Dr Martin Musumeci

(I) The Maltese Educational System(I) The Maltese Educational System

(II) School-based Assessment in (II) School-based Assessment in Science ExaminationsScience Examinations

(III) Gender Differences in Science(III) Gender Differences in Science

(IV) Student Interest in Science(IV) Student Interest in Science

Dr Martin MusumeciDr Martin Musumeci

Dept of Mathematics, Science and Technical Education, Faculty of Education Dept of Mathematics, Science and Technical Education, Faculty of Education Academic Division – MATSEC Support UnitAcademic Division – MATSEC Support Unit

University of MaltaUniversity of Maltae-mail address: [email protected] address: [email protected]

Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland – Tuesday, 8th May, 2007Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland – Tuesday, 8th May, 2007

Dr M. Musumeci - Univ. of Malta ... Torun, Poland: 08-May-2007

2

PART IPART I

THE MALTESE THE MALTESE EDUCATIONAL EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMSYSTEM


3

1.1 The Maltese Educational 1.1 The Maltese Educational System – An OverviewSystem – An Overview

KindergartenPrimary School

Years 1 to 6

M.C.A.S.T.,I.T.S., ….

Secondary SchoolForms 1 to 5

Sixth FormYears 1 and 2

University of Malta

Compulsory (up to 16 years)

State and Private schools

(Private schools = church and independent schools)


4

1.2 The Maltese Educational 1.2 The Maltese Educational System – The ContextSystem – The Context

In Malta, compulsory education is up to 16 years of age.

A National Minimum Curriculum: it covers the educational system up to 16 years. It is a law, passed through Parliament.

There is quite a high demand for entry into Church Schools: – Entry at Kindergarten and Primary level is through application and lots are drawn;

– Some have a `Common Entrance Exam` for Secondary School = quite competitive.

Other students go to the Private Independent Schools or State Schools.

State Schools: an 11+ exam at the end of Primary school for entry into Junior Lyceums, otherwise students go to Area Secondary Schools.

State schools … reform into colleges/clusters under way.


5


At the end of Secondary education (16+), students sit for external examinations provided by the local Examination Board (MATSEC – University of Malta) or by the UK Examination Boards.

The local Secondary Education Certificate (SEC) exams were intended to:

(i) provide certification to school-leavers, and (ii) provide credentials for access to post-

secondary courses.


6


Compulsory subjects for entry to Sixth Form: SEC passes in Mathematics, English Language, Maltese and a Science subject (Physics, Chemistry or Biology).

The main Sixth Form College is part of the University of Malta – the Junior College.

Other state Sixth Form Colleges.

Private Sixth Form Colleges: very competitive, as they admit only those who get the highest grades in their SEC examinations.

Entry into University courses: the Matriculation Certificate = 2 Advanced level and 4 Intermediate level (equivalent to one third of an ´A´ level) subjects . . . At least 1 language, 1 science subject, 1 humanistic/commercial subject. One Intermediate subject is compulsory: Systems of Knowledge.

Entry to University: at least 44 points, apart from special course requirements.


7

PART IIPART II

# THE SEC SYSTEM# THE SEC SYSTEM

# SCHOOL-BASED # SCHOOL-BASED ASSESSMENT IN THE ASSESSMENT IN THE SCIENCESSCIENCES


8

2.12.1 Introduction Introduction – Questions – Questions

The study attempted to investigate:

The range of marks obtained in the SBA component

The ‘real’ contribution of the SBA mark towards the final total mark

Any difference/s in marks assigned for SBA between subjects having differently detailed guidelines on assessment of coursework in the syllabus

The correlation between the marks obtained for SBA and the marks for the two written papers and the final global mark


9

2.2 2.2 The The FormatFormat of the SEC of the SEC ExamsExams

Two papers of two hours’ duration: Paper I and Paper II

Paper I is the core paper.

There are two versions of Paper II:

(i) P IIA = more demanding questions than in P I

(ii) P IIB = less demanding questions than in P I

Candidates are to indicate which version of P II they opt for when they register for the exam.


10

2.3 The Grading System2.3 The Grading System

Candidates sitting for P I and P IIA may be awarded grades 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or U (unclassified).

Candidates sitting for P I and P IIB may be awarded grades 4, 5, 6, 7 or U.

Grades 1 to 5 are accepted for access to post-secondary courses leading to the Advanced Level certification and eventually University courses.

Grades 6 and 7 indicate a lower level of attainment. These grades may be presented to prospective employers.


11

2.4 The Introduction of SBA2.4 The Introduction of SBA

19941994 – – the MATSEC Board introduced SBA at SEC level to ensure that candidates are assessed on a wider range of skills than they would be by a written examination.

This innovation :(i) induced exposure of students to activities including practical work and experiences from everyday life; (ii) enabled development of new skills and abilities as problem-solving, data gathering and analysis, and application of knowledge rather than just simple recall.

The coursework component – typically spread over 3 years – can serve as an element of formative assessment in the overall assessment of students.


