Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8


– Biology Assessment 2.

Alex McLennan – 18803088

Infectious disease is a topic that students can find particular relevance and connection to.

Being able to relate and connect to content is identified as good pedagogical practice (Gore,

2007; Ludwig & Gore, 2003) as well as a way to empower disengaged students through

building confidence in relatable content they may have prior knowledge in (Hulleman &

Harackiewicz, 2009; Mills et al., 2014).

ICT is a widely used pedagogical practice across a variety of subjects (Dawson, 2008).

Utilising ICT in the classroom has a positive impact on student engagement and learning

success (Chandra & Briskey, 2012; Fatma Taskin, 2015). ICT is best used as a complement to

the classroom lessons as students familiar with ICT tend to do better than students from

disadvantaged backgrounds, whose access to ICT outside of the school environment may be

limited (Luu & Freeman, 2011).

The video lesson in part “A” is designed to be part of a flipped lesson. ICT based flipped

lessons can have a positive impact on student engagement and understanding as part of an

overall pedagogical approach (Bishop & Verleger, 2013; Heyborne & Perrett, 2016; Janotha,

2016). This video looks at two recent epidemics, Zika and Ebola (World Health organisation,

2016a, 2016c) to provide a connection for students to the real world whilst also touching on

the recent measles cases in Sydney to enhance connection to local content (Ludwig & Gore,

2003). This video can also be used as a basic exemplar for students to follow.

The intention of the task “B” was to create a project-based, summative assessment that

allowed students to self-regulate, collaborate, self-assess and peer-assess, whilst allowing

differentiation through choice of media for their project. Weighting, the content to be

assessed and its format were based on the new syllabus (NSW Education Standards

Authority, 2017a). A formal assessment should be a valid (justifiable assessment of ability)

and reliable (consistency of results) way of determining a student’s content knowledge (He,

Opposs, Glanville, & Lampreia-Carvalho, 2014).

Summative assessment is an assessment of learning and is the ultimate objective of an

educational activity (Marsh, Clarke, & Pittaway, 2014). In a high-stakes assessment

environment like the HSC, summative assessment is needed as part of the formal reporting

on student achievement and it can be used as a guide to the content taught and student

learning (McMahon, 2006). One of the criticisms of summative assessment is it too often

results in poor learning through teachers “teaching to the test” (Fehring & Nyland, 2012),

however this task aims to combine formal summative assessment with informal formative

assessment to result in a deeper learning and knowledge experience for the students in the

form of a project-based outcome (Harlen & James, 1997; Hattie, 2015)

Project-based learning is when students take an active role in their learning by working

collaboratively in answering a question with real world implications (Holmes & Hwang,

2016). The process of working on a project where the student is responsible for their own

researching and understanding leads to stronger student engagement with, and deeper

understanding of, the content (Gary, 2015). Students who already have a conceptual
understanding of the content often excel in these type of projects. To ensure that lower

ability students are not disadvantaged during this project, it is important to allow for peer

collaboration, social support and sharing of ideas (Gore, 2007; Li, Zhang, & He, 2015).

Project-based learning is traditionally carried out in groups (Hattie & Anderman, 2013).

Because some students may feel disadvantaged by having their high stakes assessment

influenced by other student’s efforts, this task was shifted to an individual assessment. To

facilitate effective learning, social support and peer collaboration, students assess their

peers work and provide constructive feedback. The teacher will act as a facilitator during

allocated class time, to encourage collaboration between peers. This assessment is an

individual project-based task, however, it fulfils the criteria of project based learning that

has been modified for an HSC assessment task (Hattie & Anderman, 2013).

Despite being a formal summative HSC assessment (NSW Education Standards Authority,

2017a), there are elements of formative assessment throughout. There is assessment as

learning through feedback from peers and self-assessment (NSW Education Standards

Authority, 2017c; Trauth-Nare & Buck, 2011). Formative assessment ensures that students

are familiar with the concepts that are being formally assessed and to not become too

overwhelmed by the scope of their project (Barrow, 2009). Assessment as learning is also

facilitated by providing guiding questions and the marking rubric, with the document of

instructions, for the assessment.

