Secondary school teachers' perspectives on teaching about topics that bridge science and religion

The question of where to locate teaching about the relationships between science and religion has produced a long-running debate. Currently, Science and Religious Education (RE) are statutory subjects in England and are taught in secondary schools by different teachers. This paper reports on an interview study in which 16 teachers gave their perceptions of their roles and responsibilities when teaching topics that bridge science and religion and the extent to which they collaborated with teachers in the other subject area. We found that in this sample, teachers reported very little collaboration between the curriculum areas. Although the science curriculum makes no mention of religion, all the science teachers said that their approaches to such topics were affected by their recognition that some pupils hold religious beliefs. All the RE teachers reported struggling to ensure students know of a range of views about how science and religion relate. The paper concludes with a discussion about implications for curriculum design and teacher training.

Teachers' views on the nature of models

A semi-structured interview was used in Brazil to enquire into the 'notion of model' held by a total sample of 39 science teachers who were: employed in 'fundamental' (6-14 years) and 'medium' (15-17 years) schools; student science teachers currently doing their practicum; and university science teachers. Seven 'aspects' of their notions of a model were identified: the nature of a model, the use to which it can be put, the entities of which it consists, its relative uniqueness, the time span over which it is used, its status in the making of predictions, and the basis for the accreditation of its existence and use. Categories of meaning were identified for each of these aspects. The profiles of teachers' notions of 'model' in terms of the aspects and categories were complex, providing no support for the notion of 'Levels' in understanding. Teachers with degrees in chemistry or physics had different views about the notion of 'model' to those with degrees in biology or with teacher training certificates.

Science learning and graphic symbols: an exploration of early years teachers’ views and use of graphic symbols when teaching science

The study investigated early years teachers’ understanding and use of graphic symbols, defined as the visual representation(s) used to communicate one or more “linguistic” concepts, which can be used to facilitate science learning. The study was conducted in Cyprus where six early years teachers were observed and interviewed. The results indicate that the teachers had a good understanding of the role of symbols, but demonstrated a lack of understanding in regards to graphic symbols specifically. None of the teachers employed them in their observed science lesson, although some of them claimed that they did so. Findings suggest a gap in participants’ acquaintance with the terminology regarding different types of symbols and a lack of awareness about the use and availability of graphic symbols for the support of learning. There is a need to inform and train early years teachers about graphic symbols and their potential applications in supporting children’s learning.

Investigating early years teachers’ understanding and response to children’s preconceptions

This paper focuses on young children’s scientific preconceptions and discusses teachers’ identification of these preconceptions when teaching science in the early years, on which research is still limited. This paper is based on the theoretical framework of constructivism and it defines preconceptions as children’s erroneous concepts prior to formal education. A two phase case study approach was employed, facilitating in-depth investigation though the use of questionnaires, interviews and observations. The results indicate that the teachers did not dedicate time to identify children’s preconceptions when planning and teaching science, even when acknowledging preconceptions’ possible existence. This indicates a possible lack of appreciation of the importance of children’s preconceptions of the consequences when ignoring them. The results also indicate the need for further training and professional development in relation to the teaching of early-years science, especially since only a very small percentage of early years teachers tend to study science during their years compulsory education. A number of suggestions are also provided for practice and policy that can be useful for other subjects as well.

Competing priorities: Singapore teachers’ perspectives on critical literacy

This paper explores a group of Singaporean English language teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about critical literacy as well as their perspectives on how best to teach literacy and critical literacy in Singapore schools. A face-to-face survey was conducted among 58 English language teachers by using open-ended questions. The survey covered various topics related to literacy instruction including text decoding, meaning construction, and critical analysis of texts. The participating teachers believed strongly that reading and writing are transactional and interactional practices. However, they were less certain in their beliefs about teaching critical literacy including the critical, analytical and evaluative aspects of text reading. Some teachers saw a conflict between using time on teaching critical literacy and preparing students to pass their exams. As critical literacy is not a requirement at exams, they found it difficult to justify using time teaching it. The results suggest that the teachers’ belief systems are strongly influenced by the broad macrostructure of the educational system in Singapore and their own educational experiences.

Children's misconceptions and the teaching of early years science: a case study

The aim of this paper is to examine how teachers’ awareness of children’s misconceptions can affect children’s acquisition of scientific concepts. In other words, this paper is aimed at examining whether teaching is altered when teachers are aware of pupils’ misconceptions of a specific science concept. This paper details a case study focused on two kindergarten classes of five year-old children and their teachers and took place in Cyprus. Two lessons were observed and three children from each class were interviewed. Through the analysis of children’s responses it was possible to identify specific misconceptions related to the concept of rain. The results indicate that it is very important for teachers to be aware of what misconceptions children have, because this can help them plan lessons for children to overcome their misconceptions. It seems that it is more likely for children to overcome their misconceptions when teachers take these misconceptions into account as they plan and teach science lessons.

Children's preconceptions of science: how these can be used in teaching

This paper focuses on young children’s initial ideas about science prior to any teaching and discusses teachers’ identification of these ‘preconceptions’ when teaching science in the early years. The research focuses on early years teaching in public and private kindergartens with children from three to five. The area of the children’s preconceptions has been extensively investigated by other researchers in the past. However, research focusing on children’s preconceptions and how teachers work with these in the early years is still limited in comparison, especially within Cypriot context. A case study was employed which facilitated in-depth investigation employing different methods of data collection including interviews and observations. The results indicate that teachers tend to avoid identification of the children’s preconceptions when planning and teaching science. This suggests a lack of appreciation of the children’s preconceptions and the consequences when they are not acknowledged. To help teachers respond to the children’s preconceptions, this paper provides a number of suggestion on how to identify children’s preconceptions.