Science Teachers’ Uptake of Heuristic Educative Curriculum Materials to Develop Students’ Habit of Questioning and Posing Problem
Main Article Content
Abstract
Science teachers lack the pedagogical knowledge and skills to develop students’ habit of questioning and posing problems (HQP), which is vital for scientific inquiry. Prescriptive curriculum materials do not promote professional growth and development in teachers. In contrast, heuristic educative curriculum materials allow teachers to choose and learn as and when is more feasible. Heuristic design curriculum materials contain educative features that provide suggestions and rationales for instructional activities, empowering teachers to enact more flexibly. In a larger study, a heuristic curriculum material called Skilful Thinking Educative Pedagogical Support (STEPS) was prepared and encompassed three components – specific thinking strategies, habits of mind, and metacognition. STEPS was prepared using findings from needs analysis, a review of additional curriculum materials and the Malaysian Year 4 science syllabus. This paper focuses HQP which is one of the sixteen components of habits of mind. The research objective was to investigate how three Year 4 science teachers up-took educative features in STEPS to develop students’ HQP. The study utilised a qualitative exploratory research design. Classroom observations, open-ended interviews, and document analysis were the data sources. We used tracers in the educative features, such as teachers’ uttered phrases, cues, and suggested tools to indicate HQP implementation. The findings showed fidelity between STEPS and teacher implementation as teachers had used the suggested tools, encouraged students’ HQP skills by using cues, and gave justifications on why HQP is important. The teachers also gave space and scaffolded their students’ question generation and problem-posing. Moreover, teachers adapted the educative features most relevant to their teaching context. Implications for teachers, school leaders, researchers and teacher educators were discussed.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Aflalo, E. (2021). Student generating questions as a way of learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787418769120
Amels, J., Kruger, M., Suhre, C., & van Veen, K. (2019). Impact of inquiry-based working on the capacity to change in primary education, Journal of Educational Change, 20, 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09337-3
Arias, A. M., Bismack, A. S., Davis, E. A., & Palincsar, A. S. (2016). Interacting with a suite of educative features: Elementary science teachers’ use of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(3), 422–449. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21250
Arias, A. M., Smith, P. S., Davis, E. A., Marino, J.C., & Palincsar, A. S. (2017). Justifying predictions: Connecting use of educative curriculum materials to students’ engagement in science argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(1), 11–35.
Barab, S. A., & Luehmann, A. L. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87(4), 454– 467. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10083
Bernhard, J. (2007). Thinking and learning through technology: Mediating tools and insights from philosophy of technology applied to science and engineering education. The Pantaneto Forum, 27. Retrieved from http://pantaneto.co.uk/thinking-andlearning-through-technology-mediating-tools-and-insights-from-philosophy-oftechnology-applied-to-science-and-engineering-education-jonte-bernhard/
Beyer, C., & Davis, E. A. (2009). Supporting preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of science lesson plans using educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(6), 517–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9148-5
Biesta, G. (2005). The role of educational ideals in teachers’ professional work. Paper presented at the ‘Changing Teacher Roles, Identities and Professionalism Seminar Series: Identity, agency and policy in teachers’ professional lives’, King’s College London, 20 January. http://www.tlrp.org/dspace/retrieve/1484/paper-biesta.pdf
Biggers, M. (2018). Questioning questions: Elementary teachers’ adaptations of investigation questions across the inquiry continuum. Research in Science Education, 48, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9556-4
Bismack, A. S., Arias, A. M., Davis, E. A., & Palincsar, A. S. (2015). Examining student work for evidence of teacher uptake of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 816–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21220
Brown, J. C., & Livstrom, I. C. (2020). Secondary science teachers’ pedagogical design capacities for multicultural curriculum design. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(8), 821–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1756588
Burgess, J. (2012). The impact of teaching thinking skills as habits of mind to young children with challenging behaviours. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 17(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2012.652426
Cairns, D., & Areepattamannil, S. (2019). Exploring the relations of inquiry-based teaching to science achievement and dispositions in 54 countries. Research in Science Education, 49(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9639-x
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science, Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260701828101
Choppin, J., McDuffie, A. R., Drake, C., & Davis, J. (2022). The role of instructional materials in the relationship between the official curriculum and the enacted curriculum. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 24(2), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2020.1855376
Costa, A., (2022, 29 July). Describing 16 habits of mind. The Institute for Habits of Mind. Retrieved 24 November 2022, from https://www.habitsofmindinstitute.org/hear-art/#:~:text=A%20%E2%80%9CHabit%20of%20Mind%E2%80%9D%20means,certain%20patterns%20of%20intellectual%20behavior
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (Eds.) (2000). Discovering and exploring habits of mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (Eds.) (2009). Habits of mind across the curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Costa, A. & Kallick, B. (2015). Five strategies for questioning with intention. Educational Leadership, 73(1), 66–69.
Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x034003003
Davis, E. A., Palincsar, A. S., Arias, A. M., Bismack, A. S., Marulis, L. M., & Iwashyna, S. K. (2014). Designing educative curriculum materials: A theoretically and empirically driven process. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 24–52. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.g48488u230616264
Davis, E. A., Palincsar, A. S., Smith, P. S., Arias, A. M., & Kademian, S. M. (2017). Educative curriculum materials: Uptake, impact, and implications for research and design. Educational Researcher, 46(6), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17727502
Davis, E., & Smithey, J. (2009). Beginners moving toward effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 93, 745–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20311
Dohrn, S. W., & Dohn, N. B. (2018). The role of teacher question in the chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 352–363. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00196G
Dresner, M., De Rivera, C., Fuccillo, K. K., & Chang, H. (2014). Improving higher-order thinking and knowledge retention in environmental science teaching. BioScience, 64(1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bit005
Duckor, B., & Perlstein, D. (2014). Assessing habits of mind: Teaching to the test at Central Park East secondary school. Teachers College Record, 116(2). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1020228
Duncan, J. K., & Frymier, J. R. (1967). Explorations in the systemic study of curriculum. Theory into Practice, 6(4), 180–199.
Enfield, M., Smith, E. L., & Grueber, D. J. (2008). “A sketch is like a sentence”: Curriculum structures that support teaching epistemic practices of science. Science Education, 92(4), 608–630.
Fatima, A.H., & Ahmad, N.N.N.(2013). Student-centered learning in a passive learning environment: Students’ perception and performance. International Journal of Economics and Management, 7(1), 84–107.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Corwin Press.
Handler, B. (2010). Teacher as curriculum leader: A consideration of the appropriateness of that role assignment to classroom-base practitioners. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 3(3), 32–42.
Huang, J. L. (2015). Cultivating teacher thinking: Ideas and practice. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 14(3), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-015-9184-1
Hyerle, D. (2009). Beyond the wall of text: Thinking Maps® as a universal visual language for transforming how we see knowledge, thinking and learning. In Visual Data (pp. 31–49). Brill.
Jacobs, G. & Renandya, W. (2021). Any questions? Ideas for encouraging more and better student questions. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 24, 349–363. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v24i2.3819
Jurow, A. S., & Creighton, L. (2005). Improvisational science discourse: Teaching science in two K-1 classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 16(3), 275–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.02.002
Kawalkar, A., & Vijapurkar, J. (2013). Scaffolding science talk: The role of teachers’ questions in the inquiry classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2004–2027. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.604684
Keiler, L. S. (2018). Teachers’ roles and identities in student-centered classrooms. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, Article 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018- 0131-6
Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (1999). Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science: An evaluation. International Journal of Science Education, 21(4), 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290642
Kracl, C., & Harshbarger, D. (2017). Methods and strategies: Ask the right questions. Science and Children, 54(9), 78–82. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc17_054_09_78
Krajcik, J., & Delen, I. (2017). The benefits and limitations of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1279470
McKinney, S. E., Chappell, S., Berry, R. Q., & Hickman, B. T. (2009). An examination of the instructional practices of mathematics teachers in urban schools. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 53(4), 278–284.
Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2013). Metacognition and control of study choice in children. Metacognition and Learning, 8(1), 19–46.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Murray, J. W. (2016). Skills development, habits of mind, and the spiral curriculum: A dialectical approach to undergraduate general education curriculum mapping. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1156807
Nair, S., & Ngang, T. K. (2012). Exploring parents’ and teachers’ views of primary pupils’ thinking skills and problem solving skills. Creative Education, 3(1), 30–36. Retrieved from https://file.scirp.org/pdf/CE20120100003_83334581.pdf
Noh, J., & Webb, M. (2015). Teacher learning of subject matter knowledge through an educative curriculum. The Journal of Educational Research, 108(4), 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.886176
Pham, T. H. T. (2014). Implementing cross-culture pedagogies: Cooperative learning at Confucian heritage cultures. Singapore: Springer.
Phuong-Mai, N. (2008). Culture and cooperation: Cooperative learning in Asian Confucian heritage cultures. The case of Viet Nam (Doctoral dissertation, University Utrecht).
Qablan, A. M., & DeBaz, T. (2015). Facilitating elementary science teachers’ implementation of inquiry-based science teaching. Teacher Development, 19(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2014.959552
Razali, F., Talib, O., Manaf, U. K. A., & Hassan, S. A. (2018). A measure of students’ motivation, attitude and parental influence towards interest in STEM careers among Malaysian form four science stream student. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(14), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7- i14/3665
Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Two fourthgrade teachers' use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1086/499645
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of Mathmatics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
Remillard, J. T., Reinke, L. T., & Kapoor, R. (2019). What is the point? Examining how curriculum materials articulate mathematical goals and how teachers steer instruction. International Journal of Educational Research, 93, 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.09.010
Roehrig, G., Kruse, R., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristic and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 883–907. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20180
Salmon, A. K., & Barrera, M. X. (2021). Intentional questioning to promote thinking and learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40, 100822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100822
Saunders-Stewart, K. S., Gyles, P. D. T., & Shore, B. M. (2012). Student outcomes in inquiry instruction: A literature-derived inventory. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(5), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X11429860
Schneider, R. M., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 221–245.
Shanmugavelu, G., Ariffin, K., Vadivelu, M., Mahayudin, Z., & Sundaram, M. A. (2020). Questioning techniques and teachers’ role in the classroom. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8(4), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v8i4.3260
Shu Fen, L., Lieu, S. C., Chen, S., Huang, M. S., & Chang, W. (2012). Affording explicitreflective science teaching by using an educative teachers’ guide. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 999–1026.
Svendsen, B. (2015). Mediating artifact in teacher professional development. International Journal of Science Education. 37(11), 1834–1854. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1053003
Trinster, C. P., & Hughes, H. E. (2021). Teachers as curriculum designers: Inviting teachers into the productive struggle. Research in Middle Level Education, 44(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2021.1878417
Tuyet, T. T. (2013). The causes of passiveness in learning of Vietnamese students. VNU Journal of Educational Research, 29(2), 72–84.
Tzuriel, D., Isman, E. B., Klung, T., & Haywood, H. C. (2017). Effects of teaching classification on classification, verbal conceptualisation, and analogical reasoning in children with developmental language delays. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 16(1), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.16.1.107
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wahono, B., Lin, P-L., & Chang, C-Y. (2020). Evidence of STEM enactment effectiveness in Asian student learning outcomes. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, Article No. 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00236-1
Yilmaz, M. (2020). Impact of instruction with concept cartoons on students’ academic achievement in science lessons. Educational Research and Review, 15(3), 95–103. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2020.3916
Yin, Y. K., & Fitzgerald, R. (2017). Peer learning with concept cartoons enhance critical thinking and performance in secondary school economics. Journal of Economic Education Research, 18(1),1–13.
Zangori, L., Forbes, C. T., & Biggers, M. (2013). Fostering student sense making in elementary science learning environments: Elementary teachers’ use of science curriculum materials to promote explanation construction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(8), 989–1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21104
Zion, M., & Mendelovici, R. (2012). Moving from structured to open inquiry: Challenges and limits. Science Education International, 23(4), 383–399.
Zuber, J., & Altrichter, H. (2018). The role of teacher characteristics in an educational standards reform. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30, 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9275-7