 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 13, Issue 2, Article 14 (Dec., 2012) |
In this science methods course, there was no practicum or teaching experience linked with the course. The author could not observe or give feedback to the preservice elementary teachers on how science is to be taught in a real classroom setting. Hence the course was based more on theories rather than on practices. Furthermore, much of the science knowledge learned in this course was broad but not in-depth due to the short period of time. The intention of the author was to engage the interest of the preservice elementary teachers and help them to develop a positive attitude in learning and teaching science. Hopefully, they can explore science education further when they are ‘hooked’ on the excitement of teaching science.
The statistical data of this study were significant and invaluable. Based on the findings, the author knew which areas of instruction or curriculum needed further improvement. The four-lesson unit plan was a good assignment for preservice elementary teachers as they could integrate all of the theories they had learned and applied in a classroom setting. At the end of the semester, the preservice elementary teachers had to do a demonstration teaching of the unit. The feedback from the preservice elementary teachers was that the peer teaching offered them an insight of how science could be taught in the classroom and that the lesson plans were good teaching resources.
As reviewed in the findings, the author realized that the scope and sequence for teaching elementary science should be made explicit to preservice teachers. The National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) and the state science curriculum framework do not provide a clear guideline of what to teach. Thus, more time is needed to spend analyzing the depth and breadth of what is to be taught with respect to the state science curriculum framework. This is important as most of the preservice elementary teachers do not have a strong science background and are uncertain of what has to be taught. In addition, the misconception that science is just hands-on activities should be clarified as this concept has been deep rooted in many preservice elementary teachers’ minds. They focus too much on the ‘fun’ part of the activities and overlook the importance of introducing and solidifying the science concepts.
Overall, the author felt satisfied with the science methods course as there was a great increase in the percentage scores when comparing the pre- and posttest. Nevertheless, there are still certain areas that need to be improved. Moreover, the author found that the Hudson and Ginns (2007) instrument offers a good self-evaluative tool for teacher educators to reflect on their teaching pedagogy.
