The  Effect of performance based evaulation on preservice biology teachers’ achievement and laboratory report writing skills

Perihan  Güneş; Hikmet  Katırcıoğlu; Mirac  Yılmaz

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Perihan Güneş Aksaray University, Faculty of Education, Aksaray-TURKEY
Hikmet Katırcıoğlu Gazi University, Faculty of Education, Ankara-TURKEY
Mirac Yılmaz Hacettepe University, Faculty of Education, Ankara-TURKEY

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

Analytic Rubric, Holistic Rubric, DNA Analysis, Gene Technology, Preservice Teacher, Report Writing Skill

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of performance based evulation on preservice biology teachers’ cognitive achievements and laboratory report writing skills about DNA isolation. In the study, nonequivalent control-group design were used to determine the effect of performance based evaluation on pre-service biology teachers’ achievement and laboratory report skills about DNA isolation. The sample of the study was 70 pre-service teachers. A rubric and DNA isolation achievement test were developed for the data collection. Data was collected by pre-and post-administration of achievement test and administration of rubric. Before the beginning of the study, a pre-test was applied in order to determine the cognitive field levels of students on DNA isolation. Then, a DNA isolation test was applied to the experiment and control groups. While the experiment group was given a rubric to be used during writing their laboratory reports, the control group was not. At the end of the study, a post-test was applied in order to determine students’ cognitive field levels. To detect the differences between the experimental and the control groups, the independent samples t-test was used. At the end of the study, it was determined that preservice teachers who use rubrics display a higher skill in writing laboratory reports and have a higher cognitive field level compared to those who do not.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Andrade, H. G. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership, 57 (5), 13-18.

Andrade, H. G. (2001). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in Education [On-line], 4 (4). Accessed October 12. 2010 http://cie.asu.edu/volume4/number4/.

Andrade, H.G. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53 (1), 27-31.

Andrade, H.G., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessmentin learning to write. The Journal of Educational Research, 97 (1), 21-30.

Andrade, H. G., & Du, Y. (2005). Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation 10 (3), 1-11.

Andrade, H. G., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students' writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27 (2), 3–13.

Andrade, H. G., Wang, X., Du, Y., & Akawi, R. L. (2009). Rubric-referenced self assessment and self efficacy for writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 102 (4), 287-301.

Aschbacher, P. R. (1991). Performance assessment: State activity, interest and concerns. Applied Measurement in Education, 4 (4), 275-288.

Bahar, M., Nartgün, Z., Durmuş, S., & Bıçak, B. (2006). Geleneksel alternatif ölçme ve değerlendirme öğretmen el kitabı, Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.

Baron, J. B. (1991). Strategies for development of effective performance exercises. Applied Measurement in Education, 4 (4), 305-318.

Berberoğlu, G., (2006). Sınıf içi ölçme ve değerlendirme teknikleri. İstanbul: Morpha.

Cohen, E., Lotan, R., Scarloss, B., Schultz, S. & Abram, P. (2002). Can group learn? Teacher College Record, 104, 1045-1068.

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W., (2007). Educational research an introduction, USA:Pearson İnternational Edition.

Goodrich , H. G. (1997). Understanding rubrics. Educational Leadership, 54 (4). 14-17.

Gunes, P. (2011). Dereceli puanlama anahtarının ilköğretim öğrencilerinin araştırma becerisi ve bilişsel alan düzeyine etkisi. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.

Hafner, J. C., & Hafner, P. M. (2003). Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: An Emprical Study of Student Peer-Group Rating. International of Science Education, 25 (12), 1509-15298.

Halonen, J. S., Bosack, T., Clay, S., McCarthy, M., Dunn, D. S., Hill IV, G., W., McEntarffer, R., Mehrotra, C., Nesmith, R., Weaver, K. A., & Whitlock, K. (2003). A rubric for learning, teaching, and assessing scientific ınquiry in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30 (3), 196-208.

Harms, U. & Bayrhuber, H. (1999). Biotechnologie im Unterricht, Biotechnologie und Gentechnik. In M. Schallies, und K.D. Wachlin eds. Biotechnologie und Gentechnik, Springer Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, Newyork, 87-98.

Harms, U. (2002). Biotechnology Education in schools. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 5(3). http://www.ejbiotechnology.info/content/vol5/issue3/ teaching/01/ (Accessed August 8. 2004).

Karasar, N. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştirma yöntemleri (16th Ed.), Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

Kendall M. G., Babington-Smith B. (1993). The Problem of m Rankings. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 10 (3), 275- 287.

Kutlu, Ö. (2004). Tek Soru İle Öğrenci Performansının Belirlemesi. Accessed November 13. 2010. http://www.erg.sabanciuniv.edu/iok2004/bildiriler.

Kutlu, Ö., Doğan, C. D., & Karakaya, İ. (2008). Öğrenci Başarısının Belirlenmesi: Performansa ve Portfolyaya Dayalı Durum Belirleme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Luft, J. A. (1997). Design your own rubric. Science Scope, 20 (5), 25-27.

Luft, J. A. (1999). Rubrics: Design and use in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10 (2), 107-121.

Madaus, G. F., & O‘Dwyer, L. M. (1999). A short history of performance assessments. Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (9), 688-696.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McCollister, S. (2002). Developing criteria rubrics in the art classroom. Art Education, 55 (4), 46-52.

Moskal, B. M. (2000). Scoring rubrics: What, when and how? Practical, Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 7(3). Retrieved October 24, 2013 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=3.

Phillip, C. (2002). Clear expectations: Rubrics and scoring guides. Knowledge Quest, 31(2), 26-27.

Popham, J. W. (2007). Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know (5th Ed.). USA: Pearson Education.

Ouinlan, A. (2006). Assessment made easy: Scoring rubrics for teachers from K-college. Lanham, MD: Rowman and littlefield education.

Reddy, M. (2007). Effect of rubrics on enhancement of student learning. Educate 7 (1), 3-17.

Rutherford, S. (2007). Using a Laboratory Conclusion Rubric. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 43 (4), 9-14, DOI: 10.3200/SATS.43.4.9-14.

Saddler, B. & Andrade, H. G. (2004). The writing rubric. Educational Leadership, 62(2), 48- 52.

Schallies, M. & Wellensiek, A. (1995). Biotechnologie/Gentechnik Implikationen für das Bildungswesen. Arbeitsbericht, Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden- Württemberg, Stuttgart.

Sefer, D. G. (2006). Dereceli puanlama anahtarının (rubrik) problem çözme becerisinin değerlendirilmesinde kullanılması. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.

Stiggins, R. J. (1987). Design and development of performance assessments. Educational measurement: Issues and Practice, 6 (1), 33-42.

Whittaker, R. C., Spencer, S.J., & Duhaney, D. (2001). Creating instructional rubrics for inclusive classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34 (2), 8-13.

Wiggins, G. (1991). Standart, not standardization: Evoking quality student work. Educational Leadership, 48 (5), 18-25.

WNCP, (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Canadian. Accessed August 22. 2010 http://www.wncp.ca/media/40539/rethink.pdf.

Zoller, U. (2000). Teaching college science towards the next millennium: Are we getting it right? Journal of College Science Teaching, 29, 409-414