Improving Science Education: Issues and Research on Innovative Empirical and Computer-Based Approaches to Labwork in Europe

Exploitable results

This study was conducted on the assumption that the development of a reasonable image of science must be an objective of science teaching. This argument is put forward for cultural reasons, and for democratic reasons. To understand science should be integral part of a modern education for the average citizen, particularly as part of a contemporary European democracy in which citizens should be able to understand scientific results as presented in the mass media, and even participate with some competence in political decisions with scientific aspects. Teachers have a special place in communicating an image of science to their students. It is therefore important to know something of the images of science drawn upon by teachers. To this end, responses to 10 survey questions were collected and analysed from a sample of 145 teachers from Italy and France. From the responses to these questions, a questionnaire for research could be elaborated and some tentative conclusions be drawn about the common core of images of science of the teachers in the sample: - Scientific research is founded on a method, which requires sound observations and controllable experiments. - In the interpretation of experiments, scientists are guided by theoretical assumptions. - Empirical investigation is needed to confirm the scientific validity of any statement. - Conflicting interpretation of data may be due to an inadequate experiment design, to theoretical commitments (most of the University teachers) or to problems of data analysis (most of school teachers). For the given sample, differences between the ideas proposed by teachers at the school and university levels, were generally not very strong. Further research would be of great interest in this direction.

The case study method was adopted as a multifaceted research methodology potentially capable of examining the influence of particular organisational and personal factors on labwork and of identifying, describing and documenting students actions and cognitive processes that take place during labwork. 23 case studies were carried out in six participating groups, allowing for an in-depth investigation in a variety of contexts of how students understandings of several aspects of scientific knowledge and inquiry may be facilitated by different types of labwork. The case studies were diverse in focus. For example, some case studies focus on the evolution and acquisition of conceptual knowledge by students following labwork; some case studies investigate implicit objectives set out by instructors while other case studies have stated clearly their objectives; the relation between aspects of what the students do and what they learn from laboratory activities is investigated in some other case studies; the effectiveness of carrying out new teaching strategies is the foci of other case studies. A number of case studies were characterised by explicit discussion of the epistemologies and theories of learning that underpinned their methodology. A characteristic of the case studies was that they did not focus only on learning outcomes following labwork, but a number of them addressed students intellectual or manipulative activities during labwork. A classification of the case studies: Despite their diversity it was possible to classify the case studies into the following groups according to the dominant type of experimental work, which in turn made it possible to draw common findings: - Labwork based upon small group work and hands-on experiments; - Labwork based upon the integrated use of new technologies; - Open-ended labwork; - Labwork addressing specific phases and based on various representations of labwork. The effectiveness of labwork: Two types of labwork effectiveness have been envisaged. - Effectiveness 1 involves comparing students learning after labwork against expected learning objectives. - Effectiveness 2 involves evaluating students actions and understandings during labwork against the actions that had been planned at the outset: We suggest that the relationship between the use of conceptual, procedural and epistemological knowledge during labwork on the one hand, and learning outcomes after labwork on the other, is a complex one and we cannot envisage a simple causal relation between them. Besides, we suggest that a twofold effectiveness of the type described above is a very specific feature of the practical character of labwork among the various teaching activities in science education and, possibly, in other fields beyond science education. Different types of labwork were analysed using these concepts: - Typical labwork based on small group work and hands-on experiments: This type of labwork was investigated in six case studies. A general finding is that the majority of students time is spent upon manipulating apparatus and collecting data. In each case study, the major challenges for students involved conceptualising the theoretical background of laboratory activities rather than carrying out the procedures required in the laboratory. In terms of Effectiveness 1, students need to be focused to spend more time on task during labwork: in effect, they need to spend more time reflecting on links between conceptual knowledge on the one hand and their activities on the other. - Labwork based on integrated use of new technology: Effects of new technology were analysed in nine case-studies. Case study research served to illustrate the numerous positive uses of new technologies in terms of the effectiveness of labwork, as well as suggesting how some of the possible pitfalls might be avoided. Generally speaking, using the computer for model building during labwork, stimulates students to talk more about the conceptual background of a specific lab situation than most other contexts of labwork. - Open-ended labwork: Five case studies focused on open-ended labwork served to illustrate how open-ended labwork can be used to bring together both conceptual knowledge and knowledge of scientific procedures. The studiesalso illustrated that a lot of objectives not easily made explicit are implicitly pursued in open ended labwork. - Case studies involving specific phases of labwork and based on various representation of labwork: It is apparent from the three corresponding case studies that it is particularly important to have some sort of explicit model of the investigation in mind in designing instructional sequences, or in writing accounts of labwork in published media. In a study of the portrayal of labwork in textbooks, many examples were noted which presented a stereotypical account of activities, neglecting the role of the scientist in making creative decisions about actions. A model of the learning objectives for labwork: Based on the above analysis of the case studies, we propose three broad sets of learning objectives. The first two are the traditional objectives of promoting conceptual understanding and procedural competence. The third is rarely made explicit, and relates to more epistemological issues such as considering approaches to investigation, designing experiments, and processing data. Each of these potentially influences the other. In some cases, for example, laboratory procedures might be taught as a matter of routine whereas in other cases they might be taught with the aim of supporting concept learning. In the same way, measurement processing might be addressed as a routine algorithm, or alternatively with an epistemological emphasis upon links between knowledge claims and empirical evidence for those knowledge claims.