12

2.5 Prescribed Weight for SBA in 2.5 Prescribed Weight for SBA in Biology, Chemistry and PhysicsBiology, Chemistry and Physics

Subject Marks Description

Biology 15%

Laboratory reports

Mark based on the average mark of the best 15 experiments including problem-solving investigations.

Chemistry 15%

Laboratory reports

Mark based on the average mark of the best 15 experiments.

Physics 15%

Laboratory reports

Mark based on the average mark of the best 15 experiments.


13

2.6 Procedure for Marking SBA2.6 Procedure for Marking SBA

M O D E R A T IO N E X E R C IS E = in sp e c tio n o f a sa m p le o f c . 2 0 %

m a r k s fo r w a r d e d to M A T S E C S u p p o r t U n it

a sse ssm e n t d o n e b y c la ss te a c h e r

c o u r se w o r k p r o d u c e d b y c a n d id a te d u r in g fu ll-t im e e d u c a tio n

Coursework of private candidates (not engaged in full-time education) is assessed by the MATSEC Examiners’ Panel for the subject.


14

2.6 Procedure – Why Moderation?2.6 Procedure – Why Moderation?

Moderation of candidates’ coursework was introduced to:

optimise reliability of SBA, ensure fairness for candidates and schools;ensure that the work being presented is of the expected level;gather useful info for recommendations for improved practice;maintain the quality of SBA from year to year;maintain credibility, validity and acceptability of certification issued.ensure comparability of the level of competence reached – students, within and between schools, who attain the same standard should obtain the same scores, i.e., they have reached the same level though they have not gone through the same experiences.


15

2.6 Procedure – 2.6 Procedure – Moderators’ Report Moderators’ Report and Feedback to the Schoolsand Feedback to the Schools

Moderators keep a record of their work, that includes: a checklist;details of schools visited; changed marks; and any comments re work presented, marks awarded by schools.

The Chairperson collects these records compiles a brief report, which is eventually included within the Examiners’ report for the examination session.Feedback to schools is handled by the MATSEC Support Unit. Any comments by Chairpersons and moderators (the type and quality of workbooks/projects, the distribution of marks, the assessment procedure adopted, comparisons between schools) are forwarded to the respective Principal Subject Area Officer for further action.


16

2.7 Some Important Terms2.7 Some Important Terms

• Frequency = the number of occurrences

• Percentage frequency

• Frequency distribution

• Average (or mean)

• Standard deviation

• Correlation coefficient

(0 = no correlation to 1 = total correlation)

• Mode = the most common


17

2.8.1 The Results – Frequency 2.8.1 The Results – Frequency Distribution: PhysicsDistribution: Physics

Candidates sitting for P I + P IIA = 1636Candidates sitting for P I + P IIB = 2324Total population = 3960

9.7810.64

39.55

16.14

13.08

4.04 4.39

8.03

17.50

7.68

19.44

6.60

14.00

16.61

29.82

24.35

12.47

20.08

25.81

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

pe

rce

nta

ge

fre

qu

en

cy

% Freq. [A]

% Freq. [B]

% Freq. [Tot.]


18

2.8.2 The Results – The SBA 2.8.2 The Results – The SBA Component: PhysicsComponent: Physics

16.45 17.2618.29

20.48

24.74

17.94

21.57

27.09

34.29

43.67

35.61

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

dfd

fdf

% of Tot. [A] % of Tot. [B]

mark out of 15 10 11 12 13 14 15 option A B A B A B A B A B A B

frequency 35 129 50 176 123 304 418 746 821 713 135 47 % frequency 2.13 5.26 3.05 7.18 7.50 12.40 25.47 30.44 50.03 29.09 8.23 1.92

% of candidates scoring < 10 [A] = 3.60% % of candidates scoring < 10 [B] = 13.71%

SBA range of marks average st. dev.

I + IIA 13.29 1.62 I + IIB 12.41 2.29


19

2.8.3 The Results – Correlation 2.8.3 The Results – Correlation Studies: PhysicsStudies: Physics

0.34

0.27

0.42

0.81

0.94 0.94

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

SBA-P1 SBA-P2 SBA-Tot P1-P2 P1-Tot P2-Tot

corr

elat

ion

co

effic

ien

t

SBA-PI SBA-PII SBA-Tot PI-PII PI-Tot PII-TotI + IIA 0.34 0.27 0.42 0.81 0.94 0.94I + IIB 0.28 0.29 0.41 0.87 0.95 0.95

Correlation Coefficient


20

2.8.4 The Results – Correlation 2.8.4 The Results – Correlation Studies: PhysicsStudies: Physics

0.28 0.29

0.41

0.87

0.95 0.95

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00


corr

elat

ion

co

effic

ien

t


21

2.8.5 The Results – Frequency: 2.8.5 The Results – Frequency: Biology and ChemistryBiology and Chemistry

SEC Chemistry

12.27

16.79

20.04 20.58 19.49

11.37

18.37

26.53

20.7023.03

7.5810.37

12.37

17.06

10.147.92

15.5010.83

19.06

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

per

cen

tag

e fr

equ

ency

% Freq. [A] % Freq. [B] Tot. % Freq.

SEC Biology

5.77

15.44

21.65

26.84

17.46

12.84

14.91 14.91 14.1511.13

8.7512.26

21.67

6.13 4.82

44.91

3.27

16.35

26.74

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

per

cen

tag

e fr

equ

ency

% Freq. [A] % Freq. [B] % Freq. [Tot.]

Can

dida

tes

P I

+ P

IIA

Can

dida

tes

P I

+ P

IIB

Tot

al p

opul

atio

n

Biology 693 530 1223 Chemistry 554 343 897


22

2.8.6 The Results – SBA: Biology2.8.6 The Results – SBA: Biology

17.3418.48

19.6321.49

23.50

26.63

20.9722.56

26.2128.03

37.23

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

sch

oo

l-bas

ed a

sses

smen

t mar

k as

% o

f to

tal m

ark

SBA Mark as % of Tot. [A]

SBA Mark as % of Tot. [B]

SBA range of marks average st. dev. I + IIA 13.20 2.59 I + IIB 10.61 4.41

mark/15 10 11 12 13 14 15 option A B A B A B A B A B A B freq. 11 46 30 46 56 79 146 102 217 107 217 38 % freq. 1.58 8.36 4.31 8.36 8.05 14.36 20.98 18.55 31.18 19.45 31.18 6.91 % of candidates scoring < 10 [A] = 5.46% % of candidates scoring < 10 [B] = 24.00%


23

2.8.7 The Results – SBA: Chemistry2.8.7 The Results – SBA: Chemistry

17.5419.49

21.6824.74

30.38

21.50

28.03

35.71

45.23 46.23

59.79

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

sch

oo

l-bas

ed a

sses

smen

t mar

k as

% o

f to

tal m

ark



SBA range of marks

average st. dev. I + IIA 13.63 1.53 I + IIB 12.07 3.42



24

2.8.8 The Results – Correlation 2.8.8 The Results – Correlation Studies: BiologyStudies: Biology

0.45

0.39

0.59

0.68

0.890.92

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00


co

rre

lati

on

co

eff

icie

nt

I + IIA - all

0.37 0.35

0.59

0.82

0.92 0.93

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00


co

rre

lati

on

co

eff

icie

nt

I + IIB - all



25

2.8.9 The Results – Correlation 2.8.9 The Results – Correlation Studies: ChemistryStudies: Chemistry

0.34 0.33

0.45

0.87

0.96 0.97

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00


corr

elat

ion

co

effi

cien

t

I + IIA - all

0.19 0.19

0.40

0.87

0.81 0.81

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00


corr

elat

ion

co

effi

cien

t

I + IIB - all



26

2.9.1 Comparison with other subjects 2.9.1 Comparison with other subjects having more detailed guidelines for SBAhaving more detailed guidelines for SBA

Subject Marks Description

ComputerStudies

15%Exercises

Spreadsheets, programming exercises, system analysis, databases.

HomeEconomics

40%

Portfolio

Investigation and two practical assignments carried out under time-controlled conditions.

Physics, Chemistry and Biology – where guidelines for SBA are not detailed at all, though the Biology syllabus includes some further information with respect to the other two – were compared with Computer Studies and Home Economics where the syllabus guidelines for SBA are much more detailed.


27

2.9.2 Comparison with Computer Studies 2.9.2 Comparison with Computer Studies and Home Economics - Frequencyand Home Economics - Frequency

Can

did

ates

P

I +

P I

IA

Can

did

ates

P

I +

P I

IB

Tot

al p

opu

lati

on

Computer Studies 916 817 1733 Home Economics 246 295 541

SEC Computer Studies

7.97

20.31

29.48

31.46

21.4219.58

13.71 13.83

4.21

10.73

15.58

9.23

6.46

13.32

20.20

8.73

17.14

25.50

11.14

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

pe

rce

nta

ge

fre

qu

en

cy

% Freq. [A] % Freq. [B] Tot. % Freq.

SEC Home Economics

9.76

28.05

33.74

7.72

50.51

4.7512.7515.34

9.06

5.2815.45

5.76

16.61

22.37

2.59

31.05

19.22

4.44 5.550.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

pe

rce

nta

ge

fre

qu

en

cy

% Freq. [A]

% Freq. [B]

% Freq. [Tot.]


