Page 101 - Getting the Picture Modeling and Simulation in Secondary Computer Science Education

Assessment of Modeling and Simulation
5.1 Introduction
The new 2019 secondary computer science curriculum recognizes the
importance of modeling and includes an elective theme comprised of modeling
and simulation, together called Computational Science. It is described by the
high-level learning objectives: “Modeling: The candidate is able to model aspects
of another scientific discipline in computational terms” and “Simulation: The
candidate is able to construct models and simulations, and use these for the research
of phenomena in that other science field.” (Barendsen & Tolboom, 2016). The
curriculum does not provide further details about these objectives, instruction or
assessment. In line with the Dutch tradition, this is left to educators and authors of
teaching materials. The elaboration of these learning objectives, the development
of teaching materials, assessment tools and teacher training courses are already
taking place. We participate in these endeavors with practical assistance to
teachers developing teaching practices that help to attain these objectives, and
by monitoring these developments through research described in this thesis. In
our first study, we obtained an operational description of the intended learning 5 outcomes of the learning objective Computational Science — thus focusing on
Magnusson’s component M1 about the goals and objectives, observed students working on modeling tasks — focusing on Magnusson’s component M2 about students’ understanding, and established what data sources were suitable for assessment — Magnusson’s component M4 about methods of assessment (see chapter 3). In our second study (see chapter 4), we investigated teachers’ initial pedagogical content knowledge on modeling and simulation. We then proposed an assessment instrument (Grgurina, Barendsen, Suhre, Veen, et al., 2018) pertaining to Magnusson’s component M4 about methods of assessment.
In this study, we further focus on monitoring the levels of understanding in the learning outcomes of students engaging in modeling projects — Magnusson’s component M4. We aim to examine the agreement and validity of that assessment instrument to assess students’ proficiency in modeling a (problematic) situation and to provide answers to improve the situation. We seek answer to these questions:
1. Can the instrument be used by different teachers without having a distinguishable effect on the assessment?
2. Does the instrument allow for a valid measurement of students’ proficiency level?
99