This study was designed to provide information about the images of science drawn upon by science students during labwork. By images of science we mean the profile of ideas about the epistemology and sociology of science used by individuals in specific contexts for specific purposes. In the case of labwork, students draw upon images of science to explain the purposes of empirical investigation, relationships between data and knowledge claims, and relationships between knowledge claims and experimental design, analysis and interpretation of data. As individuals are viewed as having a number of images of science that might be deployed in a given situation, no attempt was made to classify individual students as thinking in a particular way. Rather, findings from the study have been used to identify ways of thinking used by large numbers of students in a variety of situations. Labwork might well develop students conceptual understanding or their skills in planning investigations, or their aptitudes at using standard laboratory procedures in carrying out investigations. Many students in teaching laboratories often work with knowledge claims already agreed as reliable within the scientific community. For example, they may be involved in work to illustrate accepted theories or to apply accepted theory in specific contexts. Their ideas about how that knowledge came to be viewed as reliable may well influence their labwork. For all these reasons, participation in labwork involves students in drawing upon epistemological understanding. In order to investigate the epistemological understanding that students might draw upon during labwork, responses were collected to 5 written survey questions from 661 students in the participating countries. These questions focused upon students views on the nature of the data collected during labwork, links between data and knowledge claims in labwork, and the ways in which decisions are made about data collection and drawing conclusions during labwork. Three images of science appeared to by used by significant numbers of students in a variety of contexts. These were: - A data-focused view, in which students appeared to view the process of data collection as a simple one of description of the real world. For example, 12% of the university students in the sample stated that the best estimate of a value from a set of measured data should correspond to a measured value, and 28% of university students suggested that the process of proposing a relationship between two variables was a simple matter of following a routine algorithm to join measured points. - A radical relativist view, in which students appeared to view the process of drawing conclusions as so problematic that it is never possible to select one explanation as being better than another one. For example, 16% of university students suggested that it is up to individual scientists to decide how to interpret a given data set as there is no way of determining between two contrasting views. - A theory and data linked view, in which theory, data and methodological aspects of labwork are viewed as inter-related, each in principle being able to influence the other. From this, it appears that many students are likely not to recognise the epistemological basis of routine algorithmic procedures used for data handling during labwork, such as estimating values from sets of data and drawing lines and curves through measured data points. In some cases, this is likely to lead to students taking inappropriate actions during their labwork learning (such as assuming that computers can solve problems of data analysis, not recognising the need for scientists to instruct computers how to handle data according to specific requirements determined by theoretical considerations). Findings from this study suggest that individual students draw from a range of images of science in acting in various situations. For many students, it may therefore be necessary to introduce ideas about the epistemological basis of routine algorithms for data analysis, as well as to give students experience and practice at applying this reasoning in a variety of appropriate labwork contexts. It also appears that many students are likely to see knowledge claims as emerging directly from the logical analysis of data, not recognising how particular theories and models help to shape scientists ways of evaluating and interpreting data. This may lead to inappropriate behaviour during labwork, such as students not recognising how theory might be drawn upon during experimental design, analysis and interpretation, or students appearing likely to draw strong conclusions from investigations carried out in labwork, based on inconclusive evidence.

