Technology enhanced assessment in complex collaborative settings

Building upon discussions by the Assessment Working Group at EDUsummIT 2013, this article reviews recent developments in technology enabled assessments of collaborative problem solving in order to point out where computerised assessments are particularly useful (and where non-computerised assessments need to be retained or developed) while assuring that the purposes and designs are transparent and empowering for teachers and learners. Technology enabled assessments of higher order critical thinking in a collaborative social context can provide data about the actions, communications and products created by a learner in a designed task space. Principled assessment design is required in order for such a space to provide trustworthy evidence of learning, and the design must incorporate and take account of the engagement of the audiences for the assessment as well as vary with the purposes and contexts of the assessment. Technology enhanced assessment enables in-depth unobtrusive documentation or ‘quiet assessment’ of the many layers and dynamics of authentic performance and allows greater flexibility and dynamic interactions in and among the design features. Most important for assessment FOR learning, are interactive features that allow the learner to turn up or down the intensity, amount and sharpness of the information needed for self-absorption and adoption of the feedback. Most important in assessment OF learning, are features that compare the learner with external standards of performance. Most important in assessment AS learning, are features that allow multiple performances and a wide array of affordances for authentic action, communication and the production of artefacts

Secondary students' values and perceptions of science-related careers: responses to vignette-based scenarios

There has been concern about the attractiveness of science-based careers to many adolescent learners, and it has been suggested that school science may not always recognise or engage personal values that are important to young people in making life choices. The present study discusses interview comments made by upper secondary level students in England when 15 young people were asked to give their personal responses to brief vignettes describing scientific careers. Using an interview-about-scenarios approach, the students were asked about whether they would feel comfortable working in the scientific careers represented. The career areas were purposefully selected because they might be considered to potentially raise issues in relation to personal values or commitments that some students might hold. A range of student perceptions relating to the mooted careers were elicited (positive, negative and indifferent), but all of the participants raised issues that impacted on the acceptability or attractiveness of at least one of the mooted scientific careers, in terms of aspects of their own personal beliefs and values systems. It is recommended that teachers and career advisors should be aware of the range of value-related considerations that influence student views of science-related careers and should consider exploring aspects of science-based careers that link to values commonly shared by young people. This exploratory study also offers indications for directions for further research exploring how learners' value systems impact upon their perceptions of science and scientific work

Preservice Elementary Science Teachers' Argumentation Competence: Impact of a Training Programme

The recent literature has shown the importance of Preservice Elementary Science Teachers (PESTs) having a deep understanding of argumentation, as this factor may affect the nature of the class activities that are taught and what students learn. A lack of understanding of this factor may represent an obstacle in the development of science education programmes in line with the development of scientific competences. This paper presents the results of the design and implementation of a training programme of 6 sessions (12 hours of class participation plus 8 hours of personal homework) on argumentation. The programme was carried out by 57 Spanish PESTs from Malaga, Spain. The training programme incorporates the innovative use of certain strategies to improve competence in argumentation, such as teaching PESTs to identify the elements of arguments in order to design assessment rubrics or by including peer assessment during evaluation with and without rubrics. The results obtained on implementing the training programme were evaluated based on the development of PESTs’ argumentation competence using Toulmin’s argumentative model. Data collection methods involved two tasks carried out at the beginning and the end of the programme, i.e., pre-test and post-test, respectively. The conclusion of the study is that students made significant progress in their argumentation competence on completing the course. In addition, PESTs who followed the training programme achieved statistically better results at the end than those in the control group (n = 41), who followed a traditional teaching programme. A 6-month transfer task showed a slight improvement for the PESTs of the experimental group in relation to the control group in their ability to transfer argumentation to practice, especially to the extent to which they mentioned argumentation in their practice portfolios.This work is part of the “I+D Excelencia” project “Development and evaluation of scientific competences through context based and modelling teaching approaches” case studies (EDU2013-41952-P), funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Finance through its 2013 research call