当前位置: X-MOL 学术International Multilingual Research Journal › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Investigating the diversity of scientific methods in high-stakes chemistry examinations in England.
International Multilingual Research Journal ( IF 1.2 ) Pub Date : 2019-10-06 , DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1666216
Alison Cullinane 1 , Sibel Erduran 1, 2 , Stephen John Wooding 3
Affiliation  

The traditional description of "the scientific method" as a stepwise, linear process of hypothesis testing through experimentation is a myth. Although the teaching and learning of the scientific method have been a curriculum and assessment goal, the notion of the 'scientific method' itself has been identified as being problematic. Many researchers have recognised there is no single scientific method. However, there does not seem to be any useful guidelines for how best to deal with the nature of scientific methods in school science, including in high-stakes summative assessment. The article presents the use of a framework to illustrate the diversity of scientific methods that goes beyond the traditional limitations of a scientific method, to provide a more comprehensive and inclusive account, including non-manipulative parameter measurements. The framework not only clarifies the definition of scientific methods but also is adapted as an analytical framework to trace how scientific methods are framed in high-stakes chemistry examination papers from three examination boards in England. Such analyses can potentially point to what is emphasised in chemistry lessons, given how instrumental high-stakes testing is for driving teaching and learning. Results from an empirical investigation of examination questions are presented, highlighting an imbalance in the representation of methods in chemistry tests.

中文翻译:

在英格兰进行高风险化学考试中研究科学方法的多样性。

传统上将“科学方法”描述为通过实验进行的假设检验的逐步线性过程是一个神话。尽管科学方法的教与学已成为课程和评估的目标,但“科学方法”本身的概念已被认为存在问题。许多研究人员已经认识到没有单一的科学方法。但是,对于如何最好地处理学校科学中的科学方法的本质,包括高风险的总结性评估,似乎没有任何有用的指南。本文介绍了使用框架来说明超越传统科学方法局限性的科学方法的多样性,以提供更全面,更具包容性的说明,包括非操纵性参数测量。该框架不仅阐明了科学方法的定义,而且还被用作分析框架,以追踪来自英国三个考试委员会的高风险化学试卷中科学方法的框架。鉴于仪器高风险测试如何促进教学,这种分析可能会指出化学课程中强调的内容。提出了对考试问题进行实证研究的结果,突显了化学测试中方法表示的不平衡。该框架不仅阐明了科学方法的定义,而且还被用作分析框架,以追踪来自英国三个考试委员会的高风险化学试卷中科学方法的框架。鉴于仪器高风险测试如何促进教学,这种分析可能会指出化学课所强调的内容。提出了对考试题进行实证研究的结果,突显了化学测试中方法表示的不平衡。该框架不仅阐明了科学方法的定义,而且还被用作分析框架,以追踪来自英国三个考试委员会的高风险化学试卷中科学方法的框架。鉴于仪器高风险测试如何促进教学,这种分析可能会指出化学课所强调的内容。提出了对考试问题进行实证研究的结果,突显了化学测试中方法表示的不平衡。
更新日期:2019-10-06
down
wechat
bug