There are very many aspects of policy and practice that influence the implementation of any change in education. Here we are concerned with three that particularly affect the implementation of working with big ideas in mind:
the form and content of the written national or state curriculum, which have implications for decisions about content, pedagogy and assessment
the key role of teachers’ content and pedagogical knowledge, which is pivotal in determining the learning opportunities of students
the formative evaluation of teaching and students’ classroom experiences, which informs decisions of how to improve practice and make the best use of professional development resources.
Big ideas in national curriculum documents It is the role of national curriculum documents to set out the goals of learning and the principles that should guide their implementation but not to propose learning activities, which is the role of teaching units or modules. Having in mind the overall aim of helping all students develop big ideas has implications for the form in which the goals are set out. Although curriculum frameworks specify other learning outcomes, such as science inquiry skills, our main concern here is with how ideas of science are expressed. This should be in terms that everyone can understand – not just teachers, educational researchers and scientists but also parents and others concerned with students’ education. Descriptions of progression towards big ideas, such as in Section 4, perhaps with more detail and exemplification, provide a useful way of communicating that the ultimate goal is the understanding of relationships, not a series of facts, or a collection of ‘small ideas’. The curriculum document should also make clear that the process of developing understanding is ongoing and continuous. The aim should be for teachers, parents and others to be able to identify the course of progression towards big ideas, thus making it possible to see how specific activities contribute to this progression. Expressing big ideas of science There are now examples of national curriculum documents that include overarching statements of aims expressed in the form of big ideas which, although not precisely the same as the 10 ideas of science we have identified, are sufficiently similar to serve the same purpose. For instance, the guidelines being developed for the K-9 curriculum in France include knowledge that: The Universe is structured from its biggest scale (galaxies, stars, planets) down to the smallest (particles, atoms and molecules). But it is how such overall aims are broken down into goals for certain stages or years that is important in communicating the need for continuity and gradual progression in developing big ideas. Big ideas should run longitudinally through the description of learning goals
across all stages. To convey the notion of progression in understanding it is not enough to state what is to be learned in terms of topics or concept words such as ‘force’, ‘electricity’ or ‘materials’. To be useful the statements should indicate the level of understanding or relationships and connections intended at particular stages. Most curriculum documents, as well as setting out the concepts to be learnt, list science inquiry skills, or practices, to be developed at different stages. Usually these two types of outcomes are listed separately but some recently developed curriculum frameworks express goals at the end of stages, or years, as a combination of skills and concepts. For example, the Scottish curriculum states goals of learning in the form of ‘I can …‘ statements, as in this extract from the outcome relating to the big ideas of biodiversity and interdependence for the end of year four: I can help to design experiments to find out what plants need in order to grow and develop. I can observe and record my finding and from what I have learned I can grow healthy plants in the school. The framework for K-12 Science Education in the USA states outcomes in terms of ‘what students who demonstrate understanding can do’ as a series of statements which combine practices and overall concepts, for example: Investigate the forces between two or more magnets to identify patterns. Use models to explain the effects of balanced and unbalanced forces on a system. The form of these statements signals that understanding ideas is to be developed through inquiry and investigation and, at the same time, that inquiry capabilities are developed and used in relation to scientific content. However, although they are clearly not intended to restrict the combination of capabilities and content, there is some arbitrariness in the specified statements in relation to which capabilities and content are linked. Further, the complexity of the statements can obscure the relationship of the ideas at each stage to the overall big ideas. Level of detail National curriculum documents vary in the intervals for which learning experiences and outcomes are specified. In some cases what is to be learned is set out year by year and in others only in terms of experiences during, and achievement at the end of, longer periods of two or three years. A detailed curriculum document turns science activities into a routine, aimed at ‘getting through the syllabus’ to meet requirements rather than spending time to ensure deep understanding. Too much detail limits the potential for teachers to take account of students’ interests. Moreover, the more detailed the specification the more problematic the decisions about the exact sequence, and the greater the risk of the detail obscuring sight of the overall aims – the development of big ideas and science inquiry capabilities. The statements of the specific ideas and capabilities that students are expected to develop at particular times ought to be justified in terms of progression towards these overall aims. This is particularly important at boundaries between phases of education such as primary to secondary. When this structure is not made explicit, the content of a curriculum can appear to be no more than an arbitrary selection of what is to be taught, based on tradition or what is easily assessed.
Including ideas about science The attention given to the big ideas about science in curriculum documents also varies. Where ideas 11 and 12, about the nature of science, are considered at all it is generally to state the assumption that these ideas are developed through engaging in scientific investigation and inquiry. That is, that opportunities to develop science capabilities are also opportunities for reflection on how scientific understanding is built through such activities. However, without more explicit reference in curriculum frameworks, such as in the aims relating to ‘working scientifically’ in the national curriculum in England, it is easy to see how these opportunities can be missed in planning programmes of study. In the case of big ideas 13 and 14, about the relationship between science and other STEM subjects and the applications of science, there are various ways in which these are included. In some cases it is through supplying cross-references, usually between the science and mathematics documents. However, these links tend to be regarded as optional when it comes to planning classroom programmes, which is often carried out by individual teachers or single subject groups, rather than in multi-disciplinary teams in which members bring their specialist expertise and together create coordinated learning experiences. Another approach is to embed reference to applications of science in the description of overall aims, as, for example, the discussion of moral and ethical questions arising from technological developments relating to DNA. A third, and possibly more effective way, is to make the links among subject domains an integral part of the curriculum framework. An example is the Framework for K-12 Science Education, where engineering and applications of science are identified as a disciplinary core idea in the same way as physical and life sciences. However, the extent to which these various attempts signal the growing importance of understanding links between science and other subject domains, particularly technology, engineering and mathematics, has yet to be seen. Teachers’ understanding of big ideas The implications for curriculum content, pedagogy and assessment discussed in Section 5 highlight the demands on teachers of the aim of ensuring that students’ learning in science gradually builds into a coherent whole, and is not left as a set of disconnected facts. There are consequences for primary and for secondary teachers, for teacher educators and for researchers. Primary school teachers face particular challenges in relation to big ideas in science. First, the activities of young children are generally focused on exploring their local environment and the living and non-living things in it. These investigations and observations lead to ‘small’ ideas whose connection to big ideas of science may seem tenuous. Thus, it is more difficult at the primary level to keep in mind the links to the big ideas. Second, in many cases teachers’ own education in science has left them without a personal grasp of the big ideas at some level and little opportunity to understand how the pieces of information they do have can be linked together. They are, therefore, likely to be poorly prepared to see the links between the ideas developed in classroom activities and the more widely applicable ideas and so not in a position to help students develop the big ideas. A further difficulty is lack of confidence in teaching science as a result of little personal exposure to scientific activity and the understanding arising from that experience.
On the other hand, primary teachers have some advantages. As generalists, they have the benefit of having closer relationships with their students than do specialist secondary teachers. Also, knowing that they are not experts, primary teachers typically prepare very carefully hands-on science activities for students and provide engaging experiences that students enjoy, enabling them to have a positive response to science. The drawback is that the focus on ‘doing’ can be at the expense of the discussion and thinking that are needed if the activities are to lead to understanding. In the secondary school the links between learning activities and big ideas are likely to be rather more obvious than at the primary level. But secondary teachers face the challenge of inquiry in the context of an overcrowded curriculum and may suffer from limited knowledge in particular science domains – being trained in biology, for example, but having to teach physical sciences – and from lack of first-hand experience of scientific activity that would give confidence in teaching ideas about science. Teaching across all science domains is challenging for anyone; even trained scientists and teachers should have opportunities for continued learning to meet these challenges, which will always be present. Professional development approaches For all teachers, the ideal would be personal understanding of big ideas of and about science. The lack of this as a result of their own school science education presents a considerable challenge for initial teacher education or continuing professional development. Of course, the whole of science education cannot be condensed into the limited time available in initial teacher education courses. But teachers and trainees are intelligent adults. They have wide relevant experience and knowledge to a greater extent than they often realise. As adults – and it should be emphasised that this is not an approach appropriate for school students – engaging with big ideas in broadly descriptive form can help them make sense of their experience. It can enable them to bring together fragments of recalled knowledge and, indeed, can lead to pleasure in making sense of things that previously seemed beyond their comprehension. The ‘engagement’ here is far more than reading and discussing the narrative descriptions of big ideas, such as those in Section 4. It should take account of current views that learning takes place in the interactions between learners, for adults as well as school students. Discussion with others of the ideas set out in the narratives enables teachers draw on their experiences and those of others in making sense of the evolving ‘story’. An individual’s understanding is influenced by the views of others as part of a constant interaction between each one and the group. Socially co-constructing their ideas in this way is unlikely to lead to a full grasp of big ideas but will hopefully begin an ongoing process of deepening understanding, one which enables teachers to help students in their progress. Such experiences should be matched by engagement of teachers in learning some science through inquiry at their own level in order to develop understanding of the nature of scientific inquiry through participation in it. Thus, teachers and trainees need time and opportunities to question and investigate something quite simple in their everyday lives (such as: why paper towels are made up of several layers; why ice floats; why the outside of a can of drink becomes moist when it is taken out of a fridge). In these activities teachers are not asked to role-play, but to become genuine investigators of these common phenomena. Reflection on what they understand initially, what more they find out, and
how, can lead them to an insight into how scientific knowledge is created. This provides some preparations for teachers to help students to understand ideas about science (ideas 11 and 12 particularly), as well as ideas of science. Just as important as such first-hand experiences in teachers’ courses is the provision of continuing support for developing understanding of science and of effective pedagogy in a form that can be accessed throughout their active lives. The internet can have a key role as a source of information, preferably in the form of tailor-made electronic publications designed to meet the needs of teachers. In addition, personal understanding of science and how to teach particular concepts can be provided, for instance, through direct contact with more experienced teachers and scientists. There is evidence that teachers learn very effectively from other teachers and that access to others’ practice is an important part of the many interacting aspects involved in the implementation of changes such as are required for working towards big ideas through inquiry-based teaching. The analysis of teachers’ professional development needs, and knowing how to cater for them in particular cases, are areas where more research is needed. However, in the next section we offer some preliminary ideas about how to identify the aspects their practice where teachers may need help in relation to teaching for big ideas. Formative evaluation of teaching for big ideas We use the word evaluation here because the focus is teaching, not the assessment of students’ learning. The purpose is to collect and use data to improve teaching of those aspects of classroom practice that enable students to develop their understanding of big ideas. We are not concerned here with the whole gamut of features of effective practice in science education, only with this key part of it, although it will include many of the elements of inquiry-based learning since this is so much a part of developing understanding in depth. Indicators of students working towards big ideas Formative evaluation in this context means collecting and using data about relevant aspects of teaching to identify where practice meets expectations and where improvements may be required. In this respect it has a similar purpose in relation to teaching as formative assessment has in relation to students’ learning. Whilst learning is assessed in relation to the goals of activities, in the case of evaluating teaching it is in relation to indicators, or standards, of effective classroom practice. The first step in evaluation, therefore, is to establish such indicators. These may be expressed in terms of students’ activities and ways of working that help their understanding of big ideas. For example, indicators of good practice are likely to include students having such opportunities as to:
understand the purpose of their activities
explore new objects of phenomena informally and ‘play with ideas’ as a preliminary to more structured investigation
make links between new and previous experience
work collaboratively with others, communicating their own ideas and considering others’ ideas
present evidence to support their arguments
engage in discussions in defence of their ideas and their explanations
apply their learning in real-life contexts
reflect self-critically about the processes and outcomes of their inquiries.
However, students’ opportunities for these experiences depend on teachers’ planning and how these plans are carried into action. So using indicators relating to teaching is a more direct approach to identifying where teachers may need help. A set of indicators describing agreed aspects of practice has a dual purpose – pointing to the data to be collected and acting as criteria for judging where teaching is or is not meeting the expected standards. Indicators of teaching towards big ideas The following are suggestions to illustrate indicators and the process of evaluation in relation to teaching that aims to develop big ideas. Indicators used in practice should emerge from discussions among teachers about how to describe teaching which has this aim. These discussions serve a formative function, helping teachers to develop their understanding of what is involved as well as ensuring that evaluation is completely open, so that everyone concerned knows the reasons for collecting and the use to be made of the evidence. It is important for teachers to know the basis of the evaluation if they are to take part willingly to review their practice. It is quite helpful to express the indicators as questions. For example, does the teacher:
have a clear idea of how the students’ activities help them towards understanding one or more of the big ideas?
allow time for students to explore new situations and discuss their initial ideas in an unstructured way?