The aim of this survey was to present an overview of labwork practice in the participating countries. To this end, the study addressed three issues: - The organisation of science teaching at the upper secondary and university levels. Data source: existing documentary information in each participating country. - Teachers practices in terms of labwork at an organisational level (time spent etc.). Data source: survey of teachers responses (n=397). - More specific aspects of teachers practice (such as the sorts of activities used). Data source: analysis of labwork sheets (n=180) using the Map of the variety of labwork. Considerable diversity in the organisation of science teaching for students in academic science streams at the upper secondary and university levels was noted. In some countries (notably France) a whole curriculum orientation is selected by students for study at upper secondary school (e.g. sciences, arts) whereas in other countries (notably Great Britain) students have considerable autonomy in selecting individual subjects. Another key variable between countries is the extent to which the upper secondary science curriculum is subject to central control. In some countries (e.g. Denmark, Greece and France) time allocations and assessment structures for each subject are specified centrally, whereas in others (e.g. Germany, Great Britain, Italy and Spain) control is more local. In terms of the amount of labwork practised, there were three main groups of countries. In Denmark, Great Britain and France labwork is regularly performed by upper secondary students, in Germany the situation is dependent upon the wishes of individual teachers, and in Italy and Greece labwork is rarely performed by upper secondary students in academic streams. However, the use of demonstrations by teachers is common in all countries. At the university level, labwork is commonly used in all countries and for all disciplines. At both secondary school level (if labwork is done) and university level, the type of labwork used vary little between countries or disciplines. By far the most common pattern of organisation is for small groups of students to work with real objects/materials following very precise instructions about methods and analysis given by a teacher or a written source (referred to as a labwork sheet). The use of open-ended project work is rare, particularly during the first two years of undergraduate study. Labwork is mainly assessed by grading reports from labwork according to the quality of students descriptions of the way in which tasks were performed, data acquisition, discussion of the quality of data and interpretation of experimental results. There is some difference in the extent to which labwork is linked to lecture courses. At upper secondary school level, labwork and lectures are typically more closely linked than at university level. At the university level there were very minor national variations in links between labwork and lectures, links being closer in Italy, Greece and Denmark than in Great Britain, France and Germany. Labwork sheets from several European countries were selected by the participating research groups as typical of the labwork normally carried out (n=175). The results of their analysis using The map of the variety of labwork are striking not only from the point of view of what the students have to do but also from what they do not have to do. At upper secondary school, the students normally have to use standard procedures, to measure, and to report observations directly. They do not have to present or display or make objects. They do not have to explore relationships between objects, to test predictions, to select between two or more explanations and so on. Even at university, it is rare for students to have to test a prediction made from a guess or a theory or to account for observations in terms of a law or theory, although sometimes in physics students are asked to test a prediction made from a law). In effect, the similarities both between disciplines and countries in terms of typical labwork is more than might be expected, given the differences in educational systems in each country. Typical labwork apparently involves a few similar types of activities.

