REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.5 Continuous Professional Development for Science Teachers
Globally, science education is currently going through a process of change, with some countries adapting better to the reforms than others. Whilst PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) is preferred and used by many (±70) European countries it is not tied to school curricular but focuses more broadly on real-world contexts. TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) studies, on the other hand, which measure traditional classroom content have revealed substantial differences in science education between countries (Van Driel, Beijaard, & Verloop 2001). For example, when South Africa’s statutory research agency, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), conducted TIMSS studies in South Africa in 1999 and 2003, testing learners at the Grade 8 level in Maths and Science, South Africa had the lowest score in Science and Maths. South African results also showed the largest distribution of scores (very low as well as a few very high scores) in Mathematics and Science of all the countries that participated in the study, which reflected inequalities in education in the South African system, (HSRC, 2004). Whilst South Africa continued to demonstrate low performances in TIMSS 2011 (being second last in the 42 countries that participated), there was an overall improvement in achievement scores for both Maths and Science for the Grade 9 learners that were tested (HSRC, 2012).
The variance in the range of scores also decreased, suggesting that the country is moving towards more equitable educational outcomes, particularly in poorer schools (HSRC, 2012).
Whilst there are differences in performance in TIMSS across different countries, there has been a unanimous criticism of the rigid way in which science is presented, i.e. a rigid body of facts, theories and rules to be memorized (Van Driel et al., 2001: 138). This has been the basis of reform in science education. Science education in its traditional form has been considered ‘outmoded’, failing to adequately prepare learners to understand science and
24 technology issues in a rapidly evolving society (Van Driel et al., 2001). This reflection on science curricular has provided the basis for changing the traditional way in which science is presented, where the focus has typically been on the development of basic skills and academic knowledge. Science curriculum reform has involved changes in course content, approaches of instruction, teacher education and development, and student assessment (Shymansky & Kyler, 1992). There has been a considerable shift from teaching science as a rigid body of facts that must be memorized to a more learner-centered approach that presents science as an active learning process. Constructivism which dominated science curriculum reforms in the 1960s and 1970s was shaped by the widespread revolution against empiricism and positivist theories of science i.e. the transmission mode of teaching science (Osborne, 1996; Matthews, 1993). Constructivism as a theory has not been without controversy. Whilst it set off to separate itself from positivism and empiricism, some scholars challenged that it can’t be detached entirely from the two philosophies (Matthews, 1993). Osborne (1996) earlier pointed out a number of epistemological flaws in constructivism, including the misrepresentation of the nature of science through an over-emphasis of the construction of concepts. Amidst the criticism, some scholars have argued for a middle ground, proposing that both constructivist as well as positivist proponents begin to acknowledge limitations posed by each of their epistemological views (Schmidt, 2001).
Reform in science emphasizes the development of knowledge and higher order thinking skills or science process skills through scientific inquiry, which helps link classroom knowledge to real life situations, i.e. situations beyond the classroom. Scientific inquiry provides learners with an opportunity to participate in the teaching sessions, thus create and solve their own problems rather than memorize and rote-learn concepts (Rehorek, 2004). According to Damnjanovic (1999), the primary purpose of inquiry teaching and learning is to develop students’ intellectual autonomy. Damnjanovic (1999) contends that in inquiry classrooms, students learn to construct their own understanding of phenomena and take ownership in establishing their own knowledge base. Whilst the proponents of constructivism, mainly in the developed countries argue that inquiry-based learning enhances students’ interest and motivation in science (Damnjanovic, 1999), critics of the constructivist approach on the other hand challenge that unguided, inquiry based learning can actually slow down knowledge acquisition (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). According to Kirschner et al., (2006) evidence from measured studies consistently supports direct, strong instructional guidance rather than constructivist-based minimally-guided learning.
25 Despite the criticism of the constructivist approaches, many developing countries including South Africa have followed suit, bringing in aspects of scientific inquiry-based teaching and learning in their curricular. According to the South African National Curriculum Statement (DoE, 2003), inquiry-based learning involves learners observing and comparing phenomena, asking questions, making predictions, conducting investigations and collecting data, recording results, and evaluating and communicating their findings. Although some teachers find scientific inquiry beneficial, others have experienced difficulty in implementing the
‘student-centered and activity-based’ science (Damnjanovic, 1999: 71). Implementation problems relating to inquiry-based teaching seem to persist not only in developing countries but also in some developed countries. For example, Kennedy (1998), Loucks-Horsley, Hewson, Love, and Stiles (1998) had also found that most elementary (primary) teachers in America were not familiar with inquiry-based science instruction. South Africa has also experienced implementation problems with regard to inquiry-based science teaching. In a recent study to investigate the implementation of science process skills (which are developed through inquiry-based teaching and learning) in Natural Sciences subject, Ambross (2011) found amongst other factors that led to poor implementation of inquiry-based learning, teachers’ lack of subject matter knowledge, lack of understanding of the science processes, their beliefs about science, their lack of confidence in teaching science, resistance towards a new teaching approach, lack of science equipment and lack of ongoing professional support.
Inquiry-based teaching is indeed an abstract idea for many of the practicing teachers as they themselves never encountered it during their own education (Kazempour, 2009). As suggested by Hammerness et al. (2005), to develop competence in an area of science inquiry that allows teachers to enact what they know, they must possess deep foundation of factual and theoretical knowledge. However, the teachers’ continued poor grasp of the knowledge of subjects like Maths and Science acts as a major barrier to teaching and learning of these subjects in South Africa (Taylor & Vinjevold, 1999). In essence, teachers require adequate knowledge of science content and effective instructional strategies so that they can engage their students in science inquiry.
In view of these complex teaching strategies and new multifaceted science knowledge, professional development for science teachers is often epitomized as a complex activity (Hewson, 2007). Professional development for science teachers ought to empower teachers to be able to embrace new knowledge and innovative teaching strategies which will enable them
26 to successfully implement modern curricular. Professional development for science teachers needs to pay explicit attention to a range of knowledge bases such as subject matter knowledge, and beliefs about teaching and learning, as well as teachers’ professional contexts (Loucks-Horsely et al., 1998); including elements of teaching scientific reasoning, development of science process skills, problem solving and conducting scientific experiments (Borko, 2004). For science teachers to deliver their teaching efficiently as envisaged in the new science curricular, they must be equipped with all the necessary scientific knowledge and skills (Osman, Halim, & Meerah, 2006). Strengthening science teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge has thus become an essential component of any professional development programme (Kriek & Grayson, 2009). This will in turn enhance their confidence to implement novel methods of teaching such as inquiry-based approach.
When teachers embark on a continuous journey of professional development/learning, they hope that they will expand their knowledge and skills and become better teachers. In science, the role of professional development programmes should thus be to advance teachers’
knowledge and practices, which will improve students’ understanding and appreciation of science (Van Driel, 2010).