help students to recognise links between new and previous experience and ideas?
discuss with students how the ideas emerging from their inquiries relate to experiences in their daily lives?
consciously build bigger ideas by showing how particular ideas can explain a range of events or phenomena?
discuss with students how their collection and use of data enables them to test ideas in ways similar to scientists?
help students to reflect on their investigations and build up ideas about the nature of scientific activity?
ensure that students learn from experience of ideas or constructions that ‘don’t work’ and do not regard this as failure?
take the opportunity to discuss how scientific ideas are used in scientific investigations or engineering advances that feature in the news?
as appropriate to students’ ages, use examples from history to show how scientific ideas have changed and the reasons for this? Gathering data for evaluation of teaching The indicators themselves signal the useful sources of information for the evaluation. These include: teachers’ lesson plans; teachers’ records of students’ progress; students’ notebooks; talking with students; and, if possible, observation of teaching. It is useful to have someone– a mentor, teacher educator or another teacher – to observe teaching. Teachers might collaborate in collecting information relating to the indicators by observing each other’s lessons. But if the help of an observer is not possible, teachers can still obtain useful information by reviewing their own plans, notes and records (including videotapes of their lessons) and making time for talking to students to find out what they think about their work. Indeed, for teachers not used to having another person in the classroom selfevaluation may be preferred, at least initially. Students’ notebooks, available to teachers and observers, constitute valuable sources of information about students’ activities, providing a record of what, and how, science has been taught. The analysis of students’ notebooks can provide evidence of a student’s communication, their conceptual and procedural understanding and the quality of a teacher's feedback to the student. Interpreting evaluation data Of course, teachers will not provide in every lesson or sequence of activities experiences of all the kinds indicated in a list such as the one above. However, if there is no evidence of certain items over a period of time, it is important to ask ‘why not?’ if the evaluation is to fulfil a formative purpose. The reasons may point to the help that is needed in some area of understanding of content or pedagogy. Evaluation of this kind is particularly relevant as part of professional development when some quite fundamental changes in teaching are being introduced, such as inquiry-based teaching and working with big ideas. It need not always address the whole range of indicators but can be used to provide feedback on particular aspects of practice that a teacher is trying to change. It is essential that the teacher remains in control of the process which should be seen as part of professional learning, not a matter of making judgements on how well the teacher is doing. Concluding comment Implementing any change in education or other areas of activity depends on several factors: recognising the need for change; belief that the proposed change will bring about the desired effect; and accepting the consequences for the many interconnected factors that determine practice in education. The reasons for change in science education have been evident in the reports of students’ negative perceptions of its value and interest to them. Foremost among the factors responsible for this are over-crowded and over-detailed curricula, assessment that is dominated by tests that encourage teaching of disconnected facts, and clinging to teaching methods that inhibit change to inquiry-based pedagogy. The result is that science education in many parts of the world has been failing to prepare young people for a world rapidly being transformed by applications of science in technology and engineering. Such preparation requires that everyone, not just those likely to take up science-based occupations, needs a general understanding of key ideas of science and about science that enable them to take part as informed citizens in decisions that affect their own and others’ well-being. In this document we have reiterated and expanded on the case for framing the goals of science education in terms of a set of over-arching ideas – called big ideas because they
explain a range of related phenomena. We have noted the arguments and offered some evidence of the potential benefits to be gained by identifying a small number of powerful ideas, not the least of these being to free up space for inquiry-based pedagogy to be implemented. Enabling students to experience and value the collection and use of evidence in scientific activity is central to developing understanding of the world around and how we make sense of it. We argue that a curriculum framed in terms of big ideas is necessary to adopting an inquiry-based approach. To bring about change in how the goals of science education are conceived and expressed requires more than a revision of curriculum documents. What happens in classroom is influenced by many interconnected practices, the main ones, discussed here, being student assessment, teacher education and pedagogy. However there are many other influential factors, such as how schools are organised, how teaching and teachers are appraised and evaluated, the role and expectations of parents, the support given by local administrator and inspectors and, of course, government policy. Real change requires coordination of all these sources of influence. Teachers are ultimately responsible for students’ learners’ experiences but they cannot make real change alone; in many cases a change in policy is required so that innovation is not stifled by existing practices.
Post a Comment