We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.

Durham University

School of Education

Staff Profile

Publication details for Ros Roberts

Roberts, R. & Gott, R. (2003). Assessment of biology investigations. Journal of biological education 37(3): 114-121.

Author(s) from Durham


This review makes a case for the assessment of investigations against the Concepts of Evidence in written tests as a potentially more reliable and valid way of assessing the ideas used in all types of biology investigations, thus reducing the distorting effect of assessment on the curriculum.


Baxter G P, Shavelson R J, Donnelly J, Johnson S and Welford G (1988) Evaluation of procedure-based scoring for hands-on assessment. Journal of Educatonal Measurement, 29, 1 – 17.
Bencze J L (1996) Correlational studies in school science: breaking the science-experiment-certainty connection. School Science Review, 78, 95 – 101.
DfEE/QCA (1999) The Science National Curriculum. London, UK: DfEE/QCA.
Donnelly J (1995) Curriculum development in science:the lessons of Sc1. School Science Review, 76, 95 – 103.
Donnelly J (2000) Secondary science teaching under the National Curriculum. School Science Review, 81, 27 – 35.
Gott R and Duggan S (2002) Problems with assessment of performance in practical science: which way now? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 183 – 201.
Gott R and Mashiter J (1991) Practical work in science – a task-based approach? in Practical Science. Woolnough, BE (ed). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
House of Commons, Science and Technology Committee(2002) Science education from 14 to 19. London, UK: The Stationery Office.
Keiler L S and Woolnough B E (2002) Practical work in school science: the dominance of assessment. School Science Review, 83, 83 – 88.
Nott M and Wellington J (1999) The state we’re in: issues in Key Stage 3 & 4 science. School Science Review, 81, 13 – 18. QCA (2002) National Curriculum Assessments from 2003. Letter from QCA to all Heads of Science June 2002.
Ruiz-Primo M A and Shavelson R (1995) Rhetoric and reality in science performance assessment: an update. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, San Fancisco, USA.
Roberts R (2001) Procedural understanding in biology: the thinking behind the doing. Journal of Biological Education, 35, 113 – 117.
Roberts R and Gott R (1999) Procedural understanding: its place in the biology curriculum School Science Review, 81, 19–25.
Roberts R and Gott R (2000) Procedural understanding in biology: how is it characterised in texts? School Science Review, 82, 83 – 91.
Solano-Flores G, Jovanovic J, Shavelson R J and Bachman M (1999) On the development and evaluation of a shell for generating science performance assessments. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 293 – 315.
Watson J R, Goldsworthy A and Wood-Robinson V (1999a) What is not fair with investigations. School Science Review, 80, 101 – 106.
Watson J R, Wood-Robinson V and Goldsworthy A (1999b) Improving investigations. Education in Science, November 1999.
Watson J R, Goldsworthy A and Wood-Robinson V (2001) Sc1: beyond the fair test. In (Eds) Sears J and Sorensen P, Issues in science teaching, London, UK: Routledge Farmer.
Welford G, Harlen W and Schofield B (1985) Practical testing at Ages 11, 13 and 15. London, UK: Department of Education and Science.