Influence of science teaching and assessment modalities on students' elementary science performance

Bu çalısmanın amacı, fen ögretim ve ölçme uygulamalarının ilkögretim düzeyindeki ögrencilerin fen basarısına etkisini incelemektir. Çalısmada, Okul Öncesi Uzun Dönem Arastırması-Anaokulu Sınıfı 1998- 99 verileri (ECLS-K) kullanılmıstır. İlkögretim dönemi çocukların verilerini içeren bu çalısmaya iliskin veri seti 2004 yılında yayımlanmıstır. Ögrenci ve ögretmen düzeyi degiskenlerinden cinsiyet, sınıf ve fen ögretimi ve ölçme tekniklerinin (üst düzey düsünme becerileri, fen etkinliklerine ayrılan zaman ve test tabanlı ölçme uygulamaları gibi) ögrenci fen bilgisi basarısına etkilerini arastırmak amacıyla çoklu regresyon modeli uygulanmıstır. Önerilen regresyon modeli, ögrencilerin fen bilgisi basarısındaki varyasyonun yaklasık %11’ini istatistiksel olarak önemli düzeyde açıklamıstır. Ayrıca, modelin açıklanmasında, tüm bagımsız degiskenlerin etkisi istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunmustur. Özellikle erkek ögrencilerin ve üçüncü sınıfların fen basarısı kız ögrencilerden ve ikinci sınıflardan önemli düzeyde yüksektir. Ayrıca, ögretmenler alternatif ölçme tekniklerini kullanmaya ve analiz, sentez ve degerlendirme gibi üst-düzey düsünme becerilerine odaklandıklarında, ögrenciler fen dersinden daha fazla yararlanmıstır.

Fen öğretimi ve ölçme yaklaşımlarının öğrencilerin İlköğretim fen başarısı üzerine etkisi

The aim of the study is to investigate the influence of science instruction and assessment practices on elementary level students’ science success utilizing the data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K). The specific data set of the study regarding elementary school age children’s variables was released in 2004. A multiple regression modeling technique was employed to explore the effects of students and teacher level variables, including gender, grade level, science teaching and assessment techniques (such as emphasizing higher-order thinking skills, the time allocated for science-related activities, and test-based assessment practices) on students’ science achievement. Regression analysis of the proposed model revealed that the model significantly explained about 11% of the variance on students’ science scale scores. Furthermore, all predictors significantly contributed and estimated students’ science performance in the model. Specifically, the boys and the third graders had significantly higher mean science scores than the girls and the second graders. Moreover, when teachers tend to implement alternative assessment methods and focus more on higher-order skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation in science, students benefited more in science.

PDF

___

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans Green.
Bol, L., & Strage, A. (1996). The contradiction between teachers' instructional goals and their assessment practices in high school biology courses. Science Education, 80, 145–163.
Bowerman, B. L., & O’Connell, R. T. (1990). Linear statistical models: An applied approach (2nd ed). Belmont, CA: Duxbury.
Chang C-Y., & Barufaldi J. P. (1999). The use of a problem-solving-based instructional model in initiating change in students' achievement and alternative frameworks. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 373-388.
Dimitrov, D. M. (1999). Gender differences in science achievement: Differential effect of ability, response format, and strands of learning outcomes. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 445–450
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, 34-52.
Echevarria, M. (2003). Hands on science reform, science achievement, and the elusive goal of ‘science for all’ in a diverse elementary school district. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9, 375-402.
Freedman, M. P. (1997). Relationship among laboratuary instruction, Attitude toward science, and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 343-357.
Gerstner, S. & Bogner, F. X. (2009). Cognitive achievement and motivation in hands-on and teacher-centred science classes: does an additional hands-on consolidation phase (concept mapping) optimise cognitive learning at work stations? International Journal of Science Education, Retreived July 28, 2009 from http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a912679478
Genc, E., (2005). Development and validation of an instrument to evaluate science teachers' assessment beliefs and practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA.
Greeno, J. G., Pearson, P. D., and Schoenfeld, A. H. (1996). Implications for NAEP of research on learning and cognition. Report of a study commissioned by the national academy of education. Panel on the NAEP Trial State Assessment, conducted by the Institute for Research on Learning. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Hilliard, A. G. (2000). Excellence in education versus high-stakes standardized testing. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 293–304. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Beaton, A. E., Gonzalez, E. J., Smith, T .A.,
Kelly, D L. (1997). Science achievement in the primary school years: IEA’s third international mathematics and science study (TIMMS). TIMSS International Study Center: Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA
Menard, S. (1995). Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Myers, R. (1990). Causal and modern regression with applications (2nd ed). Boston, MA: Duxbury.
National Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC]. (2001). NAEYC standards for early childhood professional preparation. Washington, DC: Author.
National Science Teacher Association. (1996). Survey finds science teachers optimistic National Science Education Standards will foster change. Washington, D. C. Retrieved June 10, 2009 from http://www.nsta.org/survey1.
National Research Council [NRC]. (1999). The assessment of science meets the science assessment. The summary of Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R.., Eds. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press.
Pringle, R., & Martin, S. (2005). The potential impacts of upcoming high-stakes testing on the teaching of science in elementary classrooms. Research in Science Education, 35, 347-361(15).
Shepard, L. (2002). The hazards of high-stakes testing. Issues in Science and Technology Online. Retrieved on June 11, 2009, from http://www.issues.org/issues/19.2/shepard.htm
Steinkamp, W. M. Maehr, M. L. (1983). Affect, ability and science achievement: A quantitative synthesis of correlational research. Review of Educational Research, 53, 369-396.
Stohr-Hunt, P. M. (1998). An analysis of frequency of hands-on experience and science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 101 – 109.
Webb, N.L. & Mason, S. A. (2003). Taking stock of the national science education standards: the research for assessment and accountability. In Hollweg, K. S. & Hill, D. [Eds.]. What is the Influence of the National Science Education Standards?: Reviewing the evidence, a workshop summary. National Academy Press.
Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED447128).
Winking, D. (1997). Ensuring equity with alternative assessment. Retrieved May 12, 2009 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/assment/as800.html.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher-order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 145-181.