Science Teachers’ Professional Learning in School Networks

Using an Inquiry-Based Approach- NFSUN 2014 -

Beth Andersen, University College Lillebælt

Claus Auning, University College Syd

Thomas Albrechtsen, Syddansk Universitet

Content

• Background: Projekt X – Cross-institutional development of science teaching

• Case study: The student as a scientist

• Discussion

• How is it possible to facilitate the professional learning of science teachers in an educational network using an inquiry-based approach to teaching?

Projekt X – Cross-institutional development of teaching

Purpose: To create and strengthen professional networks among science teachers across public schools (folkeskolen) and the youth education system in the region of Southern Denmark with the intention of enhancing students’ interest in science.

Projekt X – Cross-institutional development of teaching

The four cornerstones ofthe project: In-service teacher

training

Using science events as a part of

the teaching

Coherent curriculum and

locally developed teaching activities

Strengthening the connection

between school and industry

Projekt X – Cross-institutional development of teaching • Start in 2011 • Extended to 2015Participating municipalities in the region of Southern Denmark:• 1. Aabenraa (twice) 30 teachers, 250 students

• 2. Svendborg (continuation of the network collaboration) 25 teachers, 200 students

• 3. Assens og Odense 20 teachers, 100 students • 4. Kerteminde og Nyborg • 5. Varde og Esbjerg (network being established)

Themes in the first part of the project

Aabenraa 2012/2013 Theme: The body and

measurement of movement

Assens 2013/2014Theme: The student as

a scientist

Svendborg 2013/2014Theme: Climate and energy

Aabenraa 2013/2014 Theme: The production of

milk

Results from the external evaluation (Aabenraa)

”The students are inspired by each other. They see a connection and they collaborate”.

”The students got to know each other better through the event. It enhances their view on education”.

”The collaboration between the schools is not formal but it may become in the future. The teachers have gained more knowledge about each other.”

”The levels in the youth education system has been articulated. The talk was not so much about the subejcts – it was more the practical things about the event”.

Results from the external evaluation

Aabenraa The teachers said, about the future of the network, that is was the project that tied them together. They said, that time is a limited ressource in relation to the collaboration. The good thing about the project was, that there was a deadline that required them to get something done. The project was a good idea.

They all experienced a support from their school leaders for their participation in the project.

The teachers also want to make use of each other in the future and be able to continue the process by them selves. But there needs to be an anchorperson or coordinator.

Results from the external evaluationAabenraa The teachers came with examples of how it is possible to incorporate new members in the group.

Just not too many at the time. You do not need to be part of it from the beginning.

They suggest, that there is chosen one coordinator from each school if the effort is to be continued after the project is finished.

They suggest, that new networks make use of a process consultant . This is something they have had good results with. They want to continue next year, but do not know exactly yet if it will be possible. They have come to know each other better. This can be an advantage because it is then easier to contact each other and they have an opportunity to built on something common.

Case study: ”The student as a scientist”• School network consisting of 5 public schools and a vocational school

(Department of Agriculture)• Theme: ”The student as a scientist” – focus on Inquiry-Based Science

Education (Harlen, 2013) • Students from the public schools (5th-6th grade) visiting the

Department of Agriculture and taught by elder students• Inquieries about the growth conditions of plants

Two days residential training course about IBSE• Place: Talent Hotel in Sorø (2013)• Social arrangement: get to know each other; networking• Presentation from a young scientist about methods in

cancer research• Presentation about IBSE from an educational researcher• Presentation from a consultant about experiences with

using inquiry-based teaching methods • Using new technology (like Ipads) in inquiry-based science

teaching• Discussions, sharing of ideas and start designing teaching

activities

Results from the external evaluation

Interviews with the participating teachers in the course

The teachers want to have more focus on the collaboration in the course. The course is too general and there comes nothing new. They cannot really see how it adds new and different methods compared to the ways they already teach.

No school has at the moment planned concrete teaching activities, but they think they will do it in the next school year.

The teachers say, that they have been waiting for the course for a long time. There were some introducing meetings in the beginning of the school year, but first now they are on the course.

The course is too wide and open defined.

Most of the teachers express a positive attitude towards the network part and like being on the residential course.

Designing a inquiry-based teaching activity• School visit: Elder students from the vocational

school (Department of Agriculture) teaching lower secondary students about plants

• 4 ”stations” with different related themes:1. Cutting glas for the greenhouse2. Making fertilizers for the plants3. Different kinds of substrates4. Germination

Continuation of the inquiries in school• Students informing peers about the knowledge from their visit at the

vocational school using notes and recordings• Contest between the public schools using a common internet

platform• Three possibilities of winning:• 1. Tallest plants.• 2. Smallest plants.• 3. Plants that most look like the plants you can buy in a shop.

Development of teaching material

Discussion

• How do science teachers across schools and school levels learn to use the IBSE-approach?• An implicit model of the purpose of teacher professional

development:

(Source: Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002: 949)

Discussion

• Thomas Guskey’s (2002) alternative model of teacher change:

• Recognizing the power of collective experiential learning

Issues to be aware of in the last part of the project

Creating professional learning communities across educational institutions

Understanding different teaching cultures and conditions

Challenges regarding in-service training courses

Questions about the effect of science events

Questions about the sustainability of the networks after the end of the project

Guskey’s three suggestions regarding the facilitation of professional development programs for teachers

1. Recognize that change is a gradual and difficult process for teachers

2. Ensure that teachers receive regular feedback on student learning progress

3. Provide continued follow-up, support and pressure

Discussion

• Other more complex models about professional learning of (science) teachers; e.g. The interconnectedmodel of professional growth by Clarke & Hollingsworth (2002;Van Driel, 2014)

ReferencesAlake-Tuenter, E., Biemans, H.J.A., Tobi, H. & Mulder, M. (2013). Inquiry-based science teaching competence of primary school teachers: A Delphi study. Teaching and Teacher

Education, Vol. 35, 13-24. Areepattamannil, S. (2012). Effects of Inquiry-Based Science Instruction on Science Achievement and Interest in Science: Evidence from Qatar. Journal of Educational Research,

Vol. 105, No. 2, 134-146.Clarke, D. & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 947-967.Crawford, B.A. et al. (2014). Learning to Teach Science as Inquiry: Developing an Evidence-Based Framework for Effective Teacher Professional Development. In: C. Bruguiére et

al. (eds.), Topics and Trends in Current Science Education (pp. 193-211). Dortrecht: Springer.European Commission. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:/

/ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document__library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf Furtak, E.M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H. & Briggs, D.C. (2012). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis, Review of

Educational Research, Vol. 82, No. 3, 300-329. Guskey, T.R. (2002). Professional Development and Teacher Change. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, Vol. 8, No. 3/4, 381-391. Harlen, W. (2013). Inquiry-based learning in science and mathematics. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, 9-33. Harris, C.J. & Rooks, D.L. (2010). Managing Inquiry-Based Science: Challenges in Enacting Complex Science Instruction in Elementary and Middle School Classrooms. Journal of

Science Teacher Education, Vol. 21, 227-240. McCormick, R. et al. (2011). Researching and understanding educational networks. London: Routledge. McLaughlin, C., Black-Hawkins, K., McIntyre, D. & Towsend, A. (2008). Networking Practitioner Research. London: Routledge. 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 to 2002. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 47, No. 4, 474-496.Oliveira, A.W. (2010). Improving Teacher Questioning in Science Inquiry Discussions Through Professional Development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 47, No. 4,

422-453.Van Driel, J.H. (2014). Professional Learning of Science Teachers. In: C. Bruguiére et al. (eds.), Topics and Trends in Current Science Education (pp. 139-157). Dortrecht: Springer. Wallace, J. & Loughran, J. (2012). Science Teacher Learning. In: B.J. Fraser et al. (eds.). Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 295-306). Dortrecht: Springer.