[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-588538-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-588538-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","brief-science-performance-evaluation-on-8th-grade-students-volume-3-number-1-2010-abstract-and-results","BRIEF SCIENCE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ON 8TH GRADE STUDENTS - Volume 3 - Number 1 - 2010 Abstract and results","","Paper evaluates science performance of 59 eighth-grade students across three classes, using eight adapted TIMSS 2007 science items from chemistry, biology, mathematics, and physics. Students received separate grading for correct answers and for the explanation supporting their chosen answers. Results are reported in graphical statistics, showing high correctness selection rates but substantially lower rates of complete explanations. Boys scored slightly higher than girls, and mathematics content appeared more accessible.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/brief-science-performance-evaluation-on-8th-grade-students-volume-3-number-1-2010-abstract-and-results/588538/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/brief-science-performance-evaluation-on-8th-grade-students-volume-3-number-1-2010-abstract-and-results/588538.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Rizky","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main purpose of the study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To provide statistics on eighth-grade students’ science performance using adapted TIMSS 2007 items and to examine answer correctness and reasoning quality.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How many students and science items were included?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The study involved 59 eighth graders and used eight science items covering chemistry, biology, mathematics, and physics (two items per content domain).",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How were students graded and what key differences were observed?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Students were graded separately for correct answers and for the explanation supporting those answers; correct selection was relatively high, while providing the correct and complete explanation was much lower.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},588538,1792116894,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":111,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":117,"preview_page_count":4},962085564807,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","Volume 3, Number 1, 2010  \nBRIEF SCIENCE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ON 8TH GRADE  \nSTUDENTS  \nGabriela Mocanu  \nAbstract: This paper aims to provide some statistics concerning the science performance of a group of 59 8th graders, studying in three different classes (may be regarded as different study groups) . Eight science items were used, two from each content domain: chemistry, biology, mathematics and physics. These items were taken from the 2007 edition of the TIMSS test and slightly adapted. Students were graded separately for a correct answer and for the explanation why they chose/gave the answer. Results of the applied test are presented in a graphical format. The authors did not develop a grading system and did not use the one provided by the TIMSS documentation because the number of items used is mall, and a parallel between the results in this study and the TIMSS would not be valid. A very good percentage of the students chose/gave the correct answer but a much lower percentage provided the correct and complete explanation for this answer. Also, from the interpretation of the results it seems that boys score slightly higher than girls and that the mathematics content was more accessible.  \nKey words: science content, cognitive skills, evaluation  \n1. Introduction  \nIn the context of globalization and opposition to globalization, education systems are not following, de facto, to achieve the degree of homogeneity achieved by economical systems. In the case of Romania this seems to be especially obvious when earlier cycles of education are considered, as the curricular contents have not yet been brought up to date with some of the leading countries of the European Union. One of the ways to evaluate and compare students in different countries and thus evolving indifferent education systems is through international tests, such as TIMSS and PISA. These types of tests aim to asses the degree to which the students have assimilated the science content they were expected to learn and the stage of the cognitive development they are in. In providing complex answers the student must go from just possessing information (knowing), to applying it and reasoning (Gonzales et al., 2008) .  \nBased on results from tests used periodically to evaluate performances of students in 8th grade in the world, Romania is not placed in one of the lead positions. After the evaluation of the Science TIMSS 2007, Romania was ranked 28th with a score of 462 out of 1000, while the average score was 500 and the maximum score, belonging to Singapore, was 567. Also, a decrease by 8% in the TIMSS score was registered, as the score in the 1995 TIMSS was 471 (Gonzales et al., 2008) .  \nResults of this particular test cannot be compared to results from previous TIMSS or PISA tests due to statistical inconsistency: this test consisted of a smaller number of items and was applied to a smaller numbers of students. However, some conclusions can be drawn from analysis of the results of such a test.  \nThis paper is organized as follows: section 2 will describe the method used to select and interpret the items, in section 3 the results are presented and discussed and conclusions are drawn in section 4.  \n2. Method  \nA test consisting of several items was given to three classrooms of eight graders. For the classes the following notations were used: class1 (21 students), class2 (18 students) and class3 (20 students) . From a total of 59 students, 28 are girls and 31 are boys. The test has eight items, representative for the content domain of chemistry, biology, mathematics and physics (two items for each) . Each item and the key are presented in the Appendix at the end of this paper.  \nReceived 6 February 2010, accepted 20 February 2010, published 27 March 2010  \nFor the remainder of this paper, the answers are coded as follows:  \nChemistry1: Answer – 1, Explanation – 2.  \nChemistry2: Answer – 3, Explanation – 4.  \nBiology1: Answer – 5.  \nBiology2: Answer – 6, Explanation ","cbCaitGZHXbd2Cg5","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaitGZHXbd2Cg5","pdf",84584,"English","# Introduction\n# Method\n# Results and interpretation","[{\"question\":\"What is the main purpose of the study?\",\"answer\":\"To provide statistics on eighth-grade students’ science performance using adapted TIMSS 2007 items and to examine answer correctness and reasoning quality.\"},{\"question\":\"How many students and science items were included?\",\"answer\":\"The study involved 59 eighth graders and used eight science items covering chemistry, biology, mathematics, and physics (two items per content domain).\"},{\"question\":\"How were students graded and what key differences were observed?\",\"answer\":\"Students were graded separately for correct answers and for the explanation supporting those answers; correct selection was relatively high, while providing the correct and complete explanation was much lower.\"}]","BRIEF SCIENCE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ON 8TH GRADE STUDENTS - Volume 3 - Number 1 - 2010 Abstract and results | PDF",1792065445]