Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 3, Issue 1, Article 10(June, 2002)
Teresa T S WONG
A Case Study of School-Based Science Curriculum Development: Overview of Project Approach and Process of Implementation
Previous Contents Next

Developing an Interactive Approach for SBSCD

The three-phase framework discussed above is constructed based on the planning and practical experiences thus far for the SBSCD project. It should be noted that although the project timeline is logically sequenced into phases (planning, implementation, and evaluation), it must not be presumed that the curriculum development elements are carried out in the prescribed sequence. Through conducting comparison studies among the various curriculum development models in history, Brady (1995) identified four key elements for the curriculum development process to be objective, content, method and evaluation. She stated from her extensive experiences in curriculum development that restricting a curriculum development to a fixed sequence could blunt its creativity. This point has special significant and practical implication in this project. For example, it is discovered that the exercise of some of the projects' objectives as fixed at the planning phase could create unnecessary constraints to the potential power of the curriculum development endeavour for a particular school. Even when a school has chosen its objectives and content when joining the project, a situational analysis process may reveal the school's hidden limitations on fulfilling these objectives, or even other issues within the school's science curriculum that require more immediate attention. Therefore, the school may need to change objectives and/or content. An interactive model is thus proven more appropriate for this project, as its' flexible nature allows it to respond quickly and reflect closer to the reality of curriculum development in a school; a change made to one curriculum element will initiate changes to the other elements. Therefore the model allows its elements to be progressively modifiable according to the changing conditions. For example, when a school wants to develop students' skills in project learning through the design of a class web-page, teachers may soon discover that students generally do not have adequate training and background knowledge in the IT field to proceed with this objective. The school may need to substitute with another objective that can be implemented within a school term, such as to develop science investigation through project learning. An interactive model allows the curriculum developer to react promptly to the learning situation in determining what sequence to follow among the curriculum elements. The dynamic and adaptable nature of this model encourages mutual understanding and increases comfort level for the teachers and students involved.

The method approach for the selection of teaching and learning activities in SBSCD is shaped in the following process: First, the curriculum objectives as stated in the planning stage; also the guidelines suggested in the education reform with regard to science education serve as the basis for searching for the appropriate teaching and learning strategies. The overall method approach is then formulated, using the following models of teaching and learning identified by Brady (1995) as the guiding theory principle.

Cognitive Developmental Model: Subjects embody not only their own unique content, but also particular ways of thinking. Cognitive developmental model stresses on engaging students in investigative activities to further develop upon their cognitive thinking and inquiry processes skills. In the scope of the SBSCD project, both P.O.E. (predict, observe, explain) model and science process skills reinforcement are applied alongside the thinking of the cognitive developmental model as they are relatively simple models suitable for primary and junior secondary school students. They are also easily adaptable for lesson demonstrations or applied in science investigation activities.

Interaction Model: The model emphasizes on learning occurred as a result of student's interaction with others. Numerous studies have proven that learning in groups is an effective process in enhancing students' problem solving and collaborative abilities (Johnson, D., Johnson, R. and Holubec, E., 1994; Kagan, S., 1994; Lazarowitz, R. and Karsenty, G., 1990). SBSCD suggested teaching/learning activities resulted of this model may include cooperative learning, peer and group evaluations.

Transaction Model: This model stresses on providing opportunities for teachers to take on different roles (such as advisor, observer, co-learner, facilitator) to form varying degrees of teaching directions in student discovery. This is implemented in three possible settings within the SBSCD: project learning, cross-curricular thematic week and School Science Day.

Behavioural Model: This model emphasizes tightly sequenced steps of learning and the use of reinforcement to elicit observable behaviours. In the SBSCD project, this is achieved through coupling diversified teaching activities with student work; training of students' different abilities through alternative assessment formats, with particular emphasis on daily life relevance. Through developing the action plan with schools, curriculum developers gradually guide teachers to shift their teaching-learning practices from mainly teacher exposition to more interactive and student-centered learning such as brainstorming and problem-solving in small groups.

As to the selection of evaluation approach, the emphasis is not on judging the outcomes of the particular schools with any pre-determined standard, but rather to reveal the contributing factors and their related issues as stated in the evaluation phase. In addition, the evaluation approach must consider the following characteristics of this SBSCD project:

With the above considerations, Parlett and Hamilton's illuminative model (1976) was adopted to form a framework for analyzing information and results in the project. The model incorporates an interactive approach which contains three key stages: observation, inquiry and explanation. Its aim is to 'illuminate' a curriculum through description and interpretation of all situational influences, the significant features and processes of the curriculum: After a curriculum developer obtains background information from the school, detailed observations are done based on the implementation (such as all teacher-student interactions), transactions (such as frequency of teachers' self-initiated contacts) and informal remarks (such as teachers' reactions to the suggested curriculum development plan). During the inquiry stage, the curriculum developer focuses on issues selected in the observation stage as the most worthy of attention, then refines areas for more sustained and intensive inquiry. This is achieved mainly within stage 2 and 3 of the planning phase as well as throughout the implementation phase. At the final stage of explanation, individual findings obtained from the planning and the implementation phases are placed in a broader explanatory context. Conclusions are formed by weighing alternative interpretations in the light of obtained data, spotting patterns of cause and effect and are presented to the school during the final report.

Curriculum developers constantly review each curriculum element with teachers and help them to plan, reflect and readjust teaching strategies and curriculum design. Although SBSCD uses the content, objective as the basis for the method and evaluation to build upon, an interactive approach emphasizing on immediate response to the schools and teachers' needs is reinforced throughout the process.

Copyright (C) 2002 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 3, Issue 1, Article 10(June, 2002). All Rights Reserved.