Pixel International Conferences

In Malta, at Secondary Education Certificate (SEC) level – equivalent to the British GCSE – candidates’ practical skills in Physics are assessed through written laboratory reports. Despite criticism of this mode of assessment by several researchers over the past years, research studies into other forms of assessment for reliable feedback on practical skills are non-existent. This research study investigates whether practical skills are being assessed properly through the current assessment mode, and whether practical tests can be better assessment tools for such skills. This qualitative research approach adopted was ethnographic. It was carried out with two groups of Physics students during the scholastic year 2017-18: one group exposed to practical tests and written laboratory reports, and the other group presenting written laboratory reports only. A total of 36 students underwent a practical exam at the end of the scholastic year, using the think-aloud method and were video-recorded. Data collection included students’ written documents, verbal and non-verbal communication, to ensure triangulation of data.  This study evidently showed that assessment based solely on written lab reports does not give suitable feedback on students’ practical skills. Moreover, it was concluded that practical tests should accompany, and not replace, the assessment of written lab reports so as to give more reliable information about students’ practical skills. It was found that the feedback elicited through the written work of students with regards to practical skills is not unreliable but rather limited on its own. Proposals were derived from the data and the conclusions.

Keywords: practical work/skills, written lab reports, practical tests, feedback.

References:

[1] Abrahams, I., Reiss, M. J., & Sharpe, R. (2013) The assessment of practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 49:2, 209-251.
[2] Calero, H. (2006). Power of nonverbal communication, The. Los Angeles: Silver Lake Publishing.
[3] Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
[4] Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2017). The sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage.
[5] Holman, J. (2016). Practical work in science ... : why do we do it? Education in Science, (266), 9.
[6] Mestad, I., & Kolstø, S. (2014). Using the concept of zone of proximal development to explore the challenges of and opportunities in designing discourse activities based on practical work. Science Education, 98(6), 1054-1076.
[7] Roberts, R., & Gott, R. (2006). Assessment of performance in practical science and pupil attributes. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 13(1), 45-67.
[8] Sedumedi, T. (2017). Practical work activities as a method of assessing learning in chemistry teaching. Eurasia Journal Of Mathematics, Science And Technology Education, 13(6), 1765-1784.
[9] Skevington, J. H. (1986). Internal assessment of practical coursework in GCSE. Physics Education, 21(4), 204-211.