Employing the five-factor mentoring instrument : analysing mentoring practices for teaching primary science.

Primary science education is a concern around the world and quality mentoring within schools can develop preservice teachers’ practices. A five-factor model for mentoring has been identified, namely, personal attributes, system requirements, pedagogical knowledge, modelling, and feedback. Final-year preservice teachers (mentees, n=211) from three Turkish universities were administered a previously validated instrument to gather perceptions of their mentoring in primary science teaching. ANOVA indicated that each of these five factors was statistically significant (p<.001) with mean scale scores ranging from 3.36 to 4.12. Although mentees perceived their mentors to provide evaluation feedback (95%), model classroom management (88%), guide their preparation (96%), and outline the science curriculum (92%), the majority of mentors were perceived not to assist their mentees in 10 of the 34 survey items. Professional development programmes that target the specific needs of these mentors may further enhance mentoring practices for advancing primary science teaching.

Further evidence of a relationship between explaining, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming

This paper reports on a replication of earlier studies into a possible hierarchy of programming skills. In this study, the students from whom data was collected were at a university that had not provided data for earlier studies. Also, the students were taught the programming language Python, which had not been used in earlier studies. Thus this study serves as a test of whether the findings in the earlier studies were specific to certain institutions, student cohorts, and programming languages. Also, we used a non–parametric approach to the analysis, rather than the linear approach of earlier studies. Our results are consistent with the earlier studies. We found that students who cannot trace code usually cannot explain code, and also that students who tend to perform reasonably well at code writing tasks have also usually acquired the ability to both trace code and explain code.

An in-depth study of a teacher engaged in an innovative primary science trial professional development project

The implementation of effective science programmes in primary schools is of continuing interest and concern for professional developers. As part of the Australian Academy of Science's approach to creating an awareness of Primary Investigations, a project team trialled a series of satellite television broadcasts of lessons related to two units of the curriculum for Year 3 and 4 children in 48 participating schools. The professional development project entitled Simply Science, included a focused component for the respective classroom teachers, which was also conducted by satellite. This paper reports the involvement of a Year 4 teacher in the project and describes her professional growth. Already an experienced and confident teacher, no quantitative changes in science teaching self efficacy were detected. However, her pedagogical content knowledge and confidence to teach science in the concept areas of matter and energy were enhanced. Changes in the teacher's views about the co-operative learning strategies espoused by Primary Investigations were also evident. Implications for the design of professional development programmes for primary science teachers are discussed.

Science teacher leadership for transforming the curriculum and classroom practice

While teacher leadership is the basis for innovation and reform within schools, few international studies have focused on the leadership practices of science teachers and heads of science departments. This chapter reviews the Australasian literature that addresses the issue both directly and indirectly. The transformational practices of heads of science departments as well as influential science teachers within departments are identified in this chapter.

ASERA : an uncontroversial evolution

The Australasian Science Education Research Association Ltd. (ASERA) is the oldest educational research association in Australasia. Starting as an informal meeting of science educators at Monash University in May 1970, it has evolved progressively without major controversy into a formally constituted limited company that promotes science education at all levels and contexts. There are no revelations of fractures within the association, and no accounts of major controversy, other than reference to a few grumbles here and there when changes were proposed. So, has the ASERA experience been positive and uplifting for all? Are there unspoken controversies? Can the uncontroversial be made controversial?

Biotechnology learnings using ‘Claymation’ and ‘Slowmation’

This ‘Claymation’ and ‘Slowmation’ project incorporated content as well as skill development. The participants – 4 pre-service teachers and 4 secondary school students explored chromosome mapping and DNA replication. Through research, the writing, revising and editing of storyboards, two short videos were produced. Two of the pre-service teachers had prior experience with Claymation, however none of the participants had prior knowledge of chromosome mapping or DNA replication. This paper describes the learnings of the participants in terms of their self generated questions, the need for attention to detail, and argumentation / negotiation skills.

