Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.4.0725

Secondary School Science Teachers' Actual and Preferred Types of Assessment  

Noh, Taehee (Seoul National University)
Lee, Jaewon (Seoul National University)
Kang, Sukjin (Jeonju National University of Education)
Kang, Hunsik (Chuncheon National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.35, no.4, 2015 , pp. 725-733 More about this Journal
Abstract
In this study, we investigated secondary school science teachers' actual and preferred types of assessment with focus on the purpose and the method of assessment. Participants were 92 secondary school science teachers. We developed a questionnaire asking science teachers about the types of assessment they have actually used and the preferred types of assessment for hypothetical situations that have been generally reported as the prototypical examples of constructivist assessment. The characteristics of the science teachers such as teaching career, experience on in-service training about assessment, and perspective toward constructivist assessment were also examined. The analysis of the actually implemented assessments in their responses revealed that most science teachers tended to aim at traditional purposes such as summative assessment, and that multiple-choice was the most prevailing assessment method followed by experiment, report, and essay. For hypothetical assessment situations, science teachers exhibited their preferences for various types of constructivist assessment methods, whereas their purposes of the assessment still remained to be traditional. The science teachers who have had a relatively constructivist perspective toward assessment showed a statistically significant preference for using formative assessment than their counterparts in the hypothetical assessment situations.
Keywords
constructivist assessment; secondary school science teacher; actual type; preferred type;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Wang, J.-R., Kao, H.-L., & Lin, S.-W. (2010). Preservice teachers' initial conceptions about assessment of science learning: The coherence with their views of learning science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 522-529.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Wilson, L. (1992). Children as evaluators. Teaching Pre K-8, 23(1), 64-67.
3 Winterbottom, M., Brindley, S., Taber, K., Fisher, L., Finney, J., & Riga, R. (2008). Conceptions of assessment: Trainee teachers' practice and values. The Curriculum Journal, 19(3), 193-213.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Yang, I.-H., Na, J.-C., Lim, S.-M., Lim, J.-K., & Choi, H.-D. (2008). An analysis of elementary schools' science test items by Klopfer's taxonomy of educational objectives: Focusing on the first term of the 5th grade. Elementary Science Education, 27(3), 221-232.
5 Atjonen, P. (2014). Teachers' views of their assessment practice. The Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 238-259.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Baek, S.-G. (2000). Principles of performance assessment. Seoul: Kyoyookbook.
7 Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-73.   DOI
8 Brown, G. T. L. (2004). Teachers' conceptions of assessment: Implications for policy and professional development. Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice, 11(3), 301-318.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Carless, D. (2005). Prospects for the implementation of assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12(1), 39-54.   DOI
10 Chinn, C. A., & Melhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Cho, H.-H., & Choi, K. (2002). Science education: Constructivist perspectives. Journal of the Korean Association for in Science Education, 22(4), 820-836.
12 Cho, H.-M. (2001). An assessment tool from the view point of constructivism. The Journal of Education, 18, 183-197.
13 Choi, M. (2001). Teacher's understanding on constructivism and applying into their teaching: Case studies. Korean Association for Educational Information and Broadcasting, 7(1), 5-28.
14 Davis, D. S., & Neitzel, C. (2011). A self-regulated learning perspective on middle grades classroom assessment. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(3), 202-215.   DOI
15 Jeong, E., & Choi, W. (2014). A Survey on evaluation in science education at primary and secondary school in Korea. Journal of Science Education, 38(1), 168-181.   DOI
16 Gremler, D. D. (2004). The critical incident technique in service research. Journal of Service Research, 7(1), 65-89.   DOI
17 Hanna, G. S., & Dettmer, P. A. (2004). Assessment for effective teaching: Using context-adaptive planning. Boston, MA: Pearson A&B.
18 James, M., & Pedder, D. (2006). Beyond method: assessment and learning practices and values. The Curriculum Journal, 17(2), 109-138.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Jo, S.-S. (2003). The effect of corrective feedback types on academic achievement and learning attitude in formative assessment. (Master's thesis). Sogang University.
20 Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.
21 Kang, D., & Yum, S. (2014). Elementary school teachers' perception and implementation of formative assessment. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14(2), 27-43.
22 Kim, C.-J. (2012). Portfolio instruction and portfolio assessment. Seoul: Kyoyookbook.
23 Kim, D.-J. (2005). Analysis of teachers perception on performance assessment and their implementing practices. (Doctoral dissertation). Kyungnam University.
