Inquiry-based science in a primary classroom : professional development impacting practice

The critical factor in determining students' interest and motivation to learn science is the quality of the teaching. However, science typically receives very little time in primary classrooms, with teachers often lacking the confidence to engage in inquiry-based learning because they do not have a sound understanding of science or its associated pedagogical approaches. Developing teacher knowledge in this area is a major challenge. Addressing these concerns with didactic "stand and deliver" modes of Professional Development (PD) has been shown to have little relevance or effectiveness, yet is still the predominant approach used by schools and education authorities. In response to that issue, the constructivist-inspired Primary Connections professional learning program applies contemporary theory relating to the characteristics of effective primary science teaching, the changes required for teachers to use those pedagogies, and professional learning strategies that facilitate such change. This study investigated the nature of teachers' engagement with the various elements of the program. Summative assessments of such PD programs have been undertaken previously, however there was an identified need for a detailed view of the changes in teachers' beliefs and practices during the intervention. This research was a case study of a Primary Connections implementation. PD workshops were presented to a primary school staff, then two teachers were observed as they worked in tandem to implement related curriculum units with their Year 4/5 classes over a six-month period. Data including interviews, classroom observations and written artefacts were analysed to identify common themes and develop a set of assertions related to how teachers changed their beliefs and practices for teaching science. When teachers implement Primary Connections, their students "are more frequently curious in science and more frequently learn interesting things in science" (Hackling & Prain, 2008). This study has found that teachers who observe such changes in their students consequently change their beliefs and practices about teaching science. They enhance science learning by promoting student autonomy through open-ended inquiries, and they and their students enhance their scientific literacy by jointly constructing investigations and explaining their findings. The findings have implications for teachers and for designers of PD programs. Assertions related to teaching science within a pedagogical framework consistent with the Primary Connections model are that: (1) promoting student autonomy enhances science learning; (2) student autonomy presents perceived threats to teachers but these are counteracted by enhanced student engagement and learning; (3) the structured constructivism of Primary Connections resources provides appropriate scaffolding for teachers and students to transition from didactic to inquiry-based learning modes; and (4) authentic science investigations promote understanding of scientific literacy and the "nature of science". The key messages for designers of PD programs are that: (1) effective programs model the pedagogies being promoted; (2) teachers benefit from taking the role of student and engaging in the proposed learning experiences; (3) related curriculum resources foster long-term engagement with new concepts and strategies; (4) change in beliefs and practices occurs after teachers implement the program or strategy and see positive outcomes in their students; and (5) implementing this study's PD model is efficient in terms of resources. Identified topics for further investigation relate to the role of assessment in providing evidence to support change in teachers' beliefs and practices, and of teacher reflection in making such change more sustainable.

Student autonomy enhancing science learning : Observations from a Primary Connections implementation

This case study involved a detailed analysis of the changes in beliefs and teaching practices of teachers who adopted the Primary Connections program as a professional development initiative. When implementing an inquiry-based learning model, teachers observed that their students learnt more when they intervened less. By scaffolding open-ended nquiries they achieved more diverse, complex and thorough learning outcomes than previously achieved with teacher-led discussions or demonstrations. Initially, student autonomy presented erceived threats to teachers, including possible selection of topics outside the teachers’ science knowledge. In practice, when such issues arose, resolving them became a stimulating part of the earning for both teachers and students. The teachers’ observation of enhanced student learning became a powerful motivator for change in their beliefs and practices. Implications for developers of PD programs are (1) the importance of modeling student-devised inquiries, and (2) recognising the role of successful classroom implementation in facilitating change.

Science is Primary - Children Thinking and Learning in theChemistry Laboratory

The goal of primary science education is to foster children’s interest, develop positive science attitudes and promote science process skills development. Learning by playing and discovering provides several opportunities for children to inquiry and understand science based on the first–hand experience. The current research was conducted in the children’s laboratory in Heureka, the Finnish science centre. Young children (aged 7 years) which came from 4 international schools did a set of chemistry experiments in the laboratory. From the results of the cognitive test, the pre-test, the post-test, supported by observation and interview, we could make the conclusion that children enjoyed studying in the laboratory. Chemistry science was interesting and fascinating for young children; no major gender differences were found between boys and girls learning in the science laboratory. Lab work not only encouraged children to explore and investigate science, but also stimulated children’s cognitive development.

Practical activities : what science teaching can learn from primary classrooms

Although I have been teaching and researching in primary science for the past decade, I began my career in science teaching in secondary and tertiary institutions and my views on science teaching were formed in these environments. Because I have never been a classroom primary teacher it has only been slowly that I have come to recognise some of the unique characteristics of science teaching in primary schools and come to value them. This paper is an attempt to begin a discussion about what science teaching can learn from the culture of teaching in primary schools by examining some of the ways in which science is taught.

This paper is based on research conducted for my doctorate. It was done in two parts: first a pilot study, Current Primary Science Practice, to try and get a feel for the way science is taught in primary schools in Victoria, N.S.W. and the A.C.T., followed by an in study of a term-long unit of science teaching done by four teachers at four different schools in Victoria and N.S.W, The Role of Practical Activities in Science Teaching.

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.

Design on the future: developing and enacting sustainable living programs in primary schools

Sustainable living is high on the international agenda (Ginsberg & Frame, 2004; Sutton, 2004). If education is fundamental to global transformation towards sustainability, then schools are in strategic positions to facilitate this change. Over recent years, schools in Australia have become more active in encouraging sustainability with the implementation of programs such as Science Education for Sustainable Living (SESL) that focus on topics such as energy efficiency, recycling, enhancing biodiversity, protecting species, and managing resources. This paper reports on a government funded Australian School Innovation in Science, Technology and Mathematics (ASISTM) project titled “Integrating science, technology and mathematics for understanding sustainable living” in which teachers, preservice teachers and other science professionals worked collaboratively to plan and enact a range of SESL programs for primary school students. Participants in this study included: 6 teachers, 5 preservice teachers, 2 university partners, 2 scientists, 4 consultants, and over 250 primary students. The findings from this qualitative study revealed a need for: (1) professional development for understanding SESL, (2) procedures for establishing and implementing SESL, and (3) strategies to devise, implement and evaluate SESL units of work.

The gradual release of responsibility: A case study of teaching science inquiry skills

This thesis investigated how a year-4 teacher used a pedagogical approach referred to as the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) model of instruction for teaching Science Inquiry Skills in a primary classroom. Through scaffolding her students' learning using the GRR, the teacher guided her students towards developing an understanding about Scientific Inquiry leading to the foundations of scientific literacy. A learning environment was established in which students engaged in rich conversations, designed and conducted experiments using fair testing procedures, analysed and offered justifications for results, and negotiated knowledge claims in ways similar to some of those in the scientific community.

Children making sense of science

Abstract This study explored the effects that the incorporation of nature of science (NoS) activities in the primary science classroom had on children’s perceptions and understanding of science. We compared children’s ideas in four classes by inviting them to talk, draw and write about what science meant to them: two of the classes were taught by ‘NoS’ teachers who had completed an elective nature of science (NoS) course in the final year of their Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) degree. The ‘non-NoS’ teachers who did not attend this course taught the other two classes. All four teachers had graduated from the same initial teacher education institution with similar teaching grades and all had carried out the same science methods course during their B.Ed programme. We found that children taught by the teachers who had been NoS-trained developed more elaborate notions of nature of science, as might be expected. More importantly, their reflections on science and their science lessons evidenced a more in-depth and sophisticated articulation of the scientific process in terms of scientists “trying their best” and “sometimes getting it wrong” as well as “getting different answers”. Unlike children from non-NoS classes, those who had engaged in and reflected on NoS activities talked about their own science lessons in the sense of ‘doing science’. These children also expressed more positive attitudes about their science lessons than those from non-NoS classes. We therefore suggest that there is added value in including NoS activities in the primary science curriculum in that they seem to help children make sense of science and the scientific process, which could lead to improved attitudes towards school science. We argue that as opposed to considering the relevance of school science only in terms of children’s experience, relevance should include relevance to the world of science, and NoS activities can help children to link school science to science itself.