Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Visualization Type and Frequency in Final Year High School Science Examinations

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The significance of the role of students’ interpretation and creation of multiple forms of representation in science learning has long been established and advocated, but there is a paucity of research into the extent to which this emphasis in science education is reflected in high stakes final year high school science examinations. This study investigated the inclusion of visualizations in the questions within such examinations that require students to construct a response, and also the extent to which such questions required students to create or modify diagrams or graphs within their responses. Examinations in physics, biology and chemistry from the Cambridge International Examination, New Zealand, Singapore and the States of New South Wales and Victoria in Australia over a six-year period (2014-2019) were analysed. The results indicate that less than one third of constructed response item (CRI) questions include visualisations, with most occurring in physics, then biology and then chemistry. An infinitesimally small percentage of questions across all subjects and in all but one of the jurisdictions required the creation or augmentation of visualisations. The misalignment between the integral role of visualizations in science pedagogy and the paucity of visualizations in CRIs in final year high school examinations as well as implications for examination re-design and associated further research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical constellation of modes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2017). Social semiotics in university physics education. In D. Treagust, R. Duit, & H. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 95–122). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. N. (2020). How a high-stakes standardized biology assessment affects teachers' pedagogical planning and implementation for minority students of low socioeconomic status (Doctoral dissertation, Cabrini University).

  • Chang, H.-Y., Lin, T.-J., Lee, M.-H., Lee, S.W.-Y., Lin, T.-C., Tan, A.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2020). A systematic review of trends and findings in research employing drawing assessment in science education. Studies in Science Education, 56(1), 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1735822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M. M., & Gilbert, J. K. (2015). Students’ Visualization of Diagrams Representing the Human Circulatory System: The use of spatial isomorphism and representational conventions. International Journal of Science Education, 37(1), 136–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.969359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eilam, B., & Gilbert, J. K. (Eds). (2014). Science teachers’ use of visual representations (Vol. 8). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06526-7

  • English, J. (2020). Animation in online school science assessment: The validation of assessment for learning and individual development program. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Learning from Animations in Science Education: Innovating in Semiotic and Educational Research (pp. 251–277). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56047-8

  • Erduran, S., El Masri, Y., Cullinane, A., & Ng, Y. (2020). Assessment of practical science in high stakes examinations: A qualitative analysis of high performing English-speaking countries. International Journal of Science Education, 42(9), 1544–1567. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1769876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorella, L., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Drawing boundary conditions for learning by drawing. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 1115–1137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9444-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrmann, T., Schneider, B., & Blikstein, P. (2018). Should students design or interact with models? Using the Bifocal Modelling Framework to investigate model construction in high school science. International Journal of Science Education, 40(8), 867–893. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1453175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Visualization: A metacognitive skill in science and science education. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in Science Education (pp. 9–27). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., & Treagust, D. (2009). Multiple representations in chemical education (Vol. 4). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8

  • Gilbert, J. K., Reiner, M., & Nakhleh, M. (Eds.). (2008). Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (1st ed.). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5267-5

  • Gooding, D. (2004). Visualization, inference and explanation in the sciences. In G. Malcolm (Ed.), Studies in multidisciplinarity (Vol. 2, pp. 1–25). Elsevier.

  • Gooding, D. (2006). From Phenomenology to Field Theory: Faraday’s Visual Reasoning. Perspectives on Science, 14(1), 40–65. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc.2006.14.1.40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, K. E., Wittmann, M. C., Vokos, S., & Scherr, R. E. (2019). Drawings of energy: Evidence of the Next Generation Science Standards model of energy in diagrams. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 010129. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand, B., McDermott, M., & Prain, V. (Eds.). (2016). Using Multimodal Representations to Support Learning in the Science Classroom. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16450-2.

  • Hart, C. (2001). Examining relations of power in a process of curriculum change: The case of VCE physics. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 525–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C. (2002). Framing curriculum discursively: Theoretical perspectives on the experience of VCE physics. International Journal of Science Education, 24(10), 1055–1077. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubber, P., & Tytler, R. (2017). Enacting a representation construction approach to teaching and learning astronomy. In D. Treagust, R. Duit, & H. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Physics Education (pp. 139–161). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5.

  • Johnston, M., Wood, B. E., Cherrington, S., Boniface, S., & Mortlock, A. (2022). Representations of Disciplinary Knowledge in Assessment: Associations between High School and University Assessments in Science, Mathematics and the Humanities and Predictors of Success. Educational Assessment, 1–21.