28

2.9.3 Comparison with 2.9.3 Comparison with Computer Studies - SBAComputer Studies - SBA


I + IIA 11.87 2.86 I + IIB 8.88 4.65


15.7316.67

18.56

21.78

23.65

18.08

21.26

24.8125.63

30.90

34.18

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

sc

ho

ol-

ba

se

d a

ss

es

sm

en

t m

ark

as

% o

f to

tal

ma

rk




29

2.9.4 Comparison with 2.9.4 Comparison with Home Economics - SBAHome Economics - SBA


I + IIA 10.30 3.76 I + IIB 8.16 4.76

mark/15 10 11 12 13 14 15 option A B A B A B A B A B A B freq. 20 21 29 18 46 22 42 61 23 25 19 3 % freq. 8 6.82 11.74 5.84 18.62 7.14 17.00 19.81 9.31 8.12 7.69 0.97 % of candidates scoring < 10 [A] = 27.53% % of candidates scoring < 10 [B] = 51.30%

15.24 15.3414.52

13.61 13.06

20.86

15.6814.07

12.49

28.95

8.09

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

sc

ho

ol-

ba

se

d a

ss

es

sm

en

t m

ark

as

% o

f to

tal

ma

rk




30

2.10.1 2.10.1 SummarisingSummarising . . . . . . . . . . . . average SBA raw scoreaverage SBA raw score

P I + P IIA P I + P IIB average mode % scoring < 10 average mode % scoring < 10 Biology 13.20 14 5.46 10.61 14 24.00 Chemistry 13.63 14 1.81 12.07 14 11.82 Physics 13.29 14 3.60 12.41 13 13.71

Computer Studies 11.87 14 12.32 8.88 13 38.88 Home Economics 10.30 12 27.53 8.16 13 51.30

13.213.63

11.87

10.3

10.61

12.0712.41

8.88

8.16

13.29

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Biology Chemistry Physics Computer Studies Home Economics

aver

age

SBA

sco

re average [A]

average [B]


31

2.10.2 2.10.2 SummarisingSummarising . . . . . . . . . . . .Mode of SBA raw scoreMode of SBA raw score

14 14 14 14

14 14

13 13

12

13

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15


mo

de mode [A]

mode [B]


32

2.10.3 2.10.3 SummarisingSummarising . . . . . . . . . . . . percentage scoring < 10 in SBApercentage scoring < 10 in SBA

5.46

1.813.6

12.32

27.53

24.00

11.8213.71

38.88

51.30

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


per

ceta

ge

of

can

did

ates

sco

rin

g <

10

(%)

% scoring < 10 [A]

% scoring < 10 [B]


33

2.11.1 Conclusions2.11.1 Conclusions

The marks of the SBA component are definitely on the high side! But the inclusion of coursework/SBA ensures that given skills are taught and practical experiences are actually included in the school programme.

As the situation stands, SBA marks do not differentiate between candidates of different abilities. Selection/grading is solely on the written papers.

It is probable that marks can be assigned for effort – see the Home Economics case.

The correlation coefficients between SBA mark and marks for written papers and total mark are not high.


34


Comparing the data obtained for Biology with that for Physics and Chemistry (where the syllabus just specifies the presentation of the best 15 practical reports), the percentage of students scoring less than 10/15 is slightly higher in Biology, although differences in the other data is not evident.

Thus it helps to improve the guidelines by specifying a range of types of experiments/areas/skills to becovered (as there is in the Biology syllabus). This procures improvement in quality.


35


When comparing the SBA data for Computer Studies and Home Economics (which have detailed guidelines in the respective syllabi) with those for the three science subjects, the differences in average raw SBA mark and percentage of students scoring less than 10/15 are definitely evident. Thus the utility of detailed guidelines.

Suggestion: to keep the practice of including exam questions based on practical experience – candidates will not be able to answer correctly unless they have actually had practical experience.


36

PART IIIPART III

GENDER GENDER DIFFERENCES IN DIFFERENCES IN SCIENCESCIENCE


37

3.1 SEC Registrations3.1 SEC Registrations

• The SEC system initially supplemented and eventually replaced the GCE O-level examinations offered by UK examination boards.

• In 1994: Biology = 139, Chemistry = 112, Physics = 1185, Mathematics = 1553, Computer Studies = 246. NOTE: Mathematics and Physics were requirements for sixth form entry. Mathematics is still compulsory, Physics is not an exclusive sixth form entry requirement anymore. A number of secondary schools still offer Physics as the compulsory science subject with Biology and Chemistry being option subjects.

• It started in 1994.


38

3.2.1 SEC Registrations 2001 - 20063.2.1 SEC Registrations 2001 - 2006

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Biology 1108 1246 1371 1420 1605 1565

Chemistry 747 901 911 830 864 863

Computer Studies 1839 1832 1797 1985 1674 1456

Mathematics 4759 5165 5491 5371 5627 5559

Physics 3932 4090 4325 4402 4338 4347


39

3.2.2 SEC Registrations 2001 - 20063.2.2 SEC Registrations 2001 - 2006

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

year

nu

mb

er o

f re

gis

tra

tio

ns

Biology

Chemistry

Computer Studies

Mathematics

Physics


40

3.3.1 Gender Differences in Registrations3.3.1 Gender Differences in Registrations(f = females, m = males)(f = females, m = males)

Biology Chemistry Computer Studies Mathematics Physics

f m f m f m f m f m

2001 731 377 358 389 806 1033 2547 2212 2046 1906

2002 816 430 386 515 818 1014 2702 2463 2005 2085

2003 950 421 458 453 731 1066 2945 2546 2214 2111

2004 998 422 455 375 745 1240 2897 2474 2283 2119

2005 1091 514 433 431 593 1081 3045 2582 2247 2091

2006 1076 489 432 431 547 909 2950 2609 2154 2193

Biology Chemistry

Computer Studies

Mathematics Physics

2001 31.9 -4.1 -12.3 7.0 3.5

2002 31.0 -14.3 -10.7 4.6 -2.0

2003 38.6 0.5 -18.6 7.3 2.4

2004 40.6 9.6 -24.9 7.9 3.7

2005 36.0 0.2 -29.2 8.2 3.6

2006 37.5 0.1 -24.9 6.1 -0.9

The difference in registrations (f – m) as a percentage of total registrations


41

3.3.2 SEC 2006: gender differences3.3.2 SEC 2006: gender differencesin registrationsin registrations

2154

2950

547

432

1076

2193

2609

909

431

489

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Physics

Mathematics

Computer Studies

Chemistry

Biology

females

males


42

3.3.3 SEC 2006: percentage of 3.3.3 SEC 2006: percentage of 16-year-old candidates, by gender16-year-old candidates, by gender

Females (%) Males (%) Total (%)

Biology 31.1 14.3 22.4

Chemistry 14.8 13.9 14.3

Computer Studies 17.8 25.1 21.6

Mathematics 79.8 65.9 72.6

Physics 63.9 58.5 61.1


43

3.4.1 SEC 2006: gender differences3.4.1 SEC 2006: gender differencesin performancein performance

Grade 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

f m f m f m f m f m f m f m f m

Biology 3.5 7.4 7.1 10.2 11.3 16.4 18.9 20.0 17.3 12.9 7.1 5.7 5.8 4.3 27.8 22.3

Chem. 7.9 8.6 14.6 14.6 14.8 13.2 15.5 17.2 13.4 18.1 2.1 2.1 3.2 3.5 27.1 21.6

Comp. 4.9 5.0 15.4 11.8 19.0 20.1 24.7 19.8 16.6 16.2 7.7 8.7 2.7 4.6 6.6 12.4

Math 4.4 7.4 7.6 7.7 9.2 10.1 15.3 14.4 15.9 15.5 10.6 9.6 10.6 8.9 21.7 22.1

Physics 4.5 5.3 7.6 7.8 10.0 11.9 24.7 20.7 20.2 20.8 14.7 13.1 6.2 5.7 10.8 12.8

SEC 2006: Percentage passes per grade by gender


44

3.4.2 SEC Biology 2006: percentage 3.4.2 SEC Biology 2006: percentage passes per grade by genderpasses per grade by gender

3.5

7.1

11.3

7.4

10.2

16.4

20.0

27.8

5.87.1

17.318.9

22.3

4.3

5.7

12.9

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

percen

tag

e p

ass

es

per g

ra

de (

%)

females

males


45

3.4.3 SEC Chemistry 2006: percentage 3.4.3 SEC Chemistry 2006: percentage passes per grade by genderpasses per grade by gender

7.9

15.5

2.1

3.2

8.6

14.6

17.218.1

27.1

13.4

14.8

14.6

13.2

2.1

3.5

21.6

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

percen

tag

e p

ass

es

per g

ra

de (

%)

females

males


46

3.4.4 SEC Computer Studies 2006: 3.4.4 SEC Computer Studies 2006: percentage passes per grade by genderpercentage passes per grade by gender

4.9

19.0

7.7

2.7

6.6

20.1 19.8

4.6

16.6

24.7

15.4 16.2

12.4

8.7

11.8

5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

percen

tag

e p

ass

es

per g

ra

de (

%)

females

males


47

3.4.5 SEC Mathematics 2006: 3.4.5 SEC Mathematics 2006: percentage passes per grade by genderpercentage passes per grade by gender

4.4

7.6

9.27.4 7.7

21.7

10.610.6

15.9

15.3

22.1

8.99.6

15.5

14.4

10.1

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 U

grade

percen

tag

e p

ass

es

per g

ra

de (

%)

females

males


48

3.4.6 SEC Physics 2006: percentage 3.4.6 SEC Physics 2006: percentage passes per grade by genderpasses per grade by gender

4.5

7.6

10.0

5.3

7.8

10.8

6.2

14.7

20.2

24.7

12.8

5.7

13.1

20.8

20.7

11.9

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

grade

percen

tag

e p

ass

es

per g

ra

de (

%)

females

males


49

3.5 Concluding comments3.5 Concluding comments

The data reported gives rise to a number of questions:

o Should we attempt to increase the number of students taking science at this level?

o Can we increase student interest in science?o How can we make the science curriculum interesting and relevant to students’

lives?

We also need to ascertain that the level at SEC is adequate as a preparation for Advanced level and further studies.

Above all, we also need to ask:

o Are we maintaining the interest of those students who study science up to age 16 and motivate them to specialise in science and take up a career in a scientific field?

o Is the experience of science they are obtaining and the information available about careers pushing students away from these fields?

o How can we increase student interest in science?


