|
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science
Learning and Teaching, Volume 3, Issue 2, Article 2 (Dec., 2002) Peter AUBUSSON and Kevin WATSON Packaging constructivist Science teaching in a curriculum resource
|
The researchers, in conjunction with the NSW Department of Education and Training, identified the schools, teachers and students to participate in the study. 'Purposive sampling' was employed to achieve a 'representative sample' of schools across the Sydney metropolitan region with 'typicality' (Cohen & Manion, 1994, p. 89) of the schools and the willingness of two teachers in each school to participate in the study being the main criteria for selection. The materials were to be trialed in three schools with two science teachers from each school participating. The sample (see Table 1) included two coeducational schools and a single sex school drawing students from a range of socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds.
Table 1: Participating Teachers Identified by Pseudonym
Teacher Teacher Qualification Teaching Experience
School Type
Bronwyn BSc Dip Ed comprehensive Elaine BSc Dip Ed boys
Frank BSc (Hons) Dip Ed comprehensive
Gina M App Sc PhD Dip Ed boys
Harry BSc Dip Ed comprehensive
Jon Dip.Teach BSc MEd comprehensive One hundred and seven students took part in the data collection providing samples from their work books, participating in interviews and agreeing to have lessons viewed by researchers and video taped. The student sample was diverse and typical of schools in the Sydney metropolitan region.
The topic selected for teaching was 'Matter' as presented in BSCS Level B, Investigating Diversity and Limits, Unit 3: 'Why are things different?'. This topic was selected because it does not use excessive North American examples and is normally covered as part of the year 7 or 8 science program in NSW schools. The curriculum project materials were made available for teachers to examine before the first professional development session. A list of the materials supplied is shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Package Materials Provided to Teachers
Student text book unit Teacher Edition consisting of: o Introduction o Annotated student book & teachers notes o Teacher's Guide and Resource Book consisting of o Cooperative Learning background o Creating and sustaining teams o Learning Styles o Background Information o Charts of Outcomes o Extension activities o Assessment Evaluation and Student Learning o Black Line Masters Total The first of three professional development days, to support the research project was held in week 1 of term 3, 1997. This was followed by eight weeks in which the BSCS program was taught. The additional two professional development days were held in week 5 and week 8 of the teaching phase of the project. At the first professional development day the purpose of the research project was described. The teachers discussed constructivism, cooperative learning and the 5Es. Teachers' views of constructivism and cooperative learning were elicited by asking each teacher to write down their understandings of each of these terms followed by a general discussion that encouraged teachers to talk about their views. In this way teachers learnt from each other and may have modified their views. The 5Es were described and discussed. Teachers were asked to plan their first week of teaching. Throughout the day a cooperative learning approach was modelled with researchers acting as facilitators in eliciting answers to questions asked by teachers.
Each teacher was visited at least twice by one of the university researchers between the first and second professional development days. At these visits, classes were observed and conversations and interviews were held with both teachers and students to collect data and to support the teachers in their trial of the curriculum materials. Classroom observations were made using a predetermined protocol to assess how teachers were using the curriculum material - if they were following the strategies outlined by the project support notes. Observations were also made of student interactions using a predetermined check list to assess how they were engaging with the material presented in class and to find out if they perceived any differences in the way they were being taught. Student and teacher interviews, employing a semi-structures interview schedule, were used to triangulate the data collected from classroom observations and to provide detailed views on the teaching and learning experiences.
By the second professional development day two teachers had decided to leave the project. Their reasons are discussed in detail later in this paper. During the researchers' visits to classes and in interviews with teachers, it became apparent that the constructivist elements of the curriculum materials had been ignored by all but one teacher (Jon). Hence, on the second professional development day, the researchers concentrated on constructivism. The teachers themselves, however, were mainly concerned with either the difficulties or successes they were experiencing with the implementation of cooperative learning. This led to extended discussion of cooperative learning, including distinguishing cooperative learning from group work. This was achieved by modelling cooperative learning approaches to some of the suggested experiments and activities. In addition, teachers shared anecdotes about their experiences, selected activities were modelled and analysed to identify the ways they employed constructivist approaches, teachers were given an interim summary of the researchers' findings. These findings were discussed and the teachers planned the final weeks of their units.
A researcher visited each teacher at least twice between the second and third professional development days. On the third professional development day, the teachers were asked to bring students' books and videotapes of their lessons as a stimulus for discussion. It was on this day that the teachers, lead by Jon, began to concentrate the discussion on constructivism and the 5Es.
At each professional development day teachers were encouraged to talk about the experiences they had in their teaching and to identify effective teaching and learning which had occurred, as well as problems which had arisen. The professional development sessions were based on the assumption that teachers could learn from each other, drawing on their different expertise to describe and analyse their work to inform each other (Venville, Wallace & Louden, 1998). The main role played by the researchers was to promote this analysis and discussion and to act as colleagues with different expertise. Often this involved modelling approaches, offering views on the theoretical and philosophical basis of the project materials and drawing on examples from the project materials to illustrate how these views could be put into practice.
The data was reviewed throughout the data collection phase to identify patterns and trends (Erickson, 1986). This ongoing iteration of analysis influenced the questions students and teachers were asked in subsequent interviews and conversations, as well as shaping the design of the professional development program. The validity of this type of research is strengthened when a variety of overlapping data sources are collected and analysed. These included: formal interviews, informal conversations, lesson observations, observations at professional development days, survey of students' views on matter (pre and post implementation) and collection of artefacts. The interviews, conversations and observations, were analysed using the process recommended for interpretive studies (Erickson, 1986). Results are presented as short case reports for each teacher to illustrate the different ways in which they and their students used and responded to the curriculum project materials. In this way, evidence is presented to compare the impact of the package in different classes, to evaluate the extent to which they enhanced science education in each case and to identify trends. Where two teachers worked closely together in a school and the effects of the package was similar, case reports on these teachers have been combined. The pre and post surveys of student views were analysed using SPSS. No significant differences were found between pre- and post-scores on the surveys and this data is not discussed further in this article.