Mainstreaming sustainability into pre-service teacher edcuation in Australia

There is a growing interest in and support for education for sustainability in Australian schools. Australian Government schemes such as the Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative (AuSSI), along with strategies such as Educating for a Sustainable Future: A National Environmental Education Statement for Australian Schools(NEES(Australian Government and Curriculum Corporation (2005) and Living Sustainably: The Australian Government’s National Action Plan for Education for Sustainability (Australian Government 2009), recognise the need and offer support for education for sustainability in Australian schools. The number of schools that have engaged with AuSSI indicates that this interest also exists within Australian schools. Despite this, recent research indicates that pre-service teacher education institutions and programs are not doing all they can to prepare teachers for teaching education for sustainability or for working within sustainable schools. The education of school teachers plays a vital role in achieving changes in teaching and learning in schools. Indeed, the professional development of teachers in education for sustainability has been identified as ‘the priority of priorities’. Much has been written about the need to ‘reorient teacher education towards sustainability’. Teacher education is seen as a key strategy that is yet to be effectively utilised to embed education for sustainability in schools. Mainstreaming sustainability in Australian schools will not be achieved without the preparation of teachers for this task. The Mainstreaming Sustainability model piloted in this study seeks to engage a range of stakeholder organisations and key agents of change within a system to all work simultaneously to bring about a change, such as the mainstreaming of sustainability. The model is premised on the understanding that sustainability will be mainstreamed within teacher education if there is engagement with key agents of change across the wider teacher education system and if the key agents of change are ‘deeply’ involved in making the change. The model thus seeks to marry broad engagement across a system with the active participation of stakeholders within that system. Such a systemic approach is a way of bringing together diverse viewpoints to make sense of an issue and harness that shared interpretation to define boundaries, roles and relationships leading to a better defined problem that can be acted upon more effectively. Like action research, the systemic approach is also concerned with modelling change and seeking plausible solutions through collaboration between stakeholders. This is important in ensuring that outcomes are useful to the researchers/stakeholders and the system being researched as it creates partnerships and commitments to the outcomes by stakeholder participants. The study reported on here examines whether the ‘Mainstreaming Sustainability’ model might be effective as a means to mainstream sustainability in pre-service teacher education. This model, developed in an earlier study, was piloted in the Queensland teacher education system in order to examine its effectiveness in creating organisational and systemic change. The pilot project in Queensland achieved a number of outcomes. The project: • provided useful insights into the effectiveness of the Mainstreaming Sustainability model in bringing about change while also building research capacity within the system • developed capacities within the teacher education community: o developing competencies in education for sustainability o establishing more effective interactions between decision-makers and other stakeholders o establishing a community of inquiry • changed teaching and learning approaches used in participating teacher education institutions through: o curriculum and resource development o the adoption of education for sustainability teaching and learning processes o the development of institutional policies • improved networks within the teacher education system through: o identifying key agents of change within the system o developing new, and building on existing, partnerships between schools, teacher education institutions and government agencies • engaged relevant stakeholders such as government agencies and non-government organisations to understand and support the change Our findings indicate that the Mainstreaming Sustainability model is able to facilitate organisational and systemic change – over time – if: • the individuals involved have the conceptual and personal capacities needed to facilitate change, that is, to be a key agent of change • stakeholders are engaged as participants in the process of change, not simply as ‘interested parties’ • there is a good understanding of systemic change and the opportunities for leveraging change within systems. In particular, in seeking to mainstream sustainability in pre-service teacher education in Queensland it has become clear that one needs to build capacity for change within participants such as knowledge of education for sustainability, conceptual skills in systemic thinking, action research and organisational change, and leadership skills. It is also of vital importance that key agents of change – those individuals who are ‘hubs’ within a system and can leverage for change across a wide range of the system – are identified and engaged with as early as possible. Key agents of change can only be correctly identified, however, if the project leaders and known participants have clearly identified the boundary to their system as this enables the system, sub-system and environment of the system to be understood. Through mapping the system a range of key organisations and stakeholders will be identified, including government and nongovernment organisations, teacher education students, teacher education academics, and so on. On this basis, key agents of change within the system and sub-system can be identified and invited to assist in working for change. A final insight is that it is important to have time – and if necessary the funding to ‘buy time’ – in seeking to bring about system-wide change. Seeking to bring about system-wide change is an ambitious project, one that requires a great deal of effort and time. These insights provide some considerations for those seeking to utilise the Mainstreaming Sustainability model to bring about change within and across a pre-service teacher education system.

Learning in the third space : a sociocultural perspective on learning with analogies

Research on analogies in science education has focussed on student interpretation of teacher and textbook analogies, psychological aspects of learning with analogies and structured approaches for teaching with analogies. Few studies have investigated how analogies might be pivotal in students’ growing participation in chemical discourse. To study analogies in this way requires a sociocultural perspective on learning that focuses on ways in which language, signs, symbols and practices mediate participation in chemical discourse. This study reports research findings from a teacher-research study of two analogy-writing activities in a chemistry class. The study began with a theoretical model, Third Space, which informed analyses and interpretation of data. Third Space was operationalized into two sub-constructs called Dialogical Interactions and Hybrid Discourses. The aims of this study were to investigate sociocultural aspects of learning chemistry with analogies in order to identify classroom activities where students generate Dialogical Interactions and Hybrid Discourses, and to refine the operationalization of Third Space. These aims were addressed through three research questions. The research questions were studied through an instrumental case study design. The study was conducted in my Year 11 chemistry class at City State High School for the duration of one Semester. Data were generated through a range of data collection methods and analysed through discourse analysis using the Dialogical Interactions and Hybrid Discourse sub-constructs as coding categories. Results indicated that student interactions differed between analogical activities and mathematical problem-solving activities. Specifically, students drew on discourses other than school chemical discourse to construct analogies and their growing participation in chemical discourse was tracked using the Third Space model as an interpretive lens. Results of this study led to modification of the theoretical model adopted at the beginning of the study to a new model called Merged Discourse. Merged Discourse represents the mutual relationship that formed during analogical activities between the Analog Discourse and the Target Discourse. This model can be used for interpreting and analysing classroom discourse centred on analogical activities from sociocultural perspectives. That is, it can be used to code classroom discourse to reveal students’ growing participation with chemical (or scientific) discourse consistent with sociocultural perspectives on learning.

