Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 3, Issue 2, Foreword (Dec., 2002) Gregory P. THOMAS Some key questions with no easy answers Previous Contents Next

Tentative proposals

Obviously this is an area we, as science educators, need to work on. Lederman was referring specifically to the United States context when he strongly alluded to this but I suspect such a situation is quite universal. Expecting that schools and teachers will be knocking science educators' doors down for cooperation has been and still is clearly inappropriate in all but a handful of cases. I strongly agree with the old adage that teachers are the keys to educational reform. This presents a problem because there is a need for teachers to perceive that change is necessary and for them to be willing to step away from or modify some of their well-established pedagogical patterns before reform can be effected. Consequently, the process of reform can take considerable time and effort. Building relationships with teachers and schools takes time and it is us who need to be willing to approach teachers and listen to the views emanating from schools. To develop a common set of criteria for evaluating educational outcomes there is a need for trust and a shared vision to be developed. This will only happen initially through face-to-face dialogue and visiting schools is I think a powerful means for this. Findings from the seminal Project to Enhance Effective Learning (PEEL) (Baird & Mitchell, 1986; Baird & Northfield, 1992) and smaller scale research that I was involved in (Thomas & McRobbie, 2002) have convinced me that trust and shared vision can be developed, that reform can proceed and that the outcomes for schools teachers and their students are considerable. The criteria for evaluating progress may not be immediately apparent either to teachers and or the science educators involved. Rather they develop over time as collaboration proceeds. The aforementioned references also attest to the need for patience in this pursuit and highlight the possible research benefits from such collaboration between academics and practicing teachers. It is now almost 20 years since PEEL began and many people, and I would count myself as one, have benefited from the lessons learned through its operation. When I was a practicing high school science teacher it had a profound influence on how I saw the potential benefits of university academics working in collaboration with classroom teachers. Still today I believe it still serves as a powerful model of how science educators, teachers and schools can develop shared criteria for understanding and evaluating teaching and learning and hence for helping all members of the education community to have input into teacher education and development. There are no easy answers to the questions raised earlier in this foreword, however there are successful examples of how academics can work with classroom teachers and schools to better understand each other and engage in the dialogue that is so necessary for true reform to eventuate. It is important to search for these examples, to draw on the available case studies and research, if we are to begin to search further for answers.