Evaluation and Research in Education
Editor: Professor Keith Morrison, Inter-University Institute of Macau
Associate Editor: Professor Stephen Gorard, University of York
Statistical Adviser: Professor Colin Baker, University of Wales Bangor
Reviews Editor: Dr. Emma Smith, University of York
|
Volume: 15 Number: 1 Page: 33–50
|
|
|
|
|
How Defensible are Current Trends in GCSE Mathematics to Replace Teacher-assessed Coursework by Examinations?
|
|
H. Morrison, P. Cowan and J. D'Arcy
|
|
The General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) in mathematics is designed to measure not only the mathematical knowledge of candidates, but also their ability to use mathematics as a mode of inquiry.
A number of British Awarding Bodies with large candidatures now offer GCSE Mathematics Syllabus B as an alternative to Syllabus A. The two assessment frameworks are identical except in their approach to
the assessment of mathematical inquiry: Syllabus A uses teacher-assessed coursework while Syllabus B uses a timed, written examination. Given that the machinery which assures the reliability of coursework
(exemplar dissemination, in-service training and moderation) makes significant demands on teacher time and on the financial resources of the awarding bodies, it is important to test the measurement equivalence
of the assessment frameworks of these two syllabi. A confirmatory factor analysis of the GCSE score profiles of 1656 Syllabus A and 1741 Syllabus B candidates is used to reject the hypothesis that tests
can replace teacher-assessed coursework in GCSE mathematics. It is argued that the curricular advances of the last decade could be reversed should this freedom to opt for coursework or examination prompt
a wholesale replacement of school project work by tests.
© Multilingual Matters 2001
Full text PDF
|
