NCB Science advice paper comment Pt 4

IV. [pp9-10] "To improve the quality of science learning there is a need to introduce more diagnostic and formative assessment practices. These assessment tools help teachers to understand what students know and do not know and hence plan relevant learning experiences that will be beneficial."

A. The introduction of new "diagnostic assessment tools" will not make the plight of a teacher easier of more effective in any way. Rather, it will do the reverse. A science test can be easily designed to determine if a student "knows or does not know" any given concept, and tests can also be designed to determine if a student understands that same concept and its application. Furthermore, it is even easier to provide an opportunity for students to report on “all they know of a particular subject” which provides for a more individual and comprehensive assessment if required. Especially if one takes into account the common use by secondary science teachers of summative experiments, assessment in schools is done with efficiency and effectiveness at present. In my experience, differentiating between "formative assessment" and "watching and listening to the students as they work" only results in more paper work for the teacher and less time for them to interact with the students in a one-to-one fashion. "Detailed diagnostic information" never (in my experience) means "listen to the student’s explanation of a concept, and talk to them about how they are right and wrong in their understanding. Rather, it means paperwork and more paperwork.

B. The best way of enabling teachers to identify students’ needs and achievements is to provide greater opportunity for one-to-one interaction. This will not be achieved through the imposition of greater assessment and reporting requirements. Rather, it will be achieved through smaller science classes, greater time allocation for science lessons, or a combination of both of these.