title: Quality assessment by science teachers: Five focus areas

authors: Edwards, Frances

subjects: assessment capability

abstract: In order to teach science well, science teachers need to know what to focus on in order to ensure their assessment of student learning is meaningful and useful for the students’ on going learning and development. The diversity and range of content and skills within the subject of science mean that the assessment capabilities required by science teachers are wide ranging and complex, requiring specialist knowledge and skills in the assessment of science learning as part of the teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Based on a review of the literature this paper proposes a framework for quality assessment in science which focuses on five areas: teaching, students, evidence of learning, future decision-making and impact. This paper advocates a concurrent consideration of all five areas of the framework to provide a substantial, rich, broad, rigorous quality assessment approach on which teachers and students can base teaching and learning.

text: Quality assessment by science teachers: Five focus areas In order to teach science well, science teachers need to know what to focus on in order to ensure their assessment of student learning is meaningful and useful for the students’ on going learning and development. The diversity and range of content and skills within the subject of science mean that the assessment capabilities required by science teachers are wide ranging and complex, requiring specialist knowledge and skills in the assessment of science learning as part of the teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Based on a review of the literature this paper proposes a framework for quality assessment in science which focuses on five areas: teaching, students, evidence of learning, future decision-making and impact. This paper advocates a concurrent consideration of all five areas of the framework to provide a substantial, rich, broad, rigorous quality assessment approach on which teachers and students can base teaching and learning.

year: 2013

title: Fingerprints and age models for widespread New Zealand tephra marker beds erupted since 30,000 years ago: a framework for NZ-INTIMATE

authors: Lowe, David J.

subjects: tephra

abstract: The role of tephras in the NZ-INTIMATE project is a critical one because most high-resolution palaeoclimatic records are linked and dated by one or more tephra layers. In this review, first we document eruptive, distributional, and compositional fingerprinting data, both mineralogical and geochemical, for 22 key marker tephras erupted since 30,000 years ago to facilitate their identification and correlation. We include new glass compositional data. The selected marker tephras comprise 10 from Taupo and nine from Okataina volcanoes (rhyolitic), one from Tuhua volcano (peralkaline rhyolitic), and one each from Tongariro and Egmont volcanoes (andesitic). Second, we use four approaches to develop 2σ-age models for the tephras (youngest to oldest): (1) calendar ages for Kaharoa and Taupo/Y were obtained by wiggle-matching log-derived tree-ring sequences dated by 14C; (2) Whakaipo/V was dated using an age–depth model from peat; (3) 14 tephras in the montane Kaipo peat sequence (Waimihia/S, Unit K, Whakatane, Tuhua, Mamaku, Rotoma, Opepe/E, Poronui/C, Karapiti/B, Okupata, Konini, Waiohau, Rotorua, Rerewhakaaitu) were dated by simultaneously wiggle-matching stratigraphic position and 51 independent 14C-age points against IntCal04 using Bayesian probability methods via both OxCal and Bpeat; and (4) the five oldest tephras, erupted before ca 18,000 cal. yr BP, were dated by calibrating limited numbers of 14C ages using IntCal04 (Okareka) or comparison curves of the expanded Cariaco Basin sequence (Te Rere, Kawakawa/Oruanui, Poihipi, Okaia). Kawakawa/Oruanui tephra, the most widely distributed marker tephra, was erupted probably ca 27,097±957 cal. yr BP. Potential dating approaches for the older tephras include their identification in Antarctic ice cores (if present) or annually laminated sediments for which robust calendar-age models have been constructed, high-precision AMS 14C dating on appropriate material from environmentally stable sites, systematic luminescence dating, or new radiometric techniques (e.g. U–Th/He) if suitable minerals are available and errors markedly reduced. Further application of Bayesian age-modelling to stratigraphic sequences of 14C ages, possibly augmented with luminescence ages, may help refine age models for pre-Holocene tephras with the largest errors. Finally, we discuss the critical role these marker tephras play in the ongoing construction of an event stratigraphy for the New Zealand region, which is a key objective of Australasian and Southern Hemisphere INTIMATE projects.