24 Kim, S. (2002). A study on the teacher's competence for classroom assessment. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 15(1), 67-85.
25 Kim, S.-W. (2007). A study on analysis and alternatives of performance assessment in high school science subject. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 20(4), 53-73.
26 Lee, J. (2003). Study of middle school teachers' perception and competence in the educational assessment of students. (Master's thesis). Ewha Womans University.
27 Kim, S.-W., & Hyun, M.-S. (2005). The study on the recognition of science teachers about the general matters of performance assessment and the appropriate performance assessment methods in middle school science curriculum. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 9(2), 213-232.
28 Kim, Y.-.H., Yoon, K.-S., & Kwon, D.-K. (2010). Analysis of summative evaluation objectives in middle school biology based on Bloom's revised taxonomy of educational objectives. Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 164-174.   DOI
29 Kwak, Y., Kim, C.-J., Lee, Y.-R., & Jeong, D.-S. (2006). Investigation on elementary and secondary students' interest in science. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 27(3), 260-268.
30 Ministry of Education & Human Resources Development [MEHRD] (1997). 7th national curriculum for elementary and middle schools. Notification No. 1997-15.
31 Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [MEST] (2011). 2009 revised national curriculum of science. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology.
32 Nam, J., Choi, J., Ko, M., Kim, J., Kang, S., Lim, J., & Kong, Y. (2005). The effects of formative assessment-based teaching and learning strategy on the students' science concept understanding, motivation and metacognitive ability in middle school. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 49(3), 311-320.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Nam, J.-H., Seung, E.-S., Um, J.-H., Kim, K.-H., & Choi, B.-S. (1999). The science teachers' perceptions and the status of formative assessment in science teaching. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 43(6), 720-727.
34 Park, J. (2013b). Self-rating of elementary teachers' student assessment literacy. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 30(3), 357-376.   DOI
35 Noh, T., Yoon, J., & Kang, S. (2009). The investigation of elementary school teachers' perceptions toward constructivist science assessment and their relationship with related variables. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 28(3), 352-360.
36 Oh, H.-S., & Lee, K.-Y. (2006). An exemplary analysis of paper and pencil test items of current secondary school science. The Journal of Curriculum & Evaluation, 9(1), 405-424.
37 Park, J. (2013a). Resurgence of formative assessment and the educational implication. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 26(4), 719-738.
38 Park, S.-M. (1998). A theoretical and practical linkage between constructivism and performance assessment. Social Studies Education, 31, 339-356.
39 Park, Y. (2009). A study on teacher's practicing of formative assessment in social studies classroom of elementary school. Theory and Research in Citizenship Education, 41(4), 51-79.
40 Popham, W. J. (2010). Unlearned lessons: Six stumbling blocks to our school's success. In C. T. Chauncey (Ed.), Strategic priorities for school improvement (pp. 9-16). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press.
41 Sato, M., Coffey, J., & Moorthy, S. (2005). Two teachers making assessment for learning their own. Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 177-191.   DOI   ScienceOn
42 Seo, J.-G. (2008). Research on the actual condition of the performance assessment in the high school science subject: Focused on experimental practice. (Master's thesis). Gyeongsang National University.
43 Son, J.-S. (2011). A study on science teachers' perception of experiment and practice performance assessment in secondary school. (Master's thesis). Korea National University of Education.
44 Seung, E., Nam, J., & Choi, B. (2000). The characteristics of formative assessments practiced in middle school science teaching form a constructivist perspective. Journal of the Korean Association for in Science Education, 20(3), 455-467.
45 Shapira-Lishchinsky, O. (2011). Teachers' critical incidents: Ethical dilemmas in teaching practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 648-656.   DOI   ScienceOn
46 Shavelson, R. J., Young, D. B., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Tomita, M. K., & Yin, Y. (2008). On the impact of curriculum-embedded formative assessment on learning; a collaboration between curriculum and assessment developers. Applied Measurement in Education, 21(4), 295-314.   DOI   ScienceOn
47 Thomas, L., Deaudelin, C., Desjardins, J., & Dezutter, O. (2011). Elementary teachers' formative evaluation practices in an era of curricular reform in Quebec, Canada. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 381-398.   DOI
48 Thorndike, R. M. (1997). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
49 Tierney, R. D. (2006). Changing practices: Influences on classroom assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 13(3), 239-264.   DOI
50 von Glasersfeld, E. (1993). Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In Tobin, K. (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education. Washington, DC: Association for the Advancement of Science Press.