The map of the variety of labwork (referred as the 'map of labwork') was developed at a relatively early stage of the LSE project, as a tool for use within the project and perhaps beyond it. It gives a taxonomy of labwork tasks providing a means of describing in detail any given labwork task. To develop this taxonomy, it was first necessary to specify what we mean by. What do we mean by labwork? The boundary between labwork and other science teaching/learning activities is not clearcut and is, indeed, somewhat arbitrary. However despite the absence of a clear-cut line of demarcation, 'labwork' is widely recognised by science teachers and educators as a distinct (and distinctive) type of science teaching/learning activity. So, in continuing to use the term, we are not creating a novel category, but rather exploring the boundaries of a category which is already in widespread use and trying to define its characteristics more precisely. In order to define more precisely what is meant by labwork, how it is designed, what is done by students and what is learnt by them, a map was produced to model the design and evaluation of a labwork task and the influences on each. This map includes: Box A: Teacher's objectives (what the students are intended to learn) Box B: Design features of task/ details of context (what students actually have to do; what students have available to them) Box C: What the students actually do Box D: What the students actually learn The design of a teaching/learning task might be thought to start with the learning objectives the teacher has in mind (Box A): what does he or she want the students to learn? This leads directly on to the design of the task, which is to be used to achieve those objectives (Box B). In designing the teaching/learning task, the teacher intends that the students will do something when given the task. So the model leads on to the question of what the students actually do when carrying out the task (Box C). This may be as the teacher intended, or it may differ from it in certain ways. For example, students may misunderstand the instructions and carry out actions, which are not the ones the teacher had in mind. Or they may carry out the intended operations on objects, but not engage in the kind of thinking about these, which the teacher intended. Finally, the process leads on to Box D, where we ask what the students learned from carrying out the task. Influences upon students actions and learning during labwork include their images of science and their images of learning. Similarly, influences upon the ways in which teachers design labwork include their images of science and their images of learning. For this reason, surveys were conducted to investigate students and teachers images of science as well as teachers views about appropriate learning objectives for labwork. The model set out above is useful when we turn to the question of the effectiveness of particular labwork tasks. A first level of enquiry into effectiveness would ask the question: o the students actually do the things we wished them to do when we designed the task? This is about the relationship between C and B. It then leads on to the more difficult (from a researcher's perspective) question of the effectiveness of a task in promoting student learning (the relationship between D and A). Subsets of categories in boxes A, B, C and D were generated, and used valuably as a tool for describing work in various aspects of the project. In particular, the map was successfully used to analyse labwork sheets in biology, chemistry and physics in different European countries as described in the next section.

This survey was designed to investigate the learning objectives identified by teachers as important for labwork, with particular reference upon any differences in objectives between disciplines, countries or levels. In order to identify the learning objectives actually considered important by teachers, a three stage methodology was used. In the first instance, a sample of teachers (n=60) were asked open-ended questions about the learning objectives that they saw as important for labwork. Second, data categories of objectives were abstracted from these responses and compared with categories reported in the literature. Third, these categories were formulated as a number of closed-response statements to be ranked and rated by a larger sample of teachers. Findings from the survey address the main objectives identified by teachers as important for labwork, and the relative effectiveness of different types of labwork at reaching those objectives. Teachers were presented with five overall objectives for labwork. These were: - To link theory to practice; - Learning experimental skills; - Getting to know the methods of scientific thinking; - Fostering motivation, personal development and social competency; - Evaluating the knowledge of students. These had to be ranked in order from most important to least important by the teachers. More than 40% of the teachers surveyed identified the main objective of labwork as being to link theory to practice. This objective was rated higher by physics teachers than by teachers of biology and chemistry. The objectives of learning experimental skills and getting to know the methods of scientific thinking were also rated highly. The objective learning experimental skills was rated more highly by university teachers than by upper secondary teachers. The objective getting to know the methods of scientific thinking was rated more highly by biology teachers than by teachers of chemistry and physics. Fostering motivation, personal development and social competency and evaluating the knowledge of students were rated low. Differences between country samples show only minor differences, e.g. in the French sample to develop scientific thinking shows the highest average rank value. Five organisational patterns for labwork were presented to teachers. These were: - Experiments carried out by the students; - Open ended labwork; - Using modern technologies; - Strongly guided experiments; - Demonstration experiments. Teachers were asked to rank each type of labwork according to how useful it was at promoting the learning objectives listed above. It was apparent that experiments carried out by the students were seen as overwhelmingly useful for promoting all learning objectives of labwork. Open-ended labwork was also viewed as useful, though less so for the learning objectives of linking theory and practice and learning experimental skills. Experiments using modern technologies and strongly guided labwork were all seen as useful for promoting all learning objectives, though both types were not seen as particularly effective at motivating students or evaluating students knowledge. Demonstration experiments were viewed as being not particularly effective at motivating students and evaluating their understanding, but more useful for linking theory and practice. Overall, the results from this survey are important as a frame for possible objectives of labwork, focusing on those objectives, which are ranked as particularly important by teachers. Possible future work involves comparing findings from this study about the objectives that teachers see as important for labwork, with findings from case study work about the effectiveness of labwork at promoting students learning.

Searching for OpenAIRE data...

Exploitable results

Share this page

Download