50

PART IVPART IV

STUDENT INTEREST STUDENT INTEREST IN SCIENCEIN SCIENCE


51

4.1 Introduction4.1 Introduction

• In recent years, a decline in the number of students opting to study S & T has been observed in many countries …

o at undergraduate level (e.g. University and College Union, UCU, 2006)o at upper secondary level (e.g. Cassidy, 2006)o it has also made the news (e.g. BBC news online, 28/06/2006).

• This decrease has lead to concern in many countries – an economy increasingly driven by complex knowledge and advanced cognitive skills.• July 2003 – a working group established by the 9th Meeting of the Global Science Forum of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) … an OECD-wide analysis to determine the real decline and to study the causes and possible remedies … information from 19 countries: Australia, Belgium (Flanders and Wallonia), Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The working group’s findings and recommendations were summarised in a report published in May 2006.• We compared these findings with the situation in Malta.


52

4.2.1 Quantitative trends in student 4.2.1 Quantitative trends in student choice for S & T studieschoice for S & T studies

• One of the aims of the investigation was to determine the decline in interest in S & T studies among young people.

• The disciplines included in the investigation were: mathematics and statistics, the physical sciences, the life sciences, computer science and engineering.

• According to the OECD Global Science Forum Report ….

o due to the growing enrolment rates in higher education in OECD countries, absolute numbers of students in S & T courses increased in most countries over the 1993-2003 period

o however, the exact opposite is observed in terms of the relevant share of S & T students out of the overall student population during the same period

o … observed both at the tertiary education and the upper secondary levels in many countries.

o The OECD report predicts that, coupled with unfavourable demographics and a stabilisation of the number of students accessing tertiary education, several OECD countries can expect this general trend to affect the absolute number of S & T students in future years.


53

4.2.2 Quantitative trends in student 4.2.2 Quantitative trends in student choice for S & T studieschoice for S & T studies


54

4.3 The Maltese situation4.3 The Maltese situation

• In Malta, the absolute number of students studying Advanced level subjects with a S & T orientation (biology, chemistry, computing, physics and pure mathematics) has also increased over the last 10 years …

• …the general increase has leveled off in 2006.• In computing, pure mathematics, physics and chemistry the number of students

roughly doubled over the last 10 years. • The sharpest increase is observed for biology where the number of students taking A-

level biology has increased by 3.5 times between 1997 and 2006.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f C

and

idat

es

Biology

Chemistry

Computing

Physics

Pure Mathematics


55

4.4 Number of students taking A-level S & T subjects 4.4 Number of students taking A-level S & T subjects

as a % of the total number of students taking the MCas a % of the total number of students taking the MC 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Biology 11.2 13.3 15.5 15.7 17.1 18.1 15.7 15.9 20.4 20.3

Chemistry 11.8 12.5 14.5 14.4 13.8 16.0 12.8 13.0 14.8 14.1

Computing 8.6 7.7 6.9 5.6 6.1 6.5 5.4 8.3 9.7 8.0

Physics 17.3 15.9 15.7 16.6 16.8 17.1 16.7 17.6 19.3 19.1

Pure Mathematics 24.8 23.2 21.3 20.5 22.1 22.6 22.5 24.1 26.7 25.5

Registrations for A-level subjects as a percentage of MC registrations

0.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.0

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Year

%

Biology

Chemistry

Computing

Physics

Pure Mathematics


56

4.5.1 The distribution of S & T graduates in the 4.5.1 The distribution of S & T graduates in the

different disciplines for years 1999 - 2006different disciplines for years 1999 - 2006 • Locally, the same general trend as that reported in the OECD study is observed:

o the absolute number of students who enroll and graduate in S & T areas generally increased over recent years.

o The % of students graduating in S & T courses, out of the total number of students who graduated at Bachelors level in 2006 at the University of Malta, is only around 6%.

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

B.Eng. 54 51 48 64 48 54 57 90

Biology and Chemistry 19 13 19 12 14 14 12 33

Computer Science and Maths 1 2 3 1

Mathematics and Physics 8 7 8 2 8 6 1 7

Chemistry and Physics 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Informatics and Mathematics 1 1 1 1 2

Computer Science and Statistics & Operations Research 1 2 1

Informatics and Statistics & Operations Research 3 3

Mathematics and Statistics & Operations Research 7 11 6 5 4

Others 2 1 2 1


57

4.5.2 The distribution of S & T graduates in the 4.5.2 The distribution of S & T graduates in the

different disciplines for years 1999 - 2006different disciplines for years 1999 - 2006 • The Maltese situation in the different disciplines is, in some respects, similar

to that reported in the OECD report.

• During the eight years represented in the Table, the number of students graduating in engineering accounted for between 53 and 72% of the graduates in S & T, resulting generally higher than the trend observed in the OECD study.

• This trend is changing…. taking the number of students currently enrolled in University courses, we find that the engineering students that enrolled in 2006 ‘only’ account for 35% of the S & T students.

