Context

This evidence relates to a Year 10 Science class of 18 students, including three students with One Plans, in a semi-rural high school setting. During Term 1, students completed a Science as a Human Endeavour (SHE) assessment investigating genetic diseases. Analysis of student work and achievement data indicated that many students lacked the skills required to effectively research, structure and communicate scientific ideas in a written report format. Students experienced difficulty interpreting scientific language, organising information logically and constructing evidence-based explanations.

Analysis of student work from the Genetics task highlighted the need for a more intentionally designed assessment package that explicitly supported scientific literacy and report-writing skills while maintaining high academic expectations. In response, a subsequent SHE assessment investigating the Big Bang Theory and the scientific evidence supporting current cosmological models was redesigned to improve accessibility, clarity and assessment validity while providing multiple opportunities for student success.

Actions

The Big Bang Theory investigation was intentionally designed to improve accessibility, clarity and student achievement. Consideration was given to all aspects of the assessment package, including presentation design, assessment structure, scaffolding, timelines, success criteria, assessment rubrics, feedback processes and reporting mechanisms.

Learning materials and lesson presentations were intentionally designed using evidence-informed principles of accessibility, including consistent formatting, accessible fonts, clear visual organisation and reduced extraneous cognitive load. Each lesson presentation included explicitly taught scientific vocabulary, learning intentions and success criteria to ensure students had a clear understanding of the language, concepts and expectations required for success. Key terminology was revisited throughout the unit to support retention and application.

The assessment task was carefully sequenced and broken into manageable stages. Students were provided with a clear timeline outlining checkpoints, drafting opportunities and final submission dates. The report structure was explicitly taught through guided instruction, exemplars and scaffolded templates that modelled how scientific arguments should be organised and supported by evidence.

The assessment rubric was redesigned to improve clarity and accessibility. Achievement descriptors were streamlined and aligned more closely with the learning intentions, success criteria and curriculum expectations. This provided students with a clearer understanding of how achievement would be assessed and supported ongoing self-monitoring throughout the task.

Differentiation was embedded within the assessment design. Additional supports were provided for students requiring assistance, while extension opportunities challenged higher-achieving students to investigate additional lines of evidence supporting the Big Bang Theory, including Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, primordial hydrogen and helium abundance, and further astronomical observations. The use of scaffolded templates, chunked timelines, explicit vocabulary instruction and consistent lesson structures was particularly beneficial for students with One Plans, enabling them to access the task requirements and participate successfully alongside their peers.

Students were given the opportunity to submit drafts prior to final submission, allowing for targeted feedback and revision. Eleven students submitted a first draft, and five students chose to submit a second draft after receiving feedback, demonstrating ongoing engagement with the improvement process. Students utilised EdChat, the South Australian Department for Education AI platform, to improve sentence structure, identify spelling and grammatical errors, and develop their understanding of complex scientific terminology. Students remained responsible for explaining concepts in their own words and demonstrating their own understanding of the scientific evidence they investigated.

Following submission, assessments were marked and returned to students within one week. Students received detailed written feedback identifying strengths, areas for improvement and suggested next steps for learning. Feedback and achievement data were published through DayMap, ensuring that both students and parents could access assessment results and comments, supporting ongoing communication about student progress and achievement.

Results

Student work demonstrated measurable improvements in scientific literacy, research skills and scientific communication. Reports showed stronger organisation, improved use of scientific vocabulary, increased scientific accuracy and more sophisticated explanations of evidence.

Analysis of achievement data demonstrated a significant improvement in the quality of student achievement. While the proportion of students achieving a C grade or above remained consistent at 93.75%, the percentage of students achieving a B grade or above increased from 37.5% in the Genetics SHE task to 75% in the Big Bang SHE task. The number of students achieving an A grade also increased from two to three students.

The intervention was particularly successful in supporting students who had previously achieved at lower levels. Of the nine students who achieved a C grade or below in the Genetics SHE task, eight improved their achievement in the Big Bang SHE task. Six students improved from a C grade to a B grade, one student improved from a D grade to a C grade, one student improved from a C grade to an A grade, and one student improved from an incomplete result to a C grade.

Further analysis indicated that students who engaged with the drafting process were more likely to improve their achievement. Seventy percent of students who submitted a draft improved their final grade, compared with 50% of students who did not participate in the drafting process.

Comparison of draft and final submissions demonstrated substantial growth in scientific reasoning and communication. For example, HC expanded his investigation beyond redshift to include Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation and scientific refinement of theories, while SH incorporated WMAP observations, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation and primordial hydrogen and helium abundance, significantly increasing the depth of analysis.

The redesigned assessment package reduced literacy-related barriers and provided students with multiple opportunities to demonstrate their scientific understanding. As a result, the assessment provided a more valid representation of student achievement than the previous task. The timely return of assessment results and detailed feedback also enabled students and families to better understand achievement outcomes and areas for future improvement.

Evaluation

The intentional redesign of the assessment package successfully addressed the scientific literacy challenges identified in the previous assessment task. Rather than focusing solely on content knowledge, the assessment was designed to explicitly support the skills students required to engage successfully with scientific research, interpret evidence and communicate scientific ideas.

Achievement data and subsequent reporting processes suggest that the combination of assessment design, targeted feedback and instructional strategies was effective in moving students from satisfactory achievement into higher achievement bands. The combination of explicit vocabulary instruction, consistent success criteria, an improved rubric, scaffolded report structures, drafting opportunities, targeted feedback and strategic use of EdChat contributed to improved student outcomes.

The redesigned rubric increased transparency by clearly communicating the knowledge, skills and qualities required for success. Aligning the rubric with the learning sequence and success criteria helped ensure that assessment judgements were based on students’ scientific understanding and communication skills rather than their ability to interpret complex assessment language.

The redesign also ensured that the literacy demands of the assessment did not become a barrier to students demonstrating their scientific understanding. This data further highlighted the value of structured drafting opportunities and targeted feedback, suggesting that future iterations of the task should include strategies to increase draft submission rates across the class.

Providing detailed feedback through DayMap ensured that assessment information was communicated promptly and transparently to both students and parents. This strengthened the connection between assessment, reporting and future learning by providing clear guidance on how students could continue to improve their scientific communication and inquiry skills. This experience reinforced the importance of deliberate assessment design in supporting student success. Careful consideration of accessibility, presentation design, rubric construction, assessment sequencing, literacy supports, feedback processes and reporting practices enabled students to engage more confidently with complex scientific concepts and produce higher-quality scientific reports. Future practice will continue to incorporate these principles while further refining opportunities for peer feedback and self-assessment to develop greater student independence.

Standards and Focus Areas

#1 Know the Students (1.2, 1.5, 1.6)
#2 Know the Content (2.3)
#3 Plan Teaching and Learning (3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6)
#4 Safe Learning Environment (4.5)
#5 Assess, Feedback and Report (5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5)