The Correlation Between Test and Non-Test Assessments in the Structure and Function of Plants Course
Abstract
The problem in this case is the requirement to examine the similarity between the students' theoretical knowledge (determined by the test results) and their competencies and engagement (determined by the results of the non-test assessment). The purpose of this study is to examine the relation between the test results and the non-test results among students in the Plant Structure and Function class. The data collected in this study came from 131 prospective junior high school teachers in the field of sciences. The results of the analysis in this case show that the Test results are positively associated and strongly significant with the results of the Non-Test results in this study with the value of the correlation coefficient (r = 0.357) and significance (p = 0.000). In fact, there is no causal relationship between the results in the two tests but there is an associative relation. The results in this study can be considered as a source for the teachers in constructing a comprehensive evaluation system.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Amelia, M., Thomas, M. M., & Rusyati, L. (2023). Analysis of students misconceptions about reproduction in plants using a four-tier diagnostic test. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan IPA, 15(2), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.26418/jpmipa.v15i2.68888
Arnold, M. A., & Marshall, M. L. (2024). Student attendance, study activities, major, and midterm grades as predictors of final course grades of undergraduate and graduate plant materials courses during the eras before and after COVID-19. HortTechnology, 34(6), 687-695. https://doi.org/10.21273/horttech05503-24
Carter, K. P., & Prevost, L. B. (2023). Formative assessment and student understanding of structure-function. Advances in Physiology Education, 47(3), 615-624. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00215.2022
Carter, K. P., & Prevost, L. B. (2018). Question order and student understanding of structure and function. Advances in physiology education, 42(4), 576-585. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00182.2017
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. New York: Pearson Education.
Davey, S. K., Birbeck, D., Nallaya, S., Sallows, G., & Della Vedova, C. B. (2025). Utilising one-on-one interactive oral assessments as the major final assessment within a bioscience course. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 5(7), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2502577
Davidovitch, N., Gerkerova, A., & Kyselyova, O. (2024). Comparative analysis of knowledge control and evaluation methods in higher education. Education Sciences, 14(5), 505-515. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050505
Doxey, J. S., Waliczek, T. M., & Zajicek, J. M. (2009). The impact of interior plants in university classrooms on student course performance and on student perceptions of the course and instructor. HortScience, 44(2), 384-391. https://doi.org/10.21273/hortsci.44.2.384
Hongling, Y. E., Qingsheng, Y. A. N. G., Jiazheng, D. U., Xia, L. I. U., & Junjun, S. H. A. N. G. (2022). Exploration and practice of non-standardized assessment model in teaching of fundamental mechanics. Mechanics in Engineering, 44(5), 1206-1212. https://doi: 10.6052/1000-0879-22-105
Kruit, P., Oostdam, R., van den Berg, E., & Schuitema, J. (2020). Performance assessment as a diagnostic tool for science teachers. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 1093-1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9724-9
Lane, S. (2020). Test‐based accountability systems: The importance of paying attention to consequences. ETS Research Report Series, 2020(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12283
Lee, J., McArthur, W., & Ellis, N. J. (2019). NAPLAN versus in-school assessment: how similar or different are students’ results?. Curriculum and Teaching, 34(2), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.7459/ct/34.2.02
Leppink, J. (2020). Assessment programs and their components: a network approach. Scientia Medica, 30(1), 27-37. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2020.1.37124
Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O., & Vignoles, A. (2015). A comparison of teacher and test-based assessment for Spanish primary and secondary students. Educational Research, 57(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2014.983720
Novitasari, A., Mujianti, A., Solviana, M. D., Supriyadi, S., & Kesuma, A. J. (2024). Analysis of difficulties faced by high school biology teachers in Pringsewu regency in implementing non-test assessments. E3S Web of Conferences, 482(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202448204021
Parmiti, D. P., Rediani, N. N., Antara, I. G. W. S., & Jayadiningrat, M. G. (2021). The effectiveness of local culture-integrated science learning through project-based assessment on scientific attitudes and science process skills of elementary school students. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(3), 439-446. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i3.31301
Reeve, C. L., & Lam, H. (2007). Consideration of g as a common antecedent for cognitive ability test performance, test motivation, and perceived fairness. Intelligence, 35(4), 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.08.006
Reverter, A., Martinez, C., Currey, P., van Bommel, S., & Hudson, N. J. (2020). Unravelling student evaluations of courses and teachers. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2020.1771830
DOI: https://doi.org/10.53889/ijbetsd.v5i2.827
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 67 timesPDF - 48 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Biology Education Towards Sustainable Development
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Biology Education Towards Sustainable Development is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License