TASK SELECTION
The proposal developed for this research specified an initial comparison of NEMP tasks with the Exemplars Matrix. The intention was to select 3 quite different tasks that would allow for an exploration of as many cells on the matrix, in its then most recent version, as could be covered.

Preliminary analysis of NEMP tasks
To carry out this preliminary analysis, all published NEMP tasks from both the 1995 (Crooks and Flockton, 1996) and 1999 (Crooks and Flockton, 2000) rounds of NEMP testing were considered. All those tasks that appeared to have the potential to reveal some aspect of children’s thinking about science investigations were initially considered in relation to the Exemplars Matrix.
The Exemplars Matrix is actually presented as 4 separate matrices, which are variously called:

• Investigating in Science;
• Thinking as a Scientist;
• Developing and Communicating Science Understanding; and
• Developing Interest and Relating Science Learning to the Wider World.

To identify suitable NEMP tasks with a focus on investigative skills, we used the “key aspects” identified at the left-hand end of each row of matrix cells for almost the entire Investigating in Science matrix.3,4, We also used the “overall progression” summaries for the Thinking as a Scientist and Developing and Communicating Science Understanding matrices. We have labelled these aspects as follows:

Two researchers separately rated links between the identified NEMP tasks and the Exemplars Matrix headings. At this stage, we did not concern ourselves with levels of progression, as specified on the Exemplars Matrix. Our concern was solely with potential coverage at any level. We also noted the contextual strand(s) of Science in the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1993) that provided the overall context for each task we analysed. We then met and compared notes to develop a consensus agreement on the broad areas that were potentially covered by the identified tasks. This process was not as straightforward as it might at first appear. The matrices are detailed and the categories overlap. Arguably this is to be expected since the process of any one investigation is ultimately a unified whole. The difficulty does however serve to highlight the challenge of laying out any matrix, which must, since it is committed to two-dimensional paper, be developed in some linear order.

Results of preliminary analysis
The potential Exemplars Matrix/NEMP task matches that were identified are summarised in Tables 2-4 on the next 4 pages. Our headings matched to the selected content of the matrix (as described above) are on the left-hand side of each table. The names and overview details of each NEMP task we considered are listed across the top of each table.

Table 2 summarises matches found for tasks whose content was linked to the contextual strands Making Sense of the Living World and Making Sense of Planet Earth and Beyond. The many empty cells on this table highlight the lack of emphasis on investigative skills in NEMP tasks that cover knowledge from these two strands. For our purposes, any tasks from these 2 strands were ruled out for possible selection at this early stage.

Table 3 summarises matches found for tasks whose content was linked to the contextual strand Making Sense of the Physical World. Three tasks stand out here because their relatively full columns reveal a number of potential matches to different facets of children’s investigative skills. These tasks are Truck Track, Ball Bounce, and Parachutes. All 3 are group tasks in which small groups of children actually carry out an investigation, although this happens within pre-set parameters, rather than in response to a question of their own. NEMP staff recommended against the selection of Parachutes, because it had caused some practical difficulties for children as it was implemented.

Table 4 identifies Emptying Rate as a similarly suitable group task set in a context linked to the Making Sense of the Material World strand. Two individual tasks, Powders and Sugar Solutions, could potentially be used to reveal some aspects of thinking of individual students working on a one-to-one basis with the teacher.

There were fewer suitable tasks from which to choose than we had originally anticipated. At this stage the decision was made to use all 3 suitable group tasks – that is, Ball Bounce, Truck Track, and Emptying Rate – so that task type did not become an additional variable in the overall research.

Table 2
Investigative skills in NEMP tasks with links to the Living World and Planet Earth and Beyond strands of SNZC

Table 3
Investigative skills in the NEMP tasks with links to the Physical World strand of SNZC

Table 4
Investigative skills in the NEMP tasks with links to the Material World strand of SNZC

CREATING OBSERVATION SCHEDULES
Once the tasks had been selected, the analysis began with the creation of an observation schedule for each of the 3 tasks. To create each task schedule, the two researchers watched 3 to 5 tapes together and we discussed the dynamics displayed by each group as they worked through the task. Variables relevant to the task were identified, and task-specific features likely to be of interest were debated and incorporated in the schedule as appropriate. The 3 observation schedules were re-checked and adjusted if necessary after 10 observations for each task had been completed. A typical task schedule is included as Appendix 1.

NOTES ON THE OBSERVATION PROCESS
Emptying Rate was investigated first, with the same researcher watching all 101 tapes (48 at Year 4 and 53 at Year 8). During this process it became evident that very little new behaviour was seen after the first 20 or so episodes at either age level. For this reason, only 50 tapes were analysed for each of the other two tasks – 50 Year 4 groups for the Truck Track task, and 50 Year 8 groups for the Ball Bounce task. A third researcher assisted in the analysis of the final task Ball Bounce and watched 24 of the tapes. At the “data cleaning” stage the main observer went through a random number of the tapes that had been viewed by the third researcher to check consistency of the data collected.

All tapes, whether at Year 4, or Year 8, began with the Emptying Rate task. In most cases the other task we had selected followed next on the tapes. Thus the same groups of children were observed carrying out both tasks at their year level. The time taken to complete tasks varied quite considerably. For example, the Year 4 children generally took considerably longer to complete the Emptying Rate task than the Year 8 children. The younger children needed more time to get organised, to decide on roles, and to carry out the tasks. They also needed more help and encouragement from the teacher to keep them focused. Behavioural problems occasionally caused longer duration sessions in both year groups and across all tasks. At times it appeared that the facilitating teacher needed to hurry children to the end of the task:

Come on, we are running late and we have another activity to get through.

We have not got time to re-do it, you have to keep going5.

When time was short there was usually a very superficial discussion with children at the end of the task.

5. Throughout the report italicised statements on separate lines are actual quotes taken from the NEMP tapes.

prev page / next page