Investigation of primary students’ opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course with respect to the different variables

Many countries improve or renovate their instructional curriculum based on new educational approaches and developments in science and technology. In the last decade workings of renewal and updating the instructional curriculum have been conducted in Turkey. First key stage 1 instructional curriculum was changed in 2005 and key stage 2 instructional curriculums was upgraded and put into practice gradually between 2006 and 2008. New instructional curriculums were adapted to the constructivist learning approach. Hence, current views of learning and instruction in schools that emphasis student-centered, constructive teaching and learning require assessment systems to be changed to "go with" the content and style of teaching-learning experienced by students (Marzano, Pickering and McTighe, 2003; Özmen, 2004). One of most important reason of this change in measurement and assessment practices is due to educational reform in the world and Turkey is emphasizing the teaching and assessment of higher-level cognitive skills (Parshall et al, 2000; Çepni, 2007; Kutlu et al, 2008).

Measurement and assessment is one of the indispensable elements in instructional curriculum and educational process. Measurement and assessment can be employed for many educational purposes such as determining student attainment, evaluation of instructional curriculum, level of efficiency of instructional methods, deficiency and difficulty of learning (Baykul 2000; İşman, 2005; Çepni et al., 2005). Yıldırım (2006) says that the purpose of measurement-assessment is to increase the instructional quality, to convert the knowledge learnt in classroom, into the practice. It is needed to define the developments on the students to improve along with the instructional curriculum and to organize the suitable experiences (Coffey et al., 2005).

For this purpose various measurement and assessment techniques are used. Those techniques are generally based on the understanding of instructional strategy and methods used in in acquisition of educational standards. After cognitive and constructivist methods and techniques’ impact upon the learning was proved by the experimental studies, the process of teaching-learning has been dealt with all its dimensions (Çoklar et al., 2009). The Constructivist approach, emphasizing that every individual relates new knowledge to former knowledge and constructs the new knowledge uniquely so as far as possible teaching methods and techniques must be diversified, stresses that students must be given the multiple evaluation opportunities in which they perform their knowledge, skills and attitudes (MNE, 2005). It seems to be impossible to carry out this situation through the traditional assessment understanding. Therefore performance assessment approach which is handy to develop high level cognitive skills such as solving problem, critical thinking, analytic thinking, empathizing, deciding and creativeness, has been adopted (Çepni, 2007; Metin, 2008, Metin, 2010, Metin and Demiryürek, 2009, Kutlu et al., 2008).

It is important in performance assessment to define what skills the students have, what performance and development they execute while they are using those skills (Airasian, 2001). Hence the tasks requiring high level thinking skills are given to the students not basic, simple and plain tasks (Bransford; 1979; Logan, 1996; Linn and Gronlund; 2000; Kutlu et al., 2008). The basic purpose in that is to develop solving problem, critical thinking, creativeness skills (Kutlu et al., 2008). In addition the performance assessment provides the students to find their suggestions by exposing them to real problems (Baron, 1991; Çepni et al., 2005; Kim, 2005) rather than reminding knowledge in their memory. In this way contribution is made to their skills of problem solving. When they encounter a real problem, group working and cooperative learning can be provided.

In literature, it were expressed that performance assessment can be used to assess from multiple perspectives and assess transfer of skills and integration of content (Çepni, 2007; Kutlu et al., 2008), engages student in active learning (Airasian, 2001; Logan, 1996; Linn and Gronlund, 2000), can promote student creativity and can be summative or formative (Kubiszyn and Borich, 1993; Khattri, Reve and Kane, 1998; Airasian 2001; Metin, 2008), can promote student motivation (Metin and Birişçi, 2011), may allow probes to gain clearer picture of student understanding (Linn and Gronlund, 2000), can provide an avenue for student self-assessment and reflection (Airasian, 2001; Metin,2008; Metin and Birişçi, 2011, Çepni, 2007; Kutlu et al., 2008). In addition to performance assessment help students to improvement of writing skill, self-expression skill (Kubiszyn and Borich, 1993; Khattri, Reve and Kane, 1998; Airasian 2001; Birgin 2003; Çepni, 2007; Metin, 2008), presentation skill (Kubiszyn and Borich, 1993; Airasian, 2001; Aslanoğlu and Kutlu, 2003; Çepni et al.,, 2005; Çepni, 2007), inquiry skills (Khattri, Reve and Kane, 1998; Morgil et al., 2004; Metin, 2008), problem solving skill (Baron, 1991; Çepni et al., 2005; Kim, 2005), science process skill (Airasian, 2001; Morgil et al., 2004; Çepni et al., 2005) and high level thinking skill (Bransford; 1979; Logan, 1996; Linn and Gronlund, 2000; Çepni et al., 2005; Kutlu et al., 2008). Furthermore, it were expressed that performance assessment is effective concept learning (Slater, 1996; Morgil et al., 2004; Çepni et al., 2005; Çepni, 2007; Metin, 2008) and overcoming misconceptions (Morgil et al., 2004; Metin, 2008).

When it investigates benefit of performance assessment on students, it is important to define opinions of students about performance assessment. In literature, when it was seen studies related to performance assessment, these studies focus on giving theoretical knowledge about performance assessment and portfolio (Kubiszyn and Borich, 1993; Khattri, Reve and Kane, 1998; Airasian 2001; Çepni, 2007, Birgin, and Baki, 2007; Kutlu et al., 2008; Baron, 1991; Linn and Gronlund, 2000; Çepni et al., 2005), effect of portfolio on students achievement and attitude (Slater, 1996), effects of performance assessment and portfolio on students and teachers (Khattri, Reeve and Kane, 1998; Morgil et al., 2004, Metin, 2008) and teachers’ opinions about performance assessment and portfolio (Metin, 2011; Metin and Birişçi, 2011, Korkmaz and Kaptan, 2005; Birgin, 2003; Birgin, 2008, Metin and Demiryürek, 2009). But there are a few studies related to determine primary students’ opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course. So, it is believed that this study provide an important contribution to researchers studies on performance assessment.

The aim of study is to investigate opinions of primary students about using performance assessment in science and technology course. In accordance with this objective, the study specifically focuses on the following research questions:

What do students think about effects of performance assessment?
What do students have positive beliefs about using performance assessment in science and technology course?
What do students have negative opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course?
What do students encounter difficulties to preparing performance task in science and technology course?
What do students opinions about using portfolio in science and technology course?
Is there a difference between students’ opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course and genders?
Is there a difference between students’ opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course and grade levels?
Is there a difference between students’ opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course and graduation type of mother?
Is there a difference between students’ opinions about using performance assessment in science and technology course and graduation type of father?