• The proportion of students in the traditional science subjects has continued to increase in recent years.

• The number of students in computer science and informatics is slowly increasing but so far the increase does not appear to be a result of a shift of students from the traditional sciences to computer science.

• However there may be a shift from Engineering to other S & T disciplines.


58

4.6 The distribution of S & T students enrolling in 4.6 The distribution of S & T students enrolling in the different disciplines for years 2003 - 2006the different disciplines for years 2003 - 2006

2003 2004 2005 2006

B. Eng. 100 139 103 124

Biology and Chemistry 29 43 78 89

Biology and Physics 1

Chemistry and Mathematics 1 1

Chemistry and Physics 5 1 1 3

Computer Science & AI and Maths 14 20

Computer Science & AI and Physics 6 5

Computer Science & AI and Statistics & Operations Research 13 10

Computer Science and Maths 3 1

Computer Science and Physics 2 7

Computer Science and Statistics & Operations Research 1 2

Informatics and Mathematics 4 1 7 9

Informatics and Physics 1 2 6

Informatics and Statistics & Operations Research 1 2 12

Mathematics and Physics 15 23 33 45

Mathematics and Statistics & Operations Research 6 7 19 33

Physics and Statistics and Operations Research 1 1


59

4.7 Gender representation in S & T studies4.7 Gender representation in S & T studies

• According to the OECD report (2006), the number of female students in tertiary education has increased more rapidly than that of males, but the proportion of women choosing S & T studies is still lower than that of men.

• In most countries included in the OECD study, women constitute less than 25% of computing and engineering students while females are systematically more numerous than men in life sciences.

• Young female students were found to suffer from stereotypes in relation to external expectations such as those of parents, teachers and society in general.

• Despite having marks at least as good as boys, girls are usually not encouraged to pursue S & T careers.

• Other negative effects come from the teaching process and the lack of role models.


60

4.8.1 Gender representation in Malta4.8.1 Gender representation in Malta

• In Malta, the number of male and female students graduating in S & T courses varied during these last eight years.

• The number of female graduates is less than that of male graduates in S & T for each year considered.

• For most years the number of male graduates in these courses is more than twice that of female students. In fact the female graduates totaled between 17.6% and 34.1% of the number of students graduating in S & T in the years 1999 to 2006.

Number of Graduates in S & T courses

0

20

40

60

80

100

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Nu

mb

er

Total


61

4.8.2 Gender representation in Malta4.8.2 Gender representation in Malta

Number of Graduates in Engineering

01020304050607080


1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f G

rad

uat

es

B.Eng

Number of B.Sc Graduates

05

1015202530


1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f G

rad

uat

es

B.Sc

Bachelor of Engineering graduates

Bachelor of science graduates


62

4.9.1 The distribution of male and female students 4.9.1 The distribution of male and female students

enrolling in different S & T courses in Oct. 2006enrolling in different S & T courses in Oct. 2006 Female Male Total

B. Engineering 40 84 124

Biology and Chemistry 52 37 89

Biology and Physics 1 0 1

Chemistry and Mathematics 0 1 1

Chemistry and Physics 1 2 3

Computer Science & AI and Maths 6 14 20

Computer Science & AI and Physics 0 5 5

Computer Science & AI and Statistics & Operations Research 3 7 10

Informatics and Mathematics 5 4 9

Informatics and Physics 2 4 6

Informatics and Statistics & Operations Research 9 3 12

Mathematics and Physics 19 26 45

Mathematics and Statistics & Operations Research 20 13 33

Physics and Statistics and Operations Research 1 0 1


63

4.9.2 The distribution of male and female students 4.9.2 The distribution of male and female students enrolling in different S & T courses in Oct. 2006enrolling in different S & T courses in Oct. 2006

• The disciplines taken up by students in S & T courses vary considerably with gender.

• The number of male students is greater than that of female students in engineering; computer science and artificial intelligence (whether taken with mathematics, physics or operations research); and mathematics and physics.

• On the other hand, there are more female students taking biology and chemistry, and mathematics and statistics and operations research.

• It is evident that engineering, computer science and physics are male dominated while biology and chemistry, mathematics and statistics, and informatics attract a greater number of female students.


64


• The OECD (2006) report observed:

… an overall increase in the number of S & T students in absolute terms in many countries

… a downward trend in percentage terms. … some disciplines, such as mathematics or the

physical sciences are particularly affected. … the proportion of female students was found to be

low in most OECD countries, with fields such as engineering or computer science being largely male-dominated.


65


• This worrying decline in the number of students following S & T courses is not observed in Malta – in some disciplines there is conversely an increase in enrolment.

• However the proportion of female students is still low in a number of fields and this applies both to University courses and Upper Secondary subject choice.

• Although Malta, so far, does not exhibit the worrying decline observed elsewhere, it has often been claimed (e.g. Office of the Prime Minister, 2005) that more young people need to be encouraged to take up S & T courses and careers.