Implementing change within a school science department: progressive and dissonant voices

The purpose of this study was to describe the teaching and leadership experiences of a science teacher who, as head of department, was preparing to introduce changes in the science department of an independent school in response to the requirements of the new junior science syllabus in Queensland, Australia. This teacher consented to classroom observations and interviews with the researchers where his beliefs about teaching practice and change were explored. Other science teachers at the school also were interviewed about their reactions to the planned changes. Interpretive analysis of the data provides an account of the complex interactions, negotiations, compromises, concessions, and trade-offs faced by the teacher during a period of education reform. Perceived barriers existing within the school that impeded proposed change are identified

Researching Teachers for the Middle Years

The educational landscape around middle schooling reform is a contemporary focus of the Australian school education agenda. The University of Queensland Middle Years of Schooling pre-service teacher education program develops specialist teachers for this crucial phase of schooling. This program has become a national leader for middle school teacher education. This paper reports on aspects of a longitudinal study that began with the first cohort of students in the program in 2003. To date 234 students have been involved as participants in the study. The findings demonstrate that students: can articulate what is meant by the term middle years and can identify with a need for a philosophy of middle schooling; are aware that they are part of a reform movement which has swept the nation and which has implications for teaching in schools in the twenty first century; are confident the program is producing highly skilled professional teachers willing to take on the challenges of teaching in the middle years; can say how their training has helped them understand and account for the educational experiences of students in a time of transition; and hold quiet, yet firm beliefs about teaching in the middle years. Furthermore, using a measure of lexical density to analyze the verbs used by respondents, it seems that this quiet confidence has grown in the period from 2003 – 2006.

Civics and citizenship education in the national history curriculum : conducting the same music or rehearsing an incomplete tune?

This paper raises some questions about teaching and teacher education in the social sciences in response to the decision to implement a national curriculum in Australia. In particular, it contends that the decision to focus on discipline-specific knowledge in the social sciences will not necessarily meet the hopes of the Melbourne Declaration and deliver a 21st century curriculum that prepares students for the future. In doing so, it suggests that social educators need to engage with the broader discourse and political context shaping the push for curriculum reform in Australia and makes reference to the marginalisation of civics and citizenship education in the latest draft of the Australian curriculum: History.

