Packaging constructivist Science teaching in a curriculum resource

Of the six teachers reported, four were enthusiastic and keen to try the BSCS project materials with their classes. Elaine and Gina were initially willing to participate but were not keen on the package, considering it unsuitable for their students. The impacts of the package on the quality of teaching ranged from none (Elaine and Gina) to marked changes, such as using cooperative learning and beginning to employ constructivist teaching (Bronwyn and Frank). For Jon and Harry, the situation was complicated by their perceptions of their role as participants in a research project. Both saw their role as trialing a research package exactly as prescribed. Their attempt to maintain their research rigour restricted their use of the curriculum package. They did not adapt or use the materials in ways they might normally. For Harry this was destructive. By contrast, Jon coped ably with this problem. Hence, the fact that they were engaged in research may have inhibited potential benefits of the package.

The evidence suggests that those teachers who sought new approaches to enhance their teaching were more likely to achieve this. However, it was difficult for teachers to develop an understanding of constructivism and appreciate its implications for teaching, let alone employ constructivist approaches such as the 5Es, until they had mastered some of its building blocks including teaching strategies. Teachers perceived it necessary to implement cooperative learning teaching strategies before implementing constructivist approaches to teaching and learning, such as the 5Es. The development of this teaching-learning strategy seemed a necessary prerequisite before teachers were prepared to examine constructivism and its implications for their teaching. Bronwyn and Frank did not even begin to consider constructivism until after they had organised and established cooperative learning groups. Harry never managed to establish cooperative learning and did not move on the consider constructivism. Only Jon, who was already familiar with a constructivist approach, was not stalled by the need to implement cooperative learning in his class.

The mass of information in the curriculum package was too much for most teachers. The information, which was provided to support the implementation of the project materials, rather than promoting implementation, had the unanticipated outcome of alienating some teachers. Teachers had difficulty using the BSCS text. They found it impossible to use without reference to other support materials in the package. Those who persevered with the project eventually implemented cooperative learning, began to consider the 5Es and considered constructivism and its implications for teaching. The BSCS curriculum package also necessitated teachers working closely together in their schools and seeking mutual support as they attempted to deal with the difficulties arising from the use of the package. This interaction may have assisted teachers to develop greater insights into the teaching and learning principles than they would if they had worked alone. This was most evident with Frank and Bronwyn who worked as a team in their school from the start of their project but all participants commented on the importance of meeting with other teachers to share ideas about the resources and to be encouraged by their peers.

Almost all students in all classes (except Harry's who did like the cooperative groups into which they were placed) said that they liked their science experiences and claimed they learnt more when using the curriculum packages. Students also thought the nature of teaching and learning had changed. Students in all classes claimed, for example, that they did more practical activities and more group work. One of the main factors cited by students to explain their improved attitude to school science was the greater opportunity to work in groups, particularly when they could work with friends. Some teachers were less convinced that the teaching had changed and were concerned that students may be learning less in the time available. The difference between student and teacher perceptions of the impact of the package requires further research to explore the reasons for these differences.

Factors influencing the success of the implementation
A range of factors influenced the success of the attempted implementation of the BSCS package and its constructivist approach. These factors included

Previous learning experiences, particularly with cooperative group work and exposure to constructivist teaching.
The amount of material provided to support the teacher. In this study teachers considered there was too much to cope with.
Teachers' perceptions of what was meant by trialing a resource. For example, Browyn and Frank were more willing to adapt the package to their needs in contrast to Jon and Harry who considered it important to use the activities with minimal alteration.
Students' interest in and motivation to learn science. There seems to have been an interaction between the trial of the package and students' interest and motivation. In some classes (particularly Browyn's and Frank's) the trial of the package seemed to increase student interest and motivation. In contrast, students' lack of interest and low motivation may have made it difficult to implement the approach effectively in Harry's class. This possible interaction between students' motivation, interest and the pedagogy of the package requires further investigation.
Students' ability, particularly in language, as some students found reading the text too demanding.
The duration and type of professional development. One of the main problems experienced by teachers, other than Jon, was that it was very difficult to quickly develop a clear view of constructivist learning theory. This led to a mechanistic implementation of the 5Es teaching approach and an emphasis on the cooperative learning strategy, which they more readily understood and found attractive.