Abstract
The study described in this paper investigated the degree of implementation of school-based assessment schemes for practical science. An assessment scheme in Hong Kong was used as the context for the research. Five dimensions of implementation were identified and a conceptual framework was built by breaking down each dimension into attributes and these into content areas. The research method used in the study incorporated some modifications on most past designs in order to determine adequately the construct validity of data and to examine any method-specific biases. Three measuring instruments (namely, a student questionnaire, a teacher questionnaire and an observation schedule) were designed. The construct validity of student data was demonstrated through confirmatory factor analysis and multitrait-multimethod analysis. Comparative analyses of students' perceptions, teacher self-reports and independent observational data resulted in convergent findings for only three out of the ten attributes of implementation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ames, R. (1983). Teachers' attributions for their own teaching. In J. M. Levine & M. C. Wang (Eds.),Teacher and student perceptions: Implications for learning (pp. 105–124). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Baker, F. B. (1992). Equating tests under the graded response model.Applied Psychological Measurement, 16(1), 87–96.
Baker, F. B. (1994).EQUATE computer program. University of Wisconsin: Department of Educational Psychology.
Bowen, G., & Lock, R. (1990). Assessing practical skills at A-level.Education in Chemistry, 27(5), 137–138.
Buchan, A. S. & Jenkins, E. W. (1992). The internal assessment of practical skills in science in England and Wales, 1960–1991: Some issues in historical perspective.International Journal of Science Education, 14(4), 367–380.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.
Cheung, D. (1995).Measurement of the degree of implementation of school-based assessment schemes for practical science. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Western Australia.
Cheung, D., Hattie, J., Bucat, R., & Douglas, G. (in press). Identifying the dimensions of curriculum implementation: The nominal group technique.Curriculum Forum.
Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.
Fullan, M., & Pomfret, A. (1977). Research on curriculum and instruction implementation.Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 335–397.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987).Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Hong Kong Education Department. (1990). Evaluation of the teacher assessment scheme for advanced level chemistry practical.School Science Newsletter, 30, 38–43.
Hong Kong Examinations Authority. (1991).Handbook on the teacher assessment scheme for practical chemistry. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Examinations Authority.
Jenkins, E. W. (1992). School-based assessment of practical competence in science: Some issues from England experience.Research in Science Education, 22, 224–229.
Kempa, R. (1986).Assessment in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krakowski K., & Hattie J. A. (1994).MICFA: A Macintosh interactive program for confirmatory factor analysis. Perth: Graduate School of Education, University of Western Australia.
Leithwood, K. A., & Montgomery, D. J. (Eds.). (1987).Improving classroom practice using innovation profiles. Toronto: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size.Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391–410.
Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate?Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13–17.
Pang, K. C. (1992). The biology teacher assessment scheme (TAS).Curriculum Forum, 2, 81–90.
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores.Psychometrika Monography Supplement,4 (Part 2, Whole #17).
Scheirer, M. A., & Rezmovic, E. L. (1983). Measuring the degree of program implementation: A methodological review.Evaluation Review, 7(5), 599–633.
Snyder, J., Bolin, F., & Zumwalt, K. (1992). Curriculum implementation. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.),Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 402–435). New York: Macmillan.
Stein, M. K., & Wang, M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: The process of teacher change.Teaching & Teacher Education, 4(2), 171–187.
Thissen, D. (1991).MULTILOG user's guide: Multiple, categorical item analysis and test scoring using item response theory. Chicago: Scientific Software.
Yin, R. K. (1982). Studying the implementation of public programs. In W. Williams (Ed.),Studying implementation: Methodological and administrative issues (pp. 36–72). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cheung, D., Hattie, J., Bucat, R. et al. Measuring the degree of implementation of school-based assessment schemes for practical science. Research in Science Education 26, 375–389 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357450
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357450