There are some areas of potential student difficulty that need to be accounted for in this

assessment task. One such difficulty is access to the internet and ICT, that may be
problematic for some students from lower SES backgrounds (Luu & Freeman, 2011). To

counteract this, class time is provided in the school’s computer labs, and students are made

aware that they will need to access the school-based ICT resources to complete their


Differentiation of assessment needs to positively impact the student’s ability to complete

the task, rather than lowering the task requirements to meet the student (L. Fenwick, 2012;

Lisl Fenwick & Cooper, 2012) which can be unfair in high-stakes summative assessments

(National Science Teachers Association, 2016; Tierney, 2014). Differentiation is provided by

the teacher who alters the amount of scaffolding they provide to their students. Further

differentiation is made by highlighting keywords throughout the document of instructions

and using familiar keywords of assessment (NSW Education Standards Authority, 2012). This

is to make explicit what the expectations of the assessment are. There is also a suggested

timeline for completion of each stage of the project to help less organised students stay on


Another form of differentiation in this assessment is allowing student choice, which aims to

motivate students and promote student self-regulation (Evans & Boucher, 2015; Waters,

Smeaton, & Burns, 2004). The choice of medium allows differentiation through students

discerning where their skills and strengths lay within ICT, as part of the curriculum general

capabilities (ACARA, 2016; AITSL, 2016), whilst the choice of pathogens allows students to

focus on content that they personally connect with (Gore, 2007).

This assessment also has a focus on literacy so choosing their project medium is important

for Indigenous and LOTE students (Shipp, 2012) who may have a deficit in the

communication skills being assessed (NSW Education Standards Authority, 2017b). These

groups tend to have poor outcomes in standardized testing that assess literacy skills

(Castejón & Zancajo, 2015; Ford, 2013) so supporting these students to succeed needs to be

the focus of scaffolding and differentiation measures (Mills et al., 2014). By combing the

choice of project, connection to the content and appropriate differentiation it is hoped that

Indigenous and LOTE students can produce at their best level, and not be disadvantaged by

their background (Aldous, Barnes, & Clark, 2008)


