2011 SCORE Conference report: ‘Assessment of science at 14-19: is it fit for purpose?’

The SCORE annual conference 2011 took place on 11 February with over 150 people attending; SCORE has now released the conference report (available to download below) which highlights some of the issues and questions that came out of the day.

The conference was opened by Professor Jonathan Osborne, Stanford University, California who put forward his view of the four fundamental issues facing assessment in science education:

Osborne also stated how the assessment system needs to also measure pupils’ analysis and synthesis skills etc. rather than just their ability to recall information.

He also mentioned the concept of three types of knowledge being needed to understand and work in science – content knowledge; procedural knowledge (i.e. concepts of evidence); and epistemic knowledge (i.e. ideas about science such as peer review and the nature of a theory in science). Assessment needs to consider all of these areas rather than just focusing on hypotheses and critique.

A panel debate featuring Dr Nick Fletcher, Dr Michael Porter, Julia Hatto and Cliff Billings followed, the debate focused on whether the end users of STEM education (i.e. recruiting employers / university admissions tutors) thought that the current examination and assessment system was serving their purposes adequately. There were some varied opinions, but common denominators tended to include the feeling that exams were too prescribed, leading to them ‘turning off’ students, another suggested that there has been too much focus on content and knowledge at the expense of the application of knowledge and the debate also threw up the question of whether the education system was diverse enough to really get the best out of students.

Further talks included one from Professor Robert Coe which looked at the grading system for examinations, raising the question of whether STEM subjects, which are perceived as being harder, should be worth more than grades in other subjects. The session from Ros Roberts focused on practical work, and its reliability / validity in the scope of assessment. She suggested some new methods to assess practical work that could focus more on scientific observation, as well as ways to reduce the difficulties encountered when attempting to assess open-ended investigations.

The session delivered by Tim Oates looked at the apparent rise and fall of standards in science assessment, concluding that despite the many changing factors that should have improved the system, the performance has actually remained static during a time of huge investment in education. Oates went on to look at whether lessons could be learnt from other countries, and whether the creation of one, single awarding organisation could make a positive difference. The penultimate session was delivered by Dr Janet Brown and provided an insight into the Scottish education system, where there is indeed one, single awarding organisation – the Scottish Qualifications Authority – which is encouraging teachers to come together to share and understand standards, and by involving teachers in the complete process the SQA hopes that standards will, in time, be raised.

The conference was closed by SCORE Manager, Dr Rosalind Mist, who gave a brief excursion into SCORE’s current activities in qualifications and assessment, stating its vision as ‘an appropriate range of qualifications and assessment tools which should have a positive impact on the students’ learning'. Mist went on to give a summary of recent research commissioned by SCORE around the topic of assessment, which has enabled SCORE to be in a position to engage with policy makers and the awarding organisations.

You can download the full conference report below.

For more information on SCORE, visit the website.