 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 16, Issue 1, Article 16 (Jun., 2015) |
I have implemented Science and Technology Laboratory Applications (STLA) course to PPTs for three years. Hovewer, I met PPT having low self-confidence to conduct science experiments by virtue of their poor practice as mentioned in some studies (Appleton 1995; Pell and Jarvis 2003; Nadelson et al., 2013). They have always claimed that they got science courses including only theoretical concepts of science at first years of both high school and undergraduate degree. Then, they were intensively engaged in science experiments in their second year of undergraduate degree. To overcome this undesired problem, I needed a method to get PPTs to teach SPS and science concepts without focusing on “structure” of experiments.
Constructivist learning approach already enabled me to change the objectives by considering the learning needs of students (Brooks, 1987). I focused on getting them to acquire SPS rather than dealing with complicated experiments. I embedded SPS into the simple science experiments based on Constructivist 5E Model. I designed several “extended” science experiments (ESSE) which were known as “experiment that you can do at home” by expanding the content as well.
In the first four weeks of the Action research study, I introduced SPS and 5E model to PPTs. In the following weeks, I implemented ESSEs to 39 PPTs (25 male, 14 female) who were enrolled in STLA course in the 2013-2014 academic year. Then, I wanted them to conduct several ESSEs using the same method. The ESSE process is illustrated in “Sound is a kind of energy” experiment in Appendix A. Finally, I asked their views about the applications. Qualitative methods were used to collect data. Data collection was carried out by a focus group interview with 7 PPTs (4 female and 3 male). Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis method by coding and creating categories and themes.
The Perceptions and the Experiences of PPTs about ESSE Process
This title should not be considered as “findings section” of the study. Under this title, I tried to present the perceptions and the experiences of PPTs to provide a viewpoint to the readers about ESSE process.
Although the entire group had taken an introductory science course previously, PPTs expressed that they had fear, anxiety and worry about experiments before the implementations. One of the PPT framed that “I have learnt science theoretically”, another pre-service teacher established “I had fear of science”, another one expressed that “I have not conducted experiment until this course”, one PPT pointed that “I thought that I have a trouble conducting experiment”. After the implementations, although PPTs encountered several difficulties, most of all expressed their satisfaction. One of the PPTs expressed that “I think that it is a successful implementation for teaching and learning science”. One of the PPTs pointed that “I have learned how science subjects can be popularized and concretized. Hereafter, I can easily develop and implement several simple science experiments to teach science and SPS to my prospective students in the future”. Another pre-service teacher acknowledged that “my science fear has decreased during the course due to simple science experiment that I can do anywhere”. When a female PPT pointed that “the implementation allowed me to learn science without memorizing” the other one stated that “Although I have trouble in telling the difference between dependent and independent variables, I have gained ability to apply theoretical knowledge into practice”. One PPT expressed that “Although I had some difficulty in providing material in my hostel, I have learned that any object can be used as a material for conducting an experiment”. A male PPT summarized the benefits of ESSE. He stated that “I have learned that simple facts or events may contain complex scientific knowledge. Therefore, I have a trouble in explaining the result of the some experiments”.
