Abstract
Assessment plays a crucial role in clarifying intended learning outcomes. This underpins its more widely acknowledged formative and summative purposes and its role in monitoring and assuring the quality of educational practices and systems. Assessment instruments reduce the ambiguity about what a stated objective really means by providing an operational definition. They therefore shape classroom practices and are the most effective means of communication of learning intentions. The role of assessment in forming practice needs to be more fully acknowledged and embraced. Significantly, higher priority should be given to developing assessment instruments that embody and convey the learning outcomes that we value. This applies across the full range of science learning outcomes, but is most acutely apparent for innovative outcomes such as those associated with practical enquiry and the nature of science. The general issues involved are illustrated by an example from a recent major curriculum development project, Twenty First Century Science in the UK. Similarly, science education research on learning needs to be underpinned by greater efforts to develop validated instruments that provide clearer definitions of intended outcomes, and enable greater coherence and comparability across studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bettelheim, B. (1987). A good enough parent: A book on child-rearing. New York: Knopf.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7–74.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box. Raising standards through classroom assessment. London: School of Education, King’s College London.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2007). Large-scale assessment systems: Design principles drawn from international comparisons. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 5(1), 1–53.
Bybee, R. (2006). Boosting science learning through the design of curriculum materials. Paper presented at the ACER Conference Boosting Science Learning—What will it take? http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2006/7. Accessed 7 July 2011.
DfEE/QCA. (Department for Education and Employment/Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). (1999). The National Curriculum for England. Science. London: QCA.
DfES/QCA. (Department for Education and Skills/Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). (2004). The National Curriculum for England. Science. London: QCA.
Donnelly, J., Buchan, A., Jenkins, E., Laws, P., & Welford, G. (1996). Investigations by order. Policy, curriculum and science teachers’ work under the Education Reform Act. Nafferton: Studies in Education Ltd.
Giere, R. (1991). Understanding scientific reasoning (3rd ed.). Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.
Hammersley, M. (2002). Educational research, policymaking and practice. London: Paul Chapman.
Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141–157.
Huffman, D., & Heller, P. (1995). What does the Force Concept Inventory actually measure? The Physics Teacher, 33, 138–143.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Mazur, E. (1992). Qualitative versus quantitative thinking: are we teaching the right thing? Optics and Photonics News, 3, 38. Republished in The Pantaneto Forum, 11 (July 2003). www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue11/mazur.htm. Accessed 7 July 2011.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Millar, R. (2000). Science for public understanding: Developing a new course for 16–18 year old students. Melbourne Studies in Education, 41(2), 201–214.
Millar, R. (2006). Twenty First Century Science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1499–1521.
Millar, R. (2009). Designing a science curriculum to enhance students’ scientific literacy. In R. W. Bybee & B. J. McCrae (Eds.), PISA Science 2006: Implications for science teachers and teaching (pp. 203–214). Arlington: NSTA.
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.) (1998). Beyond 2000. Science education for the future. London: Nuffield Foundation. www.york.ac.uk/media/educationalstudies/documents/staff-docs/Beyond%202000.pdf. Accessed 7 July 2011.
Millar, R., Leach, J., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (Eds.). (2006). Improving subject teaching. Lessons from research in science education. London: Routledge.
Mulhall, P., McKittrick, B., & Gunstone, R. (2001). A perspective on the resolution of confusions in the teaching of electricity. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 575–587.
NRC. (National Research Council). (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy.
OCR. (Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations). (2005). GCSE specification: Science A. Twenty First Century Science suite. J630. Cambridge: OCR.
Savinainen, A., & Viiri, J. (2008). The Force Concept Inventory as a measure of students’ conceptual coherence. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(4), 719–740.
Slavin, R. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
Wiliam, D. (2010). What counts as evidence of educational achievement? The role of constructs in the pursuit of equity in assessment. Review of Research in Education, 34, 254–284.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Millar, R. (2013). Improving Science Education: Why Assessment Matters. In: Corrigan, D., Gunstone, R., Jones, A. (eds) Valuing Assessment in Science Education: Pedagogy, Curriculum, Policy. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6668-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6668-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6667-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6668-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)