Fusing curricula : science, technology and ICT

Curriculum demands continue to increase on school education systems with teachers at the forefront of implementing syllabus requirements. Education is reported frequently as a solution to most societal problems and, as a result of the world’s information explosion, teachers are expected to cover more and more within teaching programs. How can teachers combine subjects in order to capitalise on the competing educational agendas within school timeframes? Fusing curricula requires the bonding of standards from two or more syllabuses. Both technology and ICT complement the learning of science. This study analyses selected examples of preservice teachers’ overviews for fusing science, technology and ICT. These program overviews focused on primary students and the achievement of two standards (one from science and one from either technology or ICT). These primary preservice teachers’ fused-curricula overviews included scientific concepts and related technology and/or ICT skills and knowledge. Findings indicated a range of innovative curriculum plans for teaching primary science through technology and ICT, demonstrating that these subjects can form cohesive links towards achieving the respective learning standards. Teachers can work more astutely by fusing curricula; however further professional development may be required to advance thinking about these processes. Bonding subjects through their learning standards can extend beyond previous integration or thematic work where standards may not have been assessed. Education systems need to articulate through syllabus documents how effective fusing of curricula can be achieved. It appears that education is a key avenue for addressing societal needs, problems and issues. Education is promoted as a universal solution, which has resulted in curriculum overload (Dare, Durand, Moeller, & Washington, 1997; Vinson, 2001). Societal and curriculum demands have placed added pressure on teachers with many extenuating education issues increasing teachers’ workloads (Mobilise for Public Education, 2002). For example, as Australia has weather conducive for outdoor activities, social problems and issues arise that are reported through the media calling for action; consequently schools have been involved in swimming programs, road and bicycle safety programs, and a wide range of activities that had been considered a parental responsibility in the past. Teachers are expected to plan, implement and assess these extra-curricula activities within their already overcrowded timetables. At the same stage, key learning areas (KLAs) such as science and technology are mandatory requirements within all Australian education systems. These systems have syllabuses outlining levels of content and the anticipated learning outcomes (also known as standards, essential learnings, and frameworks). Time allocated for teaching science in obviously an issue. In 2001, it was estimated that on average the time spent in teaching science in Australian Primary Schools was almost an hour per week (Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). More recently, a study undertaken in the U.S. reported a similar finding. More than 80% of the teachers in K-5 classrooms spent less than an hour teaching science (Dorph, Goldstein, Lee, et al., 2007). More importantly, 16% did not spend teaching science in their classrooms. Teachers need to learn to work smarter by optimising the use of their in-class time. Integration is proposed as one of the ways to address the issue of curriculum overload (Venville & Dawson, 2005; Vogler, 2003). Even though there may be a lack of definition for integration (Hurley, 2001), curriculum integration aims at covering key concepts in two or more subject areas within the same lesson (Buxton & Whatley, 2002). This implies covering the curriculum in less time than if the subjects were taught separately; therefore teachers should have more time to cover other educational issues. Expectedly, the reality can be decidedly different (e.g., Brophy & Alleman, 1991; Venville & Dawson, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers report that students expand their knowledge and skills as a result of subject integration (James, Lamb, Householder, & Bailey, 2000). There seems to be considerable value for integrating science with other KLAs besides aiming to address teaching workloads. Over two decades ago, Cohen and Staley (1982) claimed that integration can bring a subject into the primary curriculum that may be otherwise left out. Integrating science education aims to develop a more holistic perspective. Indeed, life is not neat components of stand-alone subjects; life integrates subject content in numerous ways, and curriculum integration can assist students to make these real-life connections (Burnett & Wichman, 1997). Science integration can provide the scope for real-life learning and the possibility of targeting students’ learning styles more effectively by providing more than one perspective (Hudson & Hudson, 2001). To illustrate, technology is essential to science education (Blueford & Rosenbloom, 2003; Board of Studies, 1999; Penick, 2002), and constructing technology immediately evokes a social purpose for such construction (Marker, 1992). For example, building a model windmill requires science and technology (Zubrowski, 2002) but has a key focus on sustainability and the social sciences. Science has the potential to be integrated with all KLAs (e.g., Cohen & Staley, 1982; Dobbs, 1995; James et al., 2000). Yet, “integration” appears to be a confusing term. Integration has an educational meaning focused on special education students being assimilated into mainstream classrooms. The word integration was used in the late seventies and generally focused around thematic approaches for teaching. For instance, a science theme about flight only has to have a student drawing a picture of plane to show integration; it did not connect the anticipated outcomes from science and art. The term “fusing curricula” presents a seamless bonding between two subjects; hence standards (or outcomes) need to be linked from both subjects. This also goes beyond just embedding one subject within another. Embedding implies that one subject is dominant, while fusing curricula proposes an equal mix of learning within both subject areas. Primary education in Queensland has eight KLAs, each with its established content and each with a proposed structure for levels of learning. Primary teachers attempt to cover these syllabus requirements across the eight KLAs in less than five hours a day, and between many of the extra-curricula activities occurring throughout a school year (e.g., Easter activities, Education Week, concerts, excursions, performances). In Australia, education systems have developed standards for all KLAs (e.g., Education Queensland, NSW Department of Education and Training, Victorian Education) usually designated by a code. In the late 1990’s (in Queensland), “core learning outcomes” for strands across all KLA’s. For example, LL2.1 for the Queensland Education science syllabus means Life and Living at Level 2 standard number 1. Thus, a teacher’s planning requires the inclusion of standards as indicated by the presiding syllabus. More recently, the core learning outcomes were replaced by “essential learnings”. They specify “what students should be taught and what is important for students to have opportunities to know, understand and be able to do” (Queensland Studies Authority, 2009, para. 1). Fusing science education with other KLAs may facilitate more efficient use of time and resources; however this type of planning needs to combine standards from two syllabuses. To further assist in facilitating sound pedagogical practices, there are models proposed for learning science, technology and other KLAs such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), Productive Pedagogies (Education Queensland, 2004), de Bono’s Six Hats (de Bono, 1985), and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1999) that imply, warrant, or necessitate fused curricula. Bybee’s 5 Es, for example, has five levels of learning (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate; Bybee, 1997) can have the potential for fusing science and ICT standards.