Improving Quality of Science Teacher Training in European Cooperation
-
E-learning

The Evaluation Strategies of Integrated Science Teaching / Learning

• To perceive and define an evaluation of integrated science self / education as a systemic process.
• To perceive the goal, object and methodology of the evaluation of integrated science self / education;
• To analyze the different strategies of the evaluation of integrated science self / education;
• To manage to choose an optimal strategy for evaluation considering the evaluated object.

In educational literature we can find different definitions on evaluation. Evaluation is the pay-off of description – it is the synthesis of descriptive information and criterial information according to very strict and difficult rules (Scriven, 1975). Evaluation can be characterised as the process by which people make judgements about value and worth; evaluation is the process by which people make value judgements about things (Oliver, 2000).

It is obvious that evaluation is a delicate and sensitive task. On the other hand, it is not a simple and obvious process. Usually evaluation has its formal and informal sides.

• what is to be evaluated?
• when and why evaluate?
• how to evaluate?

There are two main evaluation strategies: formative and summative evaluation. The main characteristics of these two forms are presented in the table below.

• deciding on the purpose;
• what will be evaluated?
• preparing evaluation plans (who should evaluate”; drawing up the plans; planning resources; reporting the results; drawing up operational guidelines for an evaluation);
• collecting evidence;
• deciding on the evaluation methods/instruments (questionnaires and checklists; classroom observation; structured interviews; personal documents and diaries; content analysis etc.);
• using the information to make judgements.

Different models of evaluation can be used.

This model is presented by R.M Felder and R. Brent (2004). The main point in opinion of authors of the model is a triangulation in an evaluation process.

Also it is important to evaluate effectiveness of integrated science course. In this case, evaluator can use pre-course questionnaire and post-course questionnaire.

Guba and Lincoln (1981) and Nevo (1983) defined evaluation as the integration of description and judgment, in which the description part emphasizes the objective part of the assessment, while the judgment part dwells on its subjective aspect. Evaluation requires a systematic process, and the application of evaluation skills potentially enhances the objectivity of the descriptive part of the evaluation (Dori, Herscovitz, 1999).

Another important point is how to involve all students in evaluation. Black and Wiliam (1998) encourage teachers to use questioning and classroom discussion as an opportunity to increase their students' knowledge and improve understanding.

• oral and written quizzes;
• progress tests;
• achievement tests;
• diagnostic interview;
• informal feedback from all groups of students etc.

• Repeated Measurements of Student Learning and Teaching Effectiveness (the typical end-of-course student evaluation form is an indirect assessment tool that can help a teacher understand what worked to assist learning in a course and what did not);
• Direct Questioning of Students (the easiest way to find out whether students understand what is being said is to ask them directly);
• Minute Papers and Just-in-Time Teaching (at the end of a class, teachers can ask students to write for a minute or two on one of the following kinds of questions: “What is the most significant thing you’ve learned today?” “What points are still not clear?” or “What question is uppermost in your mind at the end of today’s class?” Responses can help teachers evaluate how well students are learning the material);
• Student Teams (another documented approach involves asking a team of students to work throughout the term on continuous course evaluation (Baugher, 1992; Greene, 2000; Wright et al., 1998);
• Students’ Course Notes (this technique allows teachers to see what students consider to be the main points presented and whether there is misinformation or confusion about various topics);
• Chain Notes (in small classes, it may be possible to pass around a piece of paper midway through a session and ask students to jot down the main point of what is being discussed at that moment);
• Student Study Groups (students can be encouraged to form small study groups and to send representatives to discuss any difficulties or questions with the teacher);
• Informal Conversations (teachers can seek feedback through informal conversations with students during office hours, before or after class, or through e-mail. They can ask students about what has been working well or what is problematic);
• Index Cards (several times during the term, a teacher can pass out index cards to students and ask them to respond to two questions, one on the front of the card, the other on the back. General questions can be posed, such as “What are your overall impressions of the course?” “What’s good about the course?” “Do you have any suggestions for changing the course?” or “Are there any problems?”);
• Outside Evaluators (a teacher can invite an educational improvement specialist from outside to conduct an oral evaluation with his or her students);
• Self-Evaluation (self-reports and self-reflections on a teacher’s teaching and promotion of student learning can be important sources of information for evaluating a teacher’s effectiveness (Hutchings, 1998) etc.

• give the opportunity for children to apply and develop their ideas about scientific concepts, that is, is the content relevant and interesting to them?
• enable children to use and develop science process skills, that is, is there room for the children to do the thinking or is it all done for them?
• encourage scientific attitudes, that is, give opportunity for children to exercise some choice?
• engage the interests of the children and relate to real life and their everyday experience?
• appeal equally to boys and girls and to those of all cultural and ethnic backgrounds?
• provide experience of learning through interaction with things around?
• involve the use of simple and safe equipment and materials which are familiar to the children?
• use readily available materials and equipment?
• involve children in working cooperatively and in combining their ideas?