text: Fingerprints and age models for widespread New Zealand tephra marker beds erupted since 30,000 years ago: a framework for NZ-INTIMATE The role of tephras in the NZ-INTIMATE project is a critical one because most high-resolution palaeoclimatic records are linked and dated by one or more tephra layers. In this review, first we document eruptive, distributional, and compositional fingerprinting data, both mineralogical and geochemical, for 22 key marker tephras erupted since 30,000 years ago to facilitate their identification and correlation. We include new glass compositional data. The selected marker tephras comprise 10 from Taupo and nine from Okataina volcanoes (rhyolitic), one from Tuhua volcano (peralkaline rhyolitic), and one each from Tongariro and Egmont volcanoes (andesitic). Second, we use four approaches to develop 2σ-age models for the tephras (youngest to oldest): (1) calendar ages for Kaharoa and Taupo/Y were obtained by wiggle-matching log-derived tree-ring sequences dated by 14C; (2) Whakaipo/V was dated using an age–depth model from peat; (3) 14 tephras in the montane Kaipo peat sequence (Waimihia/S, Unit K, Whakatane, Tuhua, Mamaku, Rotoma, Opepe/E, Poronui/C, Karapiti/B, Okupata, Konini, Waiohau, Rotorua, Rerewhakaaitu) were dated by simultaneously wiggle-matching stratigraphic position and 51 independent 14C-age points against IntCal04 using Bayesian probability methods via both OxCal and Bpeat; and (4) the five oldest tephras, erupted before ca 18,000 cal. yr BP, were dated by calibrating limited numbers of 14C ages using IntCal04 (Okareka) or comparison curves of the expanded Cariaco Basin sequence (Te Rere, Kawakawa/Oruanui, Poihipi, Okaia). Kawakawa/Oruanui tephra, the most widely distributed marker tephra, was erupted probably ca 27,097±957 cal. yr BP. Potential dating approaches for the older tephras include their identification in Antarctic ice cores (if present) or annually laminated sediments for which robust calendar-age models have been constructed, high-precision AMS 14C dating on appropriate material from environmentally stable sites, systematic luminescence dating, or new radiometric techniques (e.g. U–Th/He) if suitable minerals are available and errors markedly reduced. Further application of Bayesian age-modelling to stratigraphic sequences of 14C ages, possibly augmented with luminescence ages, may help refine age models for pre-Holocene tephras with the largest errors. Finally, we discuss the critical role these marker tephras play in the ongoing construction of an event stratigraphy for the New Zealand region, which is a key objective of Australasian and Southern Hemisphere INTIMATE projects.

year: 2008-01

title: What’s in a name? The sense of reference, the rigidity of designators and the history of causes when determining the names of the two main islands of Aotearoa/New Zealand

authors: Parker, Martin

subjects: New Zealand

abstract: The New Zealand Geographic Board recently revealed that the two main islands of Aotearoa/New Zealand have never been officially named. The revelation made both national and international news and led to a large number of publicly aired comments on the matter, suggesting that something so fundamental and seemingly innocuous as naming is in fact likely to generate a good deal of controversy, no more so than in a bicultural/bilingual context. This paper will examine the phenomenon of naming from a number of angles. After discussing a layperson’s idea of what is meant by the meaning of names, we shall attempt to apply a number of theoretical models from the field of Language Philosophy to the case of the main islands of Aotearoa/New Zealand: the Descriptivist approach of Frege and Russell, Kripke’s Rigid Designators, and Causal Grounding theory. We shall conclude that, in the case of applying the first two of these, there is a question mark over whether any of the current names for the two islands, both Māori and Pākehā, are in fact names at all; in terms of applying the theory of Causal Grounding, we are drawn to the conclusion that in history lies the key to the future.

text: What’s in a name? The sense of reference, the rigidity of designators and the history of causes when determining the names of the two main islands of Aotearoa/New Zealand The New Zealand Geographic Board recently revealed that the two main islands of Aotearoa/New Zealand have never been officially named. The revelation made both national and international news and led to a large number of publicly aired comments on the matter, suggesting that something so fundamental and seemingly innocuous as naming is in fact likely to generate a good deal of controversy, no more so than in a bicultural/bilingual context. This paper will examine the phenomenon of naming from a number of angles. After discussing a layperson’s idea of what is meant by the meaning of names, we shall attempt to apply a number of theoretical models from the field of Language Philosophy to the case of the main islands of Aotearoa/New Zealand: the Descriptivist approach of Frege and Russell, Kripke’s Rigid Designators, and Causal Grounding theory. We shall conclude that, in the case of applying the first two of these, there is a question mark over whether any of the current names for the two islands, both Māori and Pākehā, are in fact names at all; in terms of applying the theory of Causal Grounding, we are drawn to the conclusion that in history lies the key to the future.

year: 2010-02