Designing practical science assessments in England: students’ engagement and perceptions

ABSTRACT

Background

The paper discusses how the design of summative assessments of practical science can be enhanced through the use of robust theoretical models that capture the diversity of scientific methods. The developments in assessment policy in England and the role of practical science in teaching and learning of science are reviewed.

Purpose

The paper has two main purposes: (a) to explore how summative assessments of practical science can potentially reflect the breadth of scientific methods; and (b) to investigate how Year 10 students in England engage with and perceive summative assessments designed using Brandon’s Matrix, a framework clarifying the diversity of scientific methods.

Sample

The paper draws on data from Year 10 (14–15 years old) students with a sample of physics assessment tasks developed using Brandon’s Matrix.

Design and methods

The study focused on the development of a series of assessment questions based on Brandon’s Matrix, a framework by a philosopher of science, who classifies scientific methods in a taxonomy. Students’ performance on the assessments as well as their perceptions about practical science are investigated.

Conclusion

The results suggest that students held a very narrow understanding of what a scientific method is and often linked it to hypothesis testing, variable manipulation and measurement of several variables. Furthermore, they reported not to enjoy drawing conclusions from data.

KEYWORDS:

• Practical science
• summative assessment
• diversity of scientific methods; GCSE

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the joint funding from the Wellcome Trust, Gatsby Foundation and Royal Society (Grant Number 209659/Z/17/Z awarded to Sibel Erduran as the Principal Investigator) and thank the examiners, teachers and pupils for their contributions to Project Calibrate, the context for the research reported in the paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was jointly funded by the Wellcome Trust, Gatsby Foundation and Royal Society [209659/Z/17/Z].