Abstract
There is ample evidence that failure lies ahead when curriculum renewal goals are not (or are inadequately) reflected in assessment approaches, procedures and instruments to be linked with the renewal. Changes in curriculum goals require concurrent changes in assessment and examination policies and practices. However, restructuring assessment is one of the most significant challenges facing science education curriculum reform. This chapter focuses on the importance of the alignment between science curriculum renewal efforts and assessment of learning by means of external exit examinations, and the traps involved in seeking this alignment. Three recently completed science curriculum renewal pilots in senior secondary education in the Netherlands (2007–2010) are used as exemplifying cases. These subject-specific pilots aimed at the development and piloting of new so-called examination programmes, outlining the goals to be attained and tested in the internal and external exit examinations for physics, chemistry and biology. The focus in all three renewals is on a context-based approach.
The three pilots have been supported by an extensive, independent evaluation study. It aimed at finding out to what extent the intended curriculum reforms have resulted in programmes that are, amongst other things, assessable by means of external pilot examinations. Data have been collected about the process of constructing external pilot examinations, the content of the external pilot examinations and the performances of the pilot students on these exams. The evaluation findings demonstrate the delicacy of finding a proper balance between the science education reform perspective and psychometric concerns about reliability and comparability. A too strong focus on psychometric issues tended to be the cause of some renewal ambitions and ideas being in danger of being overlooked.
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
Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (2003). Inside science education reform. A history of curricular and policy change. New York: Teachers College.
Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., & Lubben, F. (2003). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and Science-Technology-Society (STS) approaches in the teaching of secondary science. London: EPPI-Centre, Institute of Education.
Black, P. (1998). Testing: friend or foe? Theory and practice of assessment and testing. London: Routledge.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning. Putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Bruêns, J. (2010). Verslag pilotexamen biologie eerste tijdvak (intern werkdocument). Arnhem: Cito.
Bruggeman, A. (2009). Evaluatie pilotexamen biologie eerste tijdvak (intern werkdocument). Arnhem: Cito.
Bruggeman, A. (2010). Evaluatie pilotexamen biologie eerste tijdvak (intern werkdocument). Arnhem: Cito.
Bruning, L., Folmer, E., Ottevanger, W., & Kuiper, W. (2011). Curriculumevaluatie bètaonderwijs tweede fase. Examenpilot nieuwe natuurkunde havo/vwo 2007-2010. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).
Commissie Vernieuwing Scheikunde Havo en Vwo. (2003). Chemie tussen context en concept. Ontwerpen voor vernieuwing. SLO: Enschede.
Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 6(1), 32–42.
Cuban, L. (1992). Curriculum stability and change. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 216–247). New York: Macmillan.
Earl, L. M. (2003). Assessment as learning. Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College.
Goedhart, M. (2004). Contexten en concepten: Een nadere analyse. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam/Amstel Instituut.
Goodlad, J. I. (1979). Curriculum inquiry. The study of curriculum practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kuiper, W. (2009). Curriculumevaluatie en verantwoorde vernieuwing van bètaonderwijs. Orational address. Enschede/Utrecht: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development/Freudenthal Institute for Mathematics and Science Education.
Kuiper, W. A. J. M. (1993). Curriculumvernieuwing en lespraktijk [Curriculum reform and teaching practice]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, The Netherlands.
Kuiper, W., Boersma, K., & van den Akker, J. (2005). Towards a more curricular focus in international comparative studies on mathematics and science education. In K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de Jong, & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education (pp. 41–54). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kuiper, W., Folmer, E., Ottevanger, W., & Bruning, L. (2011a). Curriculumevaluatie bètaonderwijs tweede fase. Examenpilot experimentele biologieprogramma havo/vwo 2007–2010. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).
Kuiper, W., Folmer, E., Ottevanger, W., & Bruning, L. (2011b). Curriculumevaluatie bètaonderwijs tweede fase. Samenvattend eindrapport. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).
Kulm, G., & Malcolm, S. M. (Eds.). (1991). Science assessment in the service of reform. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Kulm, G., & Stuessy, C. (1991). Assessment in science and mathematics education reform. In G. Kulm & S. M. Malcolm (Eds.), Science assessment in the service of reform (pp. 71–88). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
McKenney, S., Nieveen, N., & van den Akker, J. (2006). Design research from a curriculum perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 67–90). London: Routledge.
Millar, R. (2010). Using research to improve practice in science education: Where should we begin and what should we aim to produce. In K. Kortland & K. Klaassen (Eds.), Designing theory-based teaching-learning sequences for science education. Proceedings of the symposium in honour of Piet Lijnse at the time of his retirement as professor of physics didactics at the University of Utrecht. Utrecht: Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education.
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s College, School of Education.
Ottevanger, W., Folmer, E., Bruning, L., & Kuiper, W. (2011). Curriculumevaluatie bètaonderwijs tweede fase. Examenpilot nieuwe scheikunde havo/vwo 2007-2010. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum. An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourses. New York: Peter Lang.
Strobart, G. (2005). Assessment and change. Assessment in Education, 12(3), 215–216.
Strobart, G. (2006). Valid assessment. Assessment in Education, 13(1), 1–3.
Thijs, A., & van den Akker, J. (2009). Curriculum in development. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).
van den Akker, J. (1998). The science curriculum: Between ideals and outcomes. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 421–447). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
van den Akker, J. (2003). Curriculum perspectives: An introduction. In J. van den Akker, W. Kuiper, & U. Hameyer (Eds.), Curriculum landscapes and trends (pp. 1–10). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
van Oers, B. (2001). Contextualisation for abstraction. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 1(3–4), 279–306.
van Oers, B. (2004). The recontextualization of inscriptions: An activity-theoretical approach to the transferability of abstractions. Paper for the invited symposium ‘Rethinking abstraction and decontextualization I relationship to transfer dilemmas’, AERA, San Diego.
Walker, D. F. (1990). Fundamentals of curriculum. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Walker, D. F. (2003). Fundamentals of curriculum. Passion and professionalism (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Watkins, D., Dahlin, B., & Ekholm, M. (2005). Awareness of the backwash effect of assessment: A phenomenographic study of the views of Hong Kong and Swedish lecturers. Instructional Science, 33(4), 283–309.
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 3–14.
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
Kuiper, W., Folmer, E., Ottevanger, W. (2013). Aligning Science Curriculum Renewal Efforts and Assessment Practices. 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_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6668-6_6
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)