This article presents a systematic review of how authenticity is used in science education research and discusses the implications these uses have for the design of science education classroom practices. Authenticity has been discussed in education for decades. However, the authenticity of science education not only concerns the design of educational activities, but also the content of what is being taught. This article reviews research articles published in 2013 and 2014, in the three highest ranking journals in science education, regarding how authenticity is framed in science education. The findings suggest that the uses vary greatly from referring to externally defined practices to student relevance. The findings are discussed with the notions of cultural and personal authenticity to suggest important aspects involved with designing science classroom activities authentic to the different references. Based on the review, we have developed a strategy for balancing authenticity in science education classroom practices between cultural and personal authenticity.PhD Jens Anker-Hansen, former PhD-student at the Department of mathematics and science education at Stockholm University. He currently works at the Swedish national Agency for Education with national tests in the science subjects and computerised testing.PhD Maria Andrée, Associate Professor (Docent) at the Department of mathematics and science education at Stockholm University. Her research focuses on cultural perspectives on science education and conditions for students' participation and learning, particularly in relation to questions of science curriculum, scientific literacy and citizenship.

No abstract

No abstract

This thesis takes a departure from a view of scientific literacy as situated in participation in civic practices. Due to the complexity of transferring knowledge, it is problematic to assume that people who can explain scientific theories will automatically apply those theories in life or that knowledge will influence those people's behaviour. Participation could be seen as situated in practices and thus becomes something specific within those practices. For instance, shopping for groceries for the family goes beyond reflecting critically and ethically on health and environment since it involves considering the family economy and the personal tastes of the family members. The thesis describes a praxis development research study where I, in cooperation with teachers, have designed interventions of assessments in lower secondary science classrooms. In the research study I use the theory of Community of Practice and Expansive Learning to study affordances and constraints for assessing communication, source critique and decision-making in the science classroom. The affordances and constraints for students' participation in assessments are studied through using a socio-political debate as an assessment tool. The affordances and constraints for communicating assessment are studied through peer assessments of experimental design. The affordances and constraints for teachers to expand their assessment repertoire are studied through assessment moderation meetings. Finally, the affordances and constraints for designing authentic assessments of scientific literacy are studied through a review of different research studies' use of authenticity in science education. The studies show that tensions emerge between purposes of practices outside the classroom and practices inside the classroom that students negotiated when participating in the assessments. Discussion groups were influential on students' decisions on how to use feedback. Feedback that was not used to amend the designs was still used to discuss what should count as quality of experiments. Teachers used the moderation meetings to refine their assessments and teaching. However, conflicting views of scientific literacy as either propositional or procedural knowledge were challenging to overcome. Different publications in science education research emphasised personal or cultural aspects of authenticity. The different uses of authenticity have implications for authentic assessments, regarding the affordances and constraints for how to reify quality from external practices and through students' engagement in practices. The results of the studies point to gains of focussing the assessment on how students negotiate participation in different civic practices. However, this approach to assessment puts different demands on assessment design than assessments in which students' participation is compared with predefined ideals for performance. Language:English ISBN:978-91-7649-221-5 Contact:jens.anker-hansen@skolverket.se Download:http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/di...

Involving students in the process of classroom assessment through self-and peer-assessment is sometimes motivated by benefits gained from students' metacognitive reflections on criteria in relation to current work. However, prior research on higher education has noticed discrepancies between student and teacher assessment as well as students displaying inabilities to use suggestions for improvement. One prior explanation has been that there are differences among students concerning what is valued as 'good quality'. In this study we investigate how students make meaning of peer-assessment in two Swedish lower secondary schools working with laboratory design. The rationale of the study is to explore the function of peer-assessment in science education, and for that purpose, this work takes an emic perspectives on student-to-student interaction as they collaboratively negotiate how to use received peer-feedback. The empirical basis for the study is an intervention into science classroom practice in collaboration with their science teachers. Data was collected from student written work and audio-and video-taped discussions. Data were analysed with the theoretical framework of Communities of Practice. Type of feedback offered by students differed from 'personal suggestions' on what they preferred to eat and do, to sources of errors effect on the validity of a student's research. One main finding was that the majority of the students used the feedback provided by themselves to other students in their own amendment. Also, students' group discussion seemed to be an important resource for how the students addressed the peer-feedback.