test. Of these formats, the multiple-choice, open-ended, and hands-on test items are all shown to be sensitive in their evaluation of students’ cognition in science.


scientific literacy scientific cognition and authentic assessment 


  1. American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Washington, DC: AAAS. Google Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G.S. & Ryan, A.G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on science-technology-society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76(5), 477–491. Google Scholar
  3. Archbald, D.A. & Newmann, F.M. (1988). Beyond standardized testing: Assessing authentic academic achievement in the secondary school. Reston, VA: National Association of School Principals. Google Scholar
  4. Arons, A.B. (1983). Student patterns of thinking and reasoning: Part one of three parts. Physics Teacher, 21(9), 576–581. Google Scholar
  5. Bell, R., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Lederman, N.G., McComas, W.F. & Matthews, M.R. (2001). The nature of science and science education: A bibliography. Science Education, 10(1–2), 187–204. Google Scholar
  6. Binns, M. (1978). Chemistry for life: A mode III course. Education in Chemistry, 15(5), 143–145. Google Scholar
  7. Branscomb, A.W. (1981). Knowing how to know. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 6(36), 5–9. Google Scholar
  8. Champagne, A.B. & Newell, S.T. (1992). Directions for research and development: Alternative methods of assessing scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(8), 841–860. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiu, M.H. (2002). The development of assessments of science learning for junior high school curriculum. No. NSC 90-2511-S-003-101-X3. Taipei, Taiwan: MOE. Google Scholar
  10. Cumming, J.J. & Maxwell, G.S. (1999). Contextualising authentic assessment. Assessment in Education, 6(2), 177–194. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cunningham, C.M. & Helms, J.V. (1998). Sociology of science as a means to a more authentic, inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 483–499. Google Scholar
  12. Dori, Y.J. (2003). From nationwide standardized testing to school-based alternative embedded assessment in Israel: Students’ performance in the matriculation 2000 project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 34–52. Google Scholar
  13. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E. & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5–12. Google Scholar
  14. Education Act 1996 (1996). London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Google Scholar
  15. Furio, C. & Guisasola, J. (1998). Difficulties in learning the concept of electric field. Science Education, 82(4), 511–526. Google Scholar
  16. Gabel, D. & Sherwood, R.D. (1984). Analyzing difficulties with mole-concept tasks by using familiar analog tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(8), 843–851. Google Scholar
  17. Garnett, P.J. & Treagust, D.F. (1992). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation–reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 121–142. Google Scholar
  18. Jegl, W. (1978). The chemistry of life: A second semester course on color videotapes for students in life sciences. Journal of Chemical Education, 55(4), 225–259. Google Scholar
  19. Jenkins, E.W. (1992). School science education: Towards a reconstruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24(3), 229–246. Google Scholar
  20. Kilker, R.J. (1985). A chemistry course for high ability 8th, 9th, and 10th graders. Journal of Chemical Education, 62(5), 423–424. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Laugksch, R.C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84, 71–94. Google Scholar
  22. Laugksch, R.C. & Spargo, P.E. (1996). Development of a pool of scientific literacy test items based on selected AAAS literacy goals. Science Education, 80(2), 121–143. Google Scholar
  23. Lee, Y. & Law, N. (2001). Explorations in promoting conceptual change in electrical concepts via ontological category shift. International Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 111–149. Google Scholar
  24. Magnusson, S.J., Boyle, R.A. & Templin, M. (1997). Dynamic science assessment: A new approach for investigating conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 91–142. Google Scholar
  25. McComas, W.F., Almazroa, H. & Clough, M.P. (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science Education, 7(6), 511–532. Google Scholar
  26. Miller, J.D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29–48. Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Education (MOE) (1998). 1–9 grades curriculum guidelines. Taipei: MOE. Google Scholar
  28. Newmann, F.M. & Archbald, D.A. (1992). The nature of authentic academic achievement. In Berlak, Newmann, Adams, Archbald, Burgess, Raven & Romberg (Eds.), Toward a new science of educational testing and assessment. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Google Scholar
  29. Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science and Technological Education, 1(1), 73–82. Google Scholar
  30. Rahm, J., Miller, H.C., Hartley, L. & Moore, J.C. (2003). The value of an emergent notion of authenticity: Examples from two student/teacher-scientist partnership programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 737–756. Google Scholar
  31. Russell, T.J. (1980). Children’s understanding of simple electrical circuits. In Sia (Ed.), Science and mathematics concept learning of South East children: Second report on Phase II (pp. 67–91). Malaysia: SEAMEO-RECSAM. Google Scholar
  32. Sevenair, J.P. (1989). A nontraditional organic chemistry course. Journal of College Science Teaching, 18(4), 236–239. Google Scholar
  33. Shipstone, D.M. (1984). A study of children’s understanding of electricity in simple DC circuits. European Journal of Science Education, 6(2), 185–198. Google Scholar
  34. Shipstone, D.M. (1988). A study of students’ understanding of electricity in five European countries. International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 303–316. Google Scholar
  35. Shortland, M. (1988). Advocating science: Literacy and public understanding. Impact of Science on Society, 38(4), 305–316. Google Scholar
  36. Steinberg, M.S. & Wainwright, C.L. (1993). Using models to teach electricity: The CASTLE Project. Physics Teacher, 31(6), 353–357. Google Scholar
  37. Thomas, G. & Durant, J. (1987). Why should we promote the public understanding of science? Oxford, UK: University of Oxford. Google Scholar
  38. Walford, E.T. (1983). High school chemistry: Preparation for college or preparation for life? Journal of Chemical Education, 60(12), 1053–1055. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wiggins, G.P. (1989). A true test: Toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 703–713. Google Scholar
  40. Wiggins, G.P. (1993). Assessment: Authenticity, context, and validity. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 201–214. Google Scholar
  41. Wolf, D., Bixby, J., Glenn, J.I. & Gardner, H. (1991). To use their mind well: Investigating new forms of student assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17, 31–73. Google Scholar
  42. Yerrick, R.K. (2000). Lower track science students’ argumentation and open inquiry instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 807–838. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shu-Nu Chang
    • 1
  • Mei-Hung Chiu
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Science EducationNational Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations