Abstract
This Chapter draws on the research evidence from cross-case and cross-culture analyses of the EQUALPRIME project to identify implications for science classroom practice. While there appears to be a general global consensus in the research community regarding the goals of science teaching and the competencies students should acquire in primary school, the evidence of this project points to key dimensions across which science provision in primary schools varies. The Chapter addresses the questions: What are the commonalities and the differences in emphasis in framing these teachers’ practice in the three countries? Can the strategies-in-common identified across cultures that support reasoning be drawn upon to frame approaches to classroom practice that in some respects transcend local culture and context? Does the cultural framing of teaching and learning in schools inevitably impede any attempt to productively transfer what we have learnt from one cultural setting to another? This research has implications for teacher education at both the in-service and pre-service teaching levels. This Chapter will also explore the following themes: the different perspectives from which primary science teaching can be explored; the use of video case studies in teacher education resources; video ethnography as a reflective tool for teacher learning; and, teacher knowledge and professional learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alexander, R. (2006). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Dialogos.
Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1977). Communicating and learning in small groups. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Blomberg, G., Renkl, A., Sherin, M. G., Borko, H., & Seidel, T. (2013). Five research-based heuristics for using video in pre-service teacher education. Journal for Educational Research Online, 5(1), 90–114.
Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E., & Pittman, M. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 417–436.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins, effectiveness, and applications. Colorado Springs: BSCS.
Clark, D., Emmanuelson, J., Jablonka, E., & Mok, I. (Eds.). (2007). Making connections: Comparing mathematics classrooms around the world. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.
Freeman, B., Marginson, S., & Tytler, R. (Eds.). (2015). The age of STEM: Policy and practice in science, technology, engineering and mathematics across the world. Oxon: Routledge.
Freitag-Amtmann, I., Chittleborough, G., Hubber, P., & Aranda, G. (2016). Making use of students’ research journals as instruments for detecting students’ reasoning in co-constructing scientific concepts in a German and Australian primary school. In A. Rakhkochkine, B. Koch-Priewe, M. Hallitzky, J. C. Störtländer, & M. Trautmann (Eds.), Comparative research into didactics and curriculum: National and international perspectives. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Gallin, P. (2010). Dialogic learning. Retrieved from: http://www.ecswe.org/wren/documents/Article3GallinDialogicLearning.pdf
Hackling, M., Peers, S., & Prain, V. (2007). Primary connections: Reforming science teaching in Australian primary schools. Teaching Science, 53(3), 12–16.
Kurz, T. L., & Batarelo, I. (2010). Constructive features of video cases to be used in teacher education. TechTrends, 54(5), 46–52. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2003.08.001.
Kurz, T. L., Llama, G., & Savenye, W. (2004). Issues and challenges of creating video cases to be used with preservice teachers. TechTrends, 49(4), 67–73.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Marsh, B., Mitchell, N., & Adamczyk, P. (2010). Interactive video technology: Enhancing professional learning in initial teacher education. Computers & Education, 54, 742–748.
Max-Planck-Institut for Human Development. (2009). The COACTIV study. Retrieved from: https://www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/coactiv/en/study/
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction: What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984–2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496.
Moje, E. (2007). Developing socially just subject-matter instruction: A review of the literature on disciplinary literacy learning. Review of Research in Education, 31, 1–44.
Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Ramseger, J. (2013). Prozessbezogene Qualitätskriterien für den naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht – zehn Kriterien für wirksames didaktisches Handeln im Elementar- und Primarbereich. In Stiftung Haus der kleinen Forscher (Ed.), Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zur Arbeit der Stiftung „Haus der kleinen Forscher“ (Vol. 5, pp. 147–171). Schaffhausen: SCHUBI. Retrieved from: http://tinyurl.com/ramseger-qualitaetskriterien
Sherin, M. G. (2014). The development of teachers’ professional vision in video clubs. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Baron, & S. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 424–436). New York: Routledge.
Sherin, M. G., & Han, S. Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 163–183.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1998). Teaching is a cultural activity. American Educator, 22(4), 4–11.
Wang, J., & Hartley, K. (2003). Video technology as a support for teacher education reform. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 105–138.
Xu, L., & Clarke, D. (2013). Meta-rules of discursive practices in mathematics classrooms from Seoul, Shanghai and Tokyo. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(1), 61–72.
Yadav, A. (2008). What works for them? Preservice teachers’ perceptions of their learning from video cases. Action in Teacher Education, 29(4), 27–38. doi:10.1080/01626620.2008.10463467.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix: Ten Quality Criteria for Science Teaching
Appendix: Ten Quality Criteria for Science Teaching
1. Make nature question-able |
Good science teaching takes as its starting point a natural phenomenon that provokes the children’s sense of wonder. Together with the children, the teacher formulates a question about this phenomenon in such a way that they can find a meaningful answer to it |
2. Build on the children’s existing knowledge |
Good science teaching begins by identifying and discussing children’s preconceptions of the phenomenon in question. It confronts their ideas with new questions, observations, and (experimental) experiences |
3. Involve the children in the construction of experimental designs |
Good science teaching seeks, where possible, to involve the children in the construction of an experimental design that will yield an answer to their question. If the children are not yet capable of such involvement, and the teacher must therefore give them a predefined experiment, they must at least be aware – or must develop an awareness during the lesson – of the question about nature that the experiment is supposed to answer |
4. Practise working in a meticulous way |
Good science teaching encourages children to take a close look at things, to document their experiences carefully, and to distinguish between questions, assumptions, assertions, and observations |
5. Foster scientific discourse |
Good science teaching fosters orderly discourse among the children about their assumptions, observations, and findings. From this perspective, it is a form of language teaching |
6. Use models and representations |
Good science teaching develops suitable graphics, models, and representations with the children |
7. Take the socio-historical context into account |
Good science teaching broadens the children’s view of the phenomenon in question by giving them an insight into its historical, cultural, and social significance |
8. Show that scientific knowledge is subject to change |
Good science teaching shows the children that our answers to questions about nature are always tentative and that science is always a work in progress |
9. Secure learning gains |
Good science teaching enhances the children’s competence |
10. Facilitate experiences that boost self-efficacy |
Good science teaching enables the children to find an answer to a question about nature by means of independent reasoning, thereby strengthening their sense of self-efficacy |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tytler, R., Ramseger, J., Hubber, P., Freitag-Amtmann, I. (2017). Implications for Practice and Teacher Education. In: Hackling, M., Ramseger, J., Chen, HL. (eds) Quality Teaching in Primary Science Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44383-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44383-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44381-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44383-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)