Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

This article explores the effect of high-stakes assessment on the representation of epistemic knowledge in the enacted curriculum-That is, the curriculum experienced by students in the classroom. Epistemic knowledge concerns the processes for constructing and evaluating theories that explain phenomena in the natural and social worlds. Knowledge-building disciplines such as history and science each have their own epistemic processes. We explore the extent to which these processes are reflected in the standards used to assess history and biology for the National Certificates of Educational Achievement (NCEA). We show that these processes arc not well represented in the externally assessed (examination-based) standards for either discipline, and that biological epistcmology is not well represented by its internally assessed standards either. The internally assessed standards for history, however, do involve students in a simplified version of authentic historical enquiry. In a statistical component of the research, we show that internally assessed standards for history are a stronger predictor of subsequent achievement in history than the externally assessed standards for history, whereas the converse is the case for biology. We suggest that the epistemic focus of the internally assessed standards in history has resulted in the enacted curriculum for this subject being more epistemically based than is the case for biology.

Original publication




Journal article


Curriculum Matters

Publication Date





80 - 102