  • Klein, U. (2001). Introduction. In U. Klein (Ed.), Tools and modes of representation in the laboratory sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Kragten, M., Admiraal, W., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2015). Students’ learning activities while studying biological process diagrams. International Journal of Science Education, 37(12), 1915–1937. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1057775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaDue, N. D., Libarkin, J. C., & Thomas, S. R. (2015). Visual representations on high school biology, chemistry, earth science, and physics assessments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(6), 818–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9566-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton University Press.

  • Liu, X., & Fulmer, G. (2008). Alignment between the science curriculum and assessment in selected NY state regents exams. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(4), 373–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9107-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machová, M. (2021). Phylogenetic trees and other evolutionary diagrams in biology textbooks and their importance in secondary science education. Scientia in Educatione, 12(1), 16–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2013). The impact of embedding multiple modes of representation within writing tasks on high school students’ chemistry understanding. Instructional Science, 41(1), 217–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9225-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2016). Modeling scientific communication with multimodal writing tasks: Impact on students at different grade levels. In B. Hand, M. McDermott, & V. Prain (Eds.), Using multimodal representations to support learning in the science classroom (pp. 183–211). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16450-2_10

  • McLure, F., Won, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2021). What students’ diagrams reveal about their sense-making of plate tectonics in lower secondary science. International Journal of Science Education, 43(16), 2684–2705. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1983922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLure, F., Won, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2022). Analysis of Students’ Diagrams Explaining Scientific Phenomena. Research in Science Education, 52, 1225–1241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10004-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B., Cromley, J., & Newcombe, N. S. (2016). Improving diagrammatic reasoning in middle school science using conventions of diagrams instruction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(4), 374–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N. (2008). Model-based reasoning in scientific practice. In R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 57–79). Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States. National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. OECD publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en

  • Parodi, G. (2012). University genres and multisemiotic features: Accessing specialized knowledge through disciplinarity. Fórum Linguıstico, 9(4), 259–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2012). Learning through constructing representations in science: A framework of representational construction affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751–2773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2022). Theorising Learning in Science Through Integrating Multimodal Representations. Research in Science Education, 52(3), 805–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10025-7

  • Prain, V., Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2009). Multiple representation in learning about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 787–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701824249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, K. S. (2020). Discourse strategies for science teaching and learning: Research and practice. Routledge.

  • Tang, K.-S., Won, M., & Treagust, D. (2019). Analytical framework for student-generated drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 41(16), 2296–2322. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1672906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tippett, C. D. (2016). What recent research on diagrams suggests about learning with rather than learning from visual representations in science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(5), 725–746. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1158435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., & Fischer, H. E. (Eds.). (2017). Multiple representations in physics education (Vol. 10). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5

  • Treagust, D. F., & Tsui, C.-Y. (2013). Multiple representations in biological education. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8

  • Tytler, R., Prain, V., Aranda, G., Ferguson, J., & Gorur, R. (2020). Drawing to reason and learn in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(2), 209–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Hubber, P. (2018). Representation Construction as a Core Science Disciplinary Literacy. In K.-S. Tang & K. Danielsson (Eds.), Global Developments in Literacy Research for Science Education (pp. 301–318). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69197-8

  • Tytler, R., Prain, V., Hubber, P., & Waldrip, B. (2013). Constructing representations to learn in science. Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Van Rooy, W. S., & Chan, E. (2017). Multimodal representations in senior biology assessments: A case study of NSW Australia. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(7), 1237–1256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogler, K. E., & Carnes, G. N. (2014). Comparing the Impact of a High School Exit Examination on Science Teachers’ Instructional Practices. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 8(2), 36–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by an Australian Research Council Linkage Projects grant (LP160100263) funded by the Australian Government. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Australian Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University, North Sydney Campus, Level 2, 7 Mount St, North Sydney, PO Box 968, North Sydney, NSW, 2059, Australia

    Len Unsworth

  2. Institute of Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne Campus, Level 1, 232 Victoria Parade, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia

    Michele Herrington

Authors
  1. Len Unsworth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michele Herrington
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Len Unsworth.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Unsworth, L., Herrington, M. Visualization Type and Frequency in Final Year High School Science Examinations. Res Sci Educ 53, 707–725 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10094-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10094-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation