No abstract

This study investigated the impact of 'assessment for learning' on learner performance in Life Science. Simple random sampling was used to select four schools from the King Cetshwayo District of KwaZulu Natal Province, South Africa, to participate in the study. A quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest comparison group design was used, involving four schools -two forming the 'treatment condition' while the other two served as the 'comparison group'. Altogether, 160 grade eleven learners participated in the study. Two teachers were trained to use assessment for learning (AfL) as an instructional approach, while the two teachers of the comparison group used their usual instructional approaches. Data were analysed using SPSS (V23) and the statistical technique used was the 2-factor ANOVA with repeated measures. The result revealed that learners following an AfL instructional approach performed statistically higher that those following normal classroom instruction. This result is discussed, and recommendations made in respect of both classroom practice and further research. The findings of this study had implications for policy, further research as well as instructional and assessment approaches to be used in the teaching of Life Science in the South African education system.

Information and Communication Technology has changed the way of learning and sharing the knowledge in the education sector. Students prefer to participate and learn in web based environment. But they can be benefitted in this environment only if they have internet self-efficacy. The objective of this paper is to construct an "Internet Self-efficacy Scale" which can be used to determine the internet related ability and skills of secondary school students. The internet self-efficacy scale was administered to 350 students studying in ninth and tenth grades. Initially a preliminary draft of scale comprising 51 statements was constructed. After review and evaluation of statements by the experts, statements were reduced to 33. The 17 statements were retained in the final draft of the scale. The results of test-retest reliability indicate that the scale is reliable with reliability coefficient 0.89. Content validity was calculated and the scale developed was found to be valid.

No abstract

No abstract