ACARA. (2016). National Assessment Program. Retrieved from
AITSL. (2016). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from
Aldous, C., Barnes, A., & Clark, J. (2008). Engaging excellent Aboriginal students in science:
An innovation in culturally - inclusive schooling. Teaching Science, 54(4), 35-39.
Barrow, L. (2009). Assessment in Science: Practical Experiences and Education Research
(Vol. 109, pp. 129). Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. Paper
presented at the ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA.
Castejón, A., & Zancajo, A. (2015). Educational differentiation policies and the performance
of disadvantaged students across OECD countries. 14(3-4), 222-239.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012, May 18, 2012). Lesson 1: Introduction to
Epidemiology. Retrieved from
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Ebola (Ebola Virus Disease). Retrieved
Chandra, V., & Briskey, J. (2012). ICT driven pedagogies and its impact on learning outcomes
in high school mathematics. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 7(1),
73-83. doi:10.5172/ijpl.2012.7.1.73
Dawson, V. (2008). Use of Information Communication Technology by Early Career Science
Teachers in Western Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 30(2), 203-
219. doi:10.1080/09500690601175551
Evans, M., & Boucher, A. R. (2015). Optimizing the Power of Choice: Supporting Student
Autonomy to Foster Motivation and Engagement in Learning. Mind, Brain, and
Education, 9(2), 87-91. doi:10.1111/mbe.12073
Fatma Taskin, E. (2015). Using ICT-Supported Narratives in Teaching Science and their
Effects on Middle School Students. TOJET : The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, 14(4), n/a.
Fehring, H., & Nyland, B. (2012). Curriculum directions in Australia: Has the new focus on
literacy (English) and assessment narrowed the education agenda? Literacy Learning:
The Middle Years, 20(2), 7-16.
Fenwick, L. (2012). Limiting Opportunities to Learn in Upper-Secondary Schooling:
Differentiation and Performance Assessment in the Context of Standards-Based
Curriculum Reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(5), 629-651. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
Fenwick, L., & Cooper, M. (2012). Prevailing pedagogies for classes in low SES contexts and
the implications for standards-based reform in Australia. A Publication of the
Australian Association for Research in Education, 39(3), 349-361.
Ford, M. (2013). Achievement gaps in Australia: what NAPLAN reveals about education
inequality in Australia. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 80-102.
Gary, K. (2015). Project-Based Learning. Computer, 48(9), 98-100.
Gore, J. (2007). Improving Pedagogy. In J. Butcher & L. McDonald (Eds.), Making a
difference: Challenges for teachers, teaching, and teacher education (pp. 15-33).
Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and learning: differences and relationships
between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles,
Policy & Practice, 4(3), 365-379.
Hattie, J. (2015). Results that matter. Australian Educator(85), 18-19.
Hattie, J., & Anderman, E. M. (2013). International guide to student achievement: Routledge.
He, Q., Opposs, D., Glanville, M., & Lampreia-Carvalho, F. (2014). Assessing pupils at the age
of 16 in England – approaches for effective examinations. Curriculum Journal, 1-21.
Heyborne, W., & Perrett, J. (2016). To Flip or Not to Flip? Analysis of a Flipped Classroom
Pedagogy in a General Biology Course. Journal of College Science Teaching, 45(4), 31-
Holmes, V.-L., & Hwang, Y. (2016). Exploring the effects of project-based learning in
secondary mathematics education. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(5), 449-
463. doi:10.1080/00220671.2014.979911
Hulleman, C., & Harackiewicz, J. (2009). Promoting Interest and Performance in High School
Science Classes. Science, 326(5958), 1410-1412. doi:10.1126/science.1177067
Janotha, B. (2016). Improving Student Achievement with Flipped Classroom Pedagogy. Nurs.
Res., 65(2), E100-E101.
Li, D., Zhang, C., & He, Y. (2015). Project-based learning in teaching translation: students’
perceptions. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 1-19.
Ludwig, J., & Gore, J. (2003). Quality Teaching in NSW Public Schools A classroom practice
guide Retrieved from
Luu, K., & Freeman, J. (2011). An analysis of the relationship between information and
communication technology (ICT) and scientific literacy in Canada and Australia.
Comput. Educ., 56(4), 1072-1082. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.008
Marsh, C. J., Clarke, M., & Pittaway, S. (2014). Marsh's becoming a teacher (Sixth edition.
ed.): Frenchs Forest, N.S.W. : Pearson Australia, 2014.
McMahon, M. (2006). Assessment in science: Practical experiences and education research:
NSTA Press.
Mills, M., Monk, S., Keddie, A., Renshaw, P., Christie, P., Geelan, D., & Gowlett, C. (2014).
Differentiated learning: from policy to classroom. Oxford Review of Education, 40(3),
331-348. doi:10.1080/03054985.2014.911725
National Science Teachers Association. (2016). Considering Differences in Differentiation.
NSTA Reports, 27(8), 6-7.
NSW Education Standards Authority. (2012). A Glossary of Key Words. Retrieved from
NSW Education Standards Authority. (2017a). Assessment and Reporting in Biology Stage 6.
Retrieved from
NSW Education Standards Authority. (2017b). NSW Syllabus for the Australian Curriculum -
Biology Stage 6 Syllabus. Retrieved from
NSW Education Standards Authority. (2017c). Principles of Assessment for Stage 6.
Retrieved from
Shipp, C. (2012). Why Indigenous Perspectives in School? A Consideration of the Current
Australian Education Landscape and the Ambiguities to be Addressed in Literacy
Teaching. Engl. Aust., 47(3), 20-24.
Tierney, R. D. (2014). Fairness as a multifaceted quality in classroom assessment. Studies in
Educational Evaluation, 43, 55-69.
Trauth-Nare, A., & Buck, G. (2011). Assessment FOR Learning. The Science Teacher, 78(1),
Waters, F., Smeaton, P., & Burns, T. (2004). ACTION RESEARCH IN THE SECONDARY SCIENCE
American Secondary Education, 32(3), 89-104.
World Health organisation. (2015). Origins of the 2014 Ebola Epidemic. Retrieved from
World Health organisation. (2016a). Ebola Virus Disease Fact Sheet. Retrieved from
World Health organisation. (2016b). ZIka Virus [Press release]. Retrieved from
World Health organisation. (2016c). Zika Virus and Complications: 2016 Public Health
Emergency of International Concern. Retrieved from