A systematic review of trends and findings in research employing drawing assessment in science education
In this study, we reviewed 76 journal articles on employing drawing assessment as a research tool in science education. Findings from the systematic review suggest four justifications for using drawing as a type of research tool, including assessment via drawing as (a) an alternative method considering young participants’ verbal or writing abilities, and affective or economic reasons, (b) a unique method that can reveal aspects not easily measured by other methods, (c) a major method that reflects characteristics of science subjects, and (d) a formative assessment to diagnose students’ ideas to benefit their learning. Furthermore, five research trends of studies using drawing as assessment tools are identified, including: (a) students’ conceptions of scientists from the Draw-a-Scientist-Test (DAST) and evolving studies, (b) students’ understanding or mental models of science concepts, (c) participants’ conceptions of science learning or teaching, (d) students’ inquiry abilities and modelling skills via drawing, and (e) technology to support drawing. For each trend, we synthesised and commented on the current findings. A framework conceptualising phases and issues when designing research and instruments employing drawing assessments is proposed. The review provides insights into the design and future direction of research employing drawing assessments in science education.
Evaluating and comparing Singaporean and Taiwanese eighth graders’ conceptions of science assessment
Researchers have indicated that assessment practices and methods ought to be tailored to support learners’ construction of meaningful understanding of knowledge. To achieve this aim, understanding students’ conceptions of science assessment would be essential since it will enable us to construct more realistic, valid and fair assessments. Understanding how learners conceptualize assessment would be imperative to serve as an essential reference to properly evaluate their learning progress. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the Singaporean and Taiwanese middle school students’ conceptions of science assessment. Within each country, gender comparisons were also explored. A total of 333 Singaporean and 424 Taiwanese grade eight students were invited to complete a questionnaire named Conceptions of Science Assessment (COSA) to capture their views on science assessment. The results indicated that, first, the COSA questionnaire was valid and reliable for measuring the Singaporean and Taiwanese eighth graders’ conceptions of science assessment, including Surface, Summative, and Formative conceptions. Second, the findings showed that the summative purpose of assessment still dominates in the Taiwanese science classroom, while both formative and summative purposes of assessment are usually perceived in Singaporean science classrooms. In contrast, the Singaporean students had a greater tendency than their Taiwanese counterparts to perceive the surface purpose of assessment as merely a way of reproducing scientific knowledge, and the formative purpose of assessment as improving learning, problem solving and critical judgment. No gender differences were found among either the Singaporean or the Taiwanese students regarding their three science assessment conceptions. The findings suggest that science educators in both countries should provide learners with more opportunities to experience process-oriented science assessment activities and de-emphasize the usage of examination-oriented practices to achieve the sophistication of conceptions.
Relationship among high school students’ science academic hardiness, conceptions of learning science and science learning self-efficacy in Singapore
This study used three previously validated instruments, namely Science Academic Hardiness (SAH), Students’ Conceptions of Learning Science (COLS) and Science Learning Self-Efficacy (SLSE) on 431 Singaporean students. Using structural equation modeling, results showed that the SAH commitment dimension a positive predictor explaining both the reproductive (e.g. science learning as memorizing or testing) and constructivist (e.g. science learning as understanding or seeing in a new way) conceptions of science learning as well as all dimensions of students’ self-efficacy among high school students. It was also found that the SAH control dimension is a positive predictor for explaining the SLSE science communication dimension but is a negative predictor for explaining reproductive COLS. Finally, only students with constructivist COLS had significant associations with all SLSE dimensions. These findings suggest that students’ personal commitment to learning science is an important aspect to cultivate since it has the ability to predict conceptions of science learning and self-efficacy. Further, creating opportunities for students to be engaged in learning through constructivist ways—such as designing tasks to help students understand and see phenomena in new ways and occasions for students to apply their science knowledge to solve science problems—is likely to lead to positive self-efficacy in practical science work, science communication, and everyday applications of scientific knowledge. Additionally, students’ engagement in reproductive ways of learning science—such as memorization, testing, and calculating and practicing—could be reduced since these do not contribute to building students’ science learning self-efficacy.