• In order to encourage more students to take up S & T University courses, a new scheme was launched in 2005 (Department of Information, 2005) that awards special grants to full-time University students following certain courses identified as important for the country’s socio-economic development.


66

4.11.1 Recommendations4.11.1 Recommendations

• The OECD working group made a number of recommendations:• More female students be encouraged to take up S & T courses, but this

should NOT be achieved via programmes that are targeted specifically at girls.

• Reforms in teacher training, curriculum and role model development. • Modification in the learning context and approach – rendered more

attractive to female students, stressing, for example, on the benefits of S & T for society.

• Mentoring projects should be encouraged to support women and minority students undertaking careers in S & T.

• Reference to students’ ideas of science and their image of scientists.• Students must have access to accurate and credible information about S

& T careers, that avoids unrealistic/exaggerated portrayals… provided through direct contacts with professionals.

• The need to reform S & T education and curricula – the non-interesting and difficult content of science courses.


67


• The educational system has to satisfy two demands, particularly at lower levels: (i) the need to provide all students with scientific literacy, familiarisation with scientific thinking and developing an interest in science; (ii) to provide detailed knowledge required for further study. Difficulty arises in providing an appropriate mix of both requirements. Studies show that positive contacts with S & T at an early stage (as early as Primary school) are essential. These are highly dependant on the teachers and the teaching content. Poor opinions of S & T are often linked to negative educational experiences, e.g. non-specialist teachers teaching science, often uncomfortable with science subjects and with hands-on demonstrations, often focus on memorising rather than understanding… make science seem irrelevant and disconnected from real-life applications and tend to dampen the interest acquired at a young age.

• Good teaching skills are required – to deal with the challenging subject content in S & T, and also to convey its great intrinsic value and the merits of S & T careers. Teachers also need up-to-date S & T knowledge and information on S & T careers in order to be able to teach their students about the latest scientific developments and offer career advice.


68


• More flexible curricula … such that they offer a second chance to students who wish to go back to S & T studies following a different choice at an earlier stage.

• Curricula should be redesigned to better reflect the reality of modern S & T and to emphasise their contributions to society.

• Teaching should concentrate more on scientific concepts and methods rather than on simply retaining information especially at secondary level.


69

ReferencesReferences

• Farrugia, J. and Musumeci, M., Girls, Boys and Science: The Situation at Secondary School Level (unpublished paper)

• Farrugia, J. and Musumeci, M. (2007) Student interest in science in Malta and the OECD countries: a comparative study, Xjenza

• Farrugia, J. and Musumeci, M. (2006) The Local Examination System: What does it tell us about the number of students sitting for science subjects? Msida, Malta: CASTME Europe Conference

• Briffa, C., Farrugia, J. and Musumeci, M. (2005) Assessing School-based Material and Non-written Work, Dublin, Ireland: AEA Annual Conference – Dublin

• Musumeci, M. and Farrugia, J. (2004) School-based Assessment within the Secondary Education Certificate (16+) Science Examinations in Malta, Nicosia, Cyprus: CASTME Europe Conference

• Department of Information, Malta (2005) Press Releasse Number 1388 – L-Iskema ta’ Għotjiet ta’ Manteniment lill-Istudenti: Il-Gvern Jagħżel l-Investiment fiż-Żgħażagħ (DOI – 29-09-2005)

• Office of the Prime Minister (2005) A Better Quality of Life, 2006-2010 Pre-Budget Document

• MATSEC Review Committee (2005) MATSEC: Strengthening a National Examination System, Malta: Ministry of education, Youth and Employment[http://www.education.gov.mt/ministry/doc/pdf/matsec/matsec_MAINDOC.pdf]


70

ReferencesReferences• MATSEC Examinations Board (2006) SEC Examinations Statistical Report 2006, Malta:

MATSEC Support Unit, University of Malta [http://home.um.edu.mt/matsec/stat_sec_rep_06.pdf]

• Matriculation and Secondary Education Certificate Examinations Board (MATSEC) (2003) The Secondary Education Certificate Regulations and Syllabuses for 2005, Malta: MATSEC Board, University of Malta [http://home.um.edu.mt/matsec/]

• BBC News (2006) Decline in student science uptake. Accessed at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/scotland/5124108.stm 28/06/2006

• Cassidy, S. (2006) The Big Question: Does it really matter if the number of students studying physics is falling? Independent online News accessed at: http://education.independent.co.uk/news/article1218402.ece 11/08/2006

• Matriculation and Secondary Education Certificate Examinations Board (MATSEC) (2007) Matriculation Certificate Examinations 2006: Statistical Report. Msida, University of Malta.

• University and College Union (2006) Degrees of decline? Core science and mathematics degree courses in the UK 1998-2007. Accessed at: http://www.ucu.org.uk/media/pdf/d/t/degreesofdecline_nov06_1.pdf 27/12/2006

• Working Group of the Global Science Forum of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006) Evolution of Student Interest in Science and Technology Studies: Policy Report. Accessed at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/30/36645825.pdf 03/12/2006

Documents

Dr Martin Musumeci