1. Referring to the definitions of evaluation listed in the teaching / learning material and the most acceptable concepts give an individual definition of the evaluation of integrated science self / education.
2. Explain the following questions used in the evaluation process:
   
   

   	Object of evaluation	Time and reasons for evaluation	Ways of evaluation
   Interpretation

   
   
3. What are the objects of evaluation in the process of integrated science education? To evaluate these objects, choose the most appropriate strategies of evaluation.
4. What do you consider as the essence of an Integrated Science to your students?

Teacher X applies evaluation as a component of the educational process. Within the process of integrated science education, the teacher most frequently evaluates students’ achievements informally using the formative evaluation: promotes intensive students’ activities and verbally and in written form makes corrections to the process of learning. In order to choose an optimal content of learning, the teacher applies declarative evaluation i.e. when starting with a new topic, s/he interprets the already available learners’ knowledge and developed abilities.

1. What are the strategies of evaluation used by the above introduced teacher in the process of integrated science education?
2. What strategies of evaluation are the most suitable to agree with the principles of constructive teaching / learning?

For an evaluation of process of science teaching and learning there are different strategy and ways. The main questions are: what is to be evaluated? when and why evaluate? how to evaluate? It is clear that for science teaching success one of the most important resources is feedback from students. Teachers can evaluate a whole science course, analyse students’ learning needs, and investigate students’ experiences of teaching. There are multiple methods for collecting data on science teaching effectiveness. Also it is clear that a key to effective teaching evaluation is to collect data from multiple sources (triangulation). Evaluation of teaching may be summative or formative.

It is obvious, that many years ago, in many countries of the world, science courses were devised that attempted to cover the whole range of science in a balanced way. Such courses were in effect coordinated surveys of biology, chemistry and physics. Little was the real unity in the presentation of the course and in the examination of it. Teachers could not achieve any real integration in their teaching and teacher-training courses rarely prepared teachers for a unified approach to their teaching. General Science courses were also regarded as too superficial, as an inadequate base from which to develop higher level science courses and they were allocated too little time by schools authorities. It is possible to state that integrated science teaching is one of the logical steps in educational development.

Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (1996). Assessing teachers' practical knowledge. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 22, 275-286.

Black, P. (1998). Formative assessment: raising standards inside the classroom. School Science Review, 80, 291, p. 39-46.

Constable, H., & Long, A. (1991). Changing science teaching: Lessons from a long-term evaluation of a short in-service course. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 405-419.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.

Duffee, L., & Aikenhead, G. (1992). Curriculum change, student evaluation, and teacher practical knowledge. Science Education, 76, 493-506.

Yilmaz, H., Turkmen, H., Pedersen, J., & Huyuguzel Cavas, P. (2007). Evaluation of pre-service teachers’ images of science teaching in Turkey. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Vol. 8, Issue 1. Available via Internet: http://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v8_issue1/turkmen/index.htm#con

Jones, C. (1998). Evaluation using Ethnography: Context, content and collaboration. In Oliver, M. (Ed.) Innovation in the Evaluation of Learning Technology, London: University of North London Press, 87-100.

Lamanauskas, V. (2003). Natural Science Education in Contemporary School. Siauliai: Siauliai University Press, p. 514.

Leach, J., Scott, P. (2002). Designing and Evaluating Science Teaching Sequences: An Approach Drawing upon the Concept of Learning Demand and a Social Constructivist Perspective on Learning. Studies in Science Education, Vol. 38, Issue 1, p. 115 – 142.

Patton, M. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation, London: Sage.

Sorcinelli, M.D. (1999). The evaluation of teaching: The 40-year debate about student, colleague, and self-evaluations. In B.A. Pescosolido, and R. Aminzade (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century (pp. 195-205). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Baugher, K. (1992). LEARN: The student quality team manual. Nashville, TN: LEARN.

Bentley, D., Watts, D.M. (1992). Communicating in School Science: Groups, Tasks and Problem Solving 5-16. London: Falmer Press.

Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5 (1): 7-74.

Dori, Y.J., Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question-Posing Capability as an Alternative Evaluation Method: Analysis of an Environmental Case Study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 36, No. 4, p. 411-430.

Greene, E. (2000, June 23). Some colleges pay students to go to class—to evaluate teaching. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A18.

Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Felder, R.M., Brent, R. (2004). How to evaluate teaching. Chemical Engineering Education, 38(3), p. 200-202.

Fox, M. A., Hackerman, N. (Eds) (2003). Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington: The National Academies Press.

Harlen, W. (2000). The Teaching of Science in Primary Schools. London, David Fulton Publishers.

Hutchings, P. (Ed.). (1998). The course portfolio: How faculty can examine their teaching to advance practice and improve student learning. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.

Nevo, D. (1983). The conceptualization of educational evaluation: An analytical evaluation of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 53, 117–128.

Oliver, M. (2000). An introduction to the Evaluation of Learning Technology. Educational Technology & Society, 3(4), p. 20-30.

Scriven, M. (1975). Evaluation in Science Education. Ohio.

Wright, J.C., Millar, S.B., Kosciuk, S.A., Penberthy, D.L., Williams, P.H., and Wampold, B.E. (1998). A novel strategy for assessing the effects of curriculum reform on student competence. Journal of Chemical Education 75,986-992.