Effectiveness of A program for Teaching Science Based on Scaffolding Inquiry Strategy in Cognitive Achievement and Developing Systemic Thinking Skills and Scientific Values of Preparatory Stage Students

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Curriculum and Instruction Department, Faculty of Education, Aswan University, Aswan, EGYPT

Abstract

The current research aims at identifying the effectiveness of a program for teaching science based on scaffolding inquiry strategy in cognitive achievement and developing systemic thinking skills and scientific values of preparatory stage students. The sample of the research includes eighty – five students in preparatory third grades from preparatory school; students are divided into two groups; experimental group (n=44) and controlled group (n=41). The researcher uses the descriptive methodology in preparing the theoretical framework for the research and preparing the tools of the study (cognitive achievement test, systemic thinking skills scale and scientific values scale), and analyzing and discussing of the results. The experimental methodology is used in the field part which represented in the two homogeneous groups' experimental design. The results showed the effectiveness of a program for teaching science based on scaffolding inquiry strategy on: cognitive achievement and developing systemic thinking skills and scientific values except neutrality, and self-criticism (Blake's modified gained ratio was acceptable) and recalling level (effect size was average). In light of these results, the research presented a set of recommendations and suggestions

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

-Akerlind, G. (2004). A new dimension to understanding university teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3), 363-375.
-Alfieri, L., Brooks, P., Aldrich, N., & Tenenbaum, H. (2011). Does discover-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-18.
-Asay, L., & Orgill, M. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in The Science Teacher, 1998-2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(1), 57-79.
-Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skill in the context of earth system educatio. Journal og Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 518-560.
-Azevedo, R., Moos, D., Johnson, A., & Chauneey, A. (2010). Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory process during hypermedia learning: issues and challenges. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 201-223.
-Bell, R., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction: Assessing the inquiry level of classroom activities. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30-33.
-Benson, T. (2007). Developing a systems thinking capacity in learners of all ages. Washington, DC.: A Waters Foundation Program.
-Chessin, D., & Moore, V. (2004). The 6-E learning model. Science & Children, 42(3), 47-49.
-Eisenkraft, A. (2003). Expanding the 5E model: A proposed 7E model emphasizes "transfer of learning" and the importance of eliciting prior understanding. The Science teacher, 70(6), 56-59.
-Erick, C., Meadows, L., & Balkcom, R. (2005). Breaking into inquiry: Scaffolding supports beginning efforts to implement inquiry in the classroom. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 49-53.
-Farrell, R. (2003). Feyerabend and scientific values: Tightrope-walking rationality (Vol.235). Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media.
-Fishback, C., & Daniel, D. (2011). Improving student achievement and acquisition of 21st century skills though implementation of inquiry-based learning strategies. Irvine, CA: Concordia University.
-Hiang, P. (2005). Pedagogy of Sciene. Kuala Lumpur: Precetakan Sentosa(K.L) Sdn.Bhd.
-Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.
-Hsu, Y., Lai, T., & Hsu, W. (2015). A design model of distributed scaffolding for inquiry - based learning. Research of Science Education, 45, 241-273.
-Klentschy, M., & Thompson, L. (2008). Scaffolding science inquiry through lesson design. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
-Krauss, J., & Boss, S. (2013). Thinking through project 0 based learning: Guiding deeper inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
-Kukkonen, J. (2015). Scaffolding inquiry in science education by means of computer supported collaborative learning: Pupils' and teacher students' experiences. Dissertations in Education, Humanities, And Theology, 62, 1-122.
-Leech, A. (2013). What does this graph mean?. Formative assessment with science inquiry to improve data analysis, MA. Dgree Thesis. Portland State: Portland State University.
-Liang, L., & Richardson, G. (2009). Enhancing prospective teacher's science teaching efficacy beliefs through scaffolded, student - directed inquiry. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 51-66.
-Lupton, M. (2021, Nov. 17). Inquiry learning & The Australian Curriculum. Retrieved from Queensland University of Technology: http://inquirylearningblog.wordpress.coml
-Miao, T., Weinbrenner, S., Engler, J., Giemza, A., & Hoppe, H. (2011). A flexible approach to metacognitive scaffolding in computer-mediated inquiry learning. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on computers in education (pp. 221-230). Thailand: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in education.
-Minner, D., Levy, A., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry - based scienec instruction - what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
-National Center for Research on Rural Education. (2017). Scaffolding science inquiry instruction. Licolin: U.S. Department of Education, IES.
-National Research Council. (2015). Guide to implementing the Next Generation Science Standards. Washington, DC: The national Academies Press.
-National Science Board. (2007). National action plan for assessing the critical needs of the US sciebce, technology, engineering and mathematics education system. Washington. DC: National Science Fpundation.
-NRC. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
-Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2003). What "Ideas-about-Science" should be taugh in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of research in in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692-720.
-Pea, R. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theortical concepts for learning, education and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 423-451.
-Pedro, M. (2013). Real-time asseseement, prediction, and scaffolding of middle school students' data collection skills within physical science simulations, PhD Thesis. University of Twente: School of Education.
-Prouty, C. (2014). Student engagement: Best practices in teaching in a k-5 blended learning environment, PhD Thesis. Northwest Nazarene University: College of Education.
-Puntambekar, S., Stylianou, A., & Goldstein, J. (2007). Comparing classroom enactments of an inquiry curriculum: lessons learned from two teachers. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 42(2), 185-217.
-Quintana, C., Reiser, B., Davis, E., Krajcik, J., Duncan, R., Kyza, E., . . . Soloway, E. (2004). A Scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of The Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-386.
-Reiser, B. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304.
-Seroussi, M. (2005). Science teachers' perceptions and implementation of classroom inquiry, PhD Thesis. Connecticut: The University of Connecticut.
-Shamsudin, N., Abdullah, N., & Yaamat, N. (2013). Strategies of teaching science using an inquiry based science eduction (IBSE) by novice chemistry teachers. Proccedia Social and Behavioral Science, 90, 583-592.
-Sperling, E. (2009). More than particle theory: Action-oriented citizenship through science education in a school setting. Journal for Activities Science & Technology Education, 1(2), 12-22.
-Tang, X., Coffiey, J., Elby, A., & Levin, D. (2010). The scientific methods and scientific inquiry: tensions in teaching and learning. Science Education, 94, 29-47.
-Taylor, K., & Woolley, R. (2013). Values and vision in primary education. New York: Open University Press.
-Theodoros, V., Katerina, S., & Chryssa, T. (2014). Meaningful understanding and systems thinking in organic chemistry: Validating measurement and exploring relationships. Research in Science Education, 44(2), 239-266.
-Thornton, B., Peltier, G., & Perreault, G. (2004). Systems thinking: A skill to improve student achievement. Clearning House, 77(5), 222-227.
-Trumbull, B. (2005). Developing materials to promote inquiry: lessons learned. Science Education, 89, 879-900.
-Walan, S., & Rundgren, S.-N. (2015). Student responses to a context - and inquiry - based three - step teaching model. Teaching Science, 61(2), 33-30.
-Yeh, Y., Jen, T., & Hsu, Y. (2012). Major strands in scientific inquiry through cluster analysis of research abstracts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2811-2842.
-Zhang, L. (2019). "Hands-on" plus "inquiry"? Effects of witholding answers coupled with pyysical manipulations on student's learning of energy-related science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 60, 199-205.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics