Science education for and as resiliency through indoor agriculture

Guest Editorial: Science education in the developing world: Issues and considerations

References

The Elementary School Journal Volume 84, Number 4 S1984 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. 001 3-5984/84/8404-0004$01.00 Assumptions, even assumptions that seem logical and reasonable, can make it difficult or impossible for people to understand scientific concepts. Everyone makes assumptions about the way the world works, assumptions like "When the sky is cloudy and dark, it will probably rain" or "Bits of wood float in water." People often use those assumptions to explain how things work: "I can see myself in a mirror because light bounces off me to the mirror and off the mirror to my eyes." Such explanations or conceptions are often based on experience and common sense; however, experience and common sense can sometimes

Research in science education is becoming increasingly cognizant of the possibility that significant science education can begin as early as kindergarten and should be given much more attention in elementary school than it receives at present. This is manifest in the growing of number of articles in the science education literature as well as in many national educational reforms worldwide. However, while voices for early childhood education increase, one should also bear in mind that still there are those who object to the view that science should start so early in life. I cannot forget the comments I received from one reviewer on a recent grant proposal for the Israeli Science Foundation concerning science education in kindergarten. It was clear that in the reviewer’s eyes science in kindergarten should be limited only to causal observations of nature and the cultivation of an enjoyment of it. As far as I could see, the reviewer saw no place in kindergarten for developing the kinds of thinking and skills necessary for scientific inquiry. Unfortunately, this reviewer still represents a common opinion about early childhood science education. The danger of that view is that it opens the door to science education’s becoming marginalized in the schools. Indeed, there are a more than a few schools in which there is little science in the early grades and none at all in the kindergarten. Even where science is taught in kindergarten and the earliest grades of school, it is too often a caricature of science that is presented to the children. I of course agree that young children should observe nature and learn to enjoy it; however, it seems to me terribly wrong to think that science education in the early years should be limited to this. On the contrary, my experience in working with children in kindergarten and primary school as well as with their teachers has persuaded me that science education can go beyond observation in nature—much beyond! My own experience and research concurs with Metz’s conclusion that young children have well-enough developed cognitive machinery to benefit from activities geared towards significant scientific inquiry. Moreover, it may be that by ignoring the development of inquiry skills and reasoning at this age we are missing an important window of opportunity for expanding young children’s scientific thinking. Accordingly, this special issue explores the possibilities and benefits of teaching science in a significant way to children in their early school years. I hope, in the end, it will show that starting science as early as kindergarten will be viewed not only as possible but as essential. For me, this special issue is a natural continuation of the positions described in my book, Scientific Literacy in Primary Schools and Preschools (Eshach 2006) and broadens its horizons. The papers included in the special issue not only consolidate the positions in my book but also show, much more than I could in 2006, the variety of learning environments possible for K-6 science education and explore much more expansively the actual experiences of children and teachers vis-a-vis science education. For this reason, the special issue is divided into two parts: Innovative learning environments for K-6, and Children and Teachers’ Perspectives. In choosing the papers for this special issue, my hope was that taken together they would influence the science education community in the following ways: H. Eshach (&) The Department of Science and Technology Education, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel e-mail: heshach@bgu.ac.il

1: Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to Science Education Research.- Presidential Address: What can we reasonably expect of research in science education?.- Constructivism in science education: The need for a clear line of demarcation.- Overviews of the Research Presented at ESERA 2001.- On the methodology of 'phenomenography' as a science education research tool.- Conversation Theory and self-learning.- Analysis of video data of secondary school science students.- Longitudinal studies - providing insight into individual themes in science learning and students' views of their own learning.- Changing referential perspective in science classroom discourse.- 2:Learning and Understanding Science.- Students' positions in physics education. A gendered perspective.- Situated conceptions and obstacles. The example of digestion/excretion.- About some of the difficulties in learning Thermodynamics at the University Level.- Metacognitive Experiences in the Domain of Physics: Developmental and Educational Aspects.- How children reason from data to conclusions in practical science investigations.- Mechanistic reasoning on the concept of wave surface, and on the Huygens principle.- Atomic Physics in Upper Secondary School: Layers of Conceptions in Individual Cognitive Structure.- The electric current on its way to our house and the parallel connection of the electric appliances: primary students' (11-12) representations.- Detailed Investigation of Professional Physicists Solving Physics Tasks.- Learning from writing in secondary science: A case study of students' composing strategies.- Seventh-grade pupils' epistemic views in the context of model-based instruction.- Nonlinear Analysis of the Effect of Working-Memory Capacity on Student Performance in Problem Solving.- The Nature Of Growth In Children's Science Understandings: Insights From A Longitudinal Study.- HOCS Problem solving Vs. LOCS exercise solving: What do college science students prefer?.- 3 :Teaching and Communicating Science.- Science and Technology Education: A high priority political concern in Europe.- A mesoscopic model of liquids for teaching fluids statics.- The importance of weightlessness and tides in teaching gravitation.- Making decisions about biological conservation issues in peer group discussion.- Discourse in the laboratory: quality in argumentative and epistemic operations.- Modelling the evolution of teaching -learning sequences: From discovery to constructivism.- Nonlinear Physics in Upper Physics Classes: Educational Reconstruction as a Frame for Development and Research in a Study of Teaching and Learning Basic Ideas of Nonlinearity.- Promoting Understanding through Representational Redescription: an exploration referring to young pupils' ideas about gravity.- Different types of classroom debates on biotechnology. Are these simply an exercise in rhetoric or do they encourage a well-founded critical attitude?.- 4: Science Education and Information and Communication Technologies.- WISE Research - Promoting International Collaboration.- Research about the use of information technology in science education.- Physics Learning and Microcomputer Based Laboratory (MBL) - Learning effects of using MBL as a technological and as a cognitive tool.- Phenomenographical Approach to Design for a Hypertext Teacher's Guide to MBL.- Application of a framework appropriate for a multilevel assessment of educational multimedia software in science (FEVES).- Brain Research in Science Education Research.- Computer modelling and simulation in science lessons: using research into teachers' transformations to inform training.- 5: Science Teachers: Knowledge and Practices.- Exploring science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge.- Relating research in didactics and actual teaching practice: impact and virtues of critical details.- Transforming the Standard Instrument for Assessing Science Teacher's Self-Efficacy Beliefs (STEBI) For Use in Denmark.- Teachers' confidence in primary science and teacher-student interactions.- Teachers' views and attitudes towards the communication code and the rhetoric used in press science articles.- Science teachers' perceptions of the current situation of planetary emergency.- 6: International Research and Development Projects.- A European Research Project for New Challenges in Science Teacher Training.- Quality Development Projects in Science Education.- Video-Based Studies on Investigating Deficiencies of School Science Teaching.- Authors Index.

This study aimed to analyze the psychological effects of interactive multimedia based on scientific approaches in science teaching and learning for junior high school students. Research and Development is used as a research method, involving three experts as validators for assessing the rightness of material, language, and media, as well as 48 students and one science teacher assessing the rightness of interactive multimedia that is created. Expert assessment of Psychological effects is interactive multimedia collected using validation sheets, student and teacher assessments were carried out using a questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics aided by Statistical Package for The Social Sciences (SPSS windows 22.0). The results showed that material experts, media, languages, as well as teachers and students rated interactive multimedia based on scientific approaches in science teaching and learning to provide Psychological effects in science learning (values in sequence as follows; material = 89%, media = 86%, language = 75%, students = 85% and teacher = 92%).) This result shows that interactive multimedia based on scientific approach can be used as an alternative as a standard in science learning in secondary schools.

A modern understanding of the cell and its functions has been translated into learning goals for K-12 students by Project 2061's Benchmarks for Science Literacy (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993 ) and by the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards (NSES) (National Research Council [NRC], 1996 ). Nearly every state has used these national documents to develop their own science standards, so that there is now a fairly broad consensus on what it is that students need to know and be able to do in science generally and in biology more specifically. While this consensus represents an important first step toward improving science education, without curriculum, instruction, and assessments that are well aligned with these goals, teachers will find it extremely difficult to help their students achieve them. Here, we first highlight a few of the key findings regarding cell biology from Project 2061's study of high school textbooks and their alignment with standards. We then describe Project 2061's current efforts to develop new knowledge and tools that educators, researchers, and practitioners can use to help all students become literate in science, mathematics, and technology. Project 2061 is a long-term K–12 education initiative of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Development of Activity-Based Science Learning Models with Inquiry Approaches

The science and technology model is learning to teach science and technology in the context of experience and everyday life, focusing on societal issues, whether local, regional, national, or global, with science and technology components. Meanwhile, the scientific approach is an approach to learning science process skills. It uses a scientific approach where students are directed and guided in observing, asking, trying, reasoning, and building networks to disseminate the learning results obtained. Learning outcomes are a path to mastering knowledge or skills in a subject, usually indicated by test scores or numbers given by the teacher. Learning outcomes are obtained from learning to master knowledge, usually developed and shown by numbers. This research aims to determine whether implementing a science and technology learning model based on a scientific approach affects the science learning outcomes of grade IV students at SDN Pemongkong. Researchers are implementing technology in science learning at SDN 1 Pemongkong. Still, many obstacles exist, such as internet signals and technological stupors; only some have a laptop or cellphone. Therefore, the idea that emerged in this research was the use of technology that can be accessed by all students, namely the community science technology model based on a scientific approach, which is expected to improve student learning outcomes. The method used in this research is experimentation. This type of experimental research uses Quasi-Experimental Design or quasi-experiments. The experimental plan used in this research is a Nonequivalent Control Group Design. Hypothesis testing is carried out using uji t (independent samples test). Comparison of the average learning outcomes of the experimental class and the control class for the two classes experienced an increase compared to before learning; namely, the average value of the control class at the pretest 54.82 and increased to 73.10 after learning, while the average value of the experimental class is at posttest 58.07 and rose to 74.42 on posttest. The average learning outcomes are similar between the control class and the class experiment. However, the average learning outcomes of the experimental class are still higher than those of the control class. The class that was taught used the community science and technology learning model. Namely, two students got a score of 90 in the control class, and in the conventional class, only one got a 90. By hypothesis testing, face H0 accepted that the scientific approach-based community science and technology learning model influences the learning outcomes of class IV students at SDN 1 Pemongkong. In this case, it can be interpreted that the community science and technology learning model positively impacts student learning outcomes.

“Good luck on your first day as an assistant professor, Dr. Tanner! Have a great class!” On the wall above my desk, these words scream out from an otherwise encouraging note that is adorned with many exclamation points. This note has hung on my wall since my very first day as an Assistant Professor of Biology. As I was charging off to teach my first class, a senior faculty member who had been on my hiring committee slipped this note under my office door. In moments of pause years later, I still stare up at that note and breathe a sigh of relief that I had much more than luck to guide me on my first day as a college-level teacher. Although I continue to have much to learn—as all of us do no matter the number of years of teaching experience—I did arrive at the university with both formal and informal training in science education. I had had plenty of exposure to innovative pedagogical approaches, questioning strategies, and techniques for engaging diverse audiences in learning science. As a scientist educator, I had had the privilege of many years of collaboration with outstanding K–12 educators as well as a postdoctoral fellowship in science education. However, my training has been, to say the least, unconventional compared with that of my fellow junior faculty and unique in its preparation in regard to the teaching and learning of my discipline. It will not be news to anyone reading this article that university and college teaching is to a large extent a profession with no formal training. It’s startling but true that the majority of faculty members—and lecturers who often teach large numbers of students—have no formal training in the teaching and learning of their discipline. In fact, the hiring process in university science departments is structured primarily to evaluate a faculty candidate’s ability to be a productive researcher, with success measured in number of publications and magnitude of grant funds raised. Depending on the type of institution, for example, research university, state-level university, or liberal arts college, there may be a component of the faculty interview process that probes a candidate’s teaching ability, for example, requesting a statement of teaching philosophy and requiring the candidate to teach a sample lecture class. However, this sample lecture often screens for gross inadequacies, rather than looking for stellar innovations or pedagogical skills. This lack of formal, accredited training for university and college instructors stands in stark contrast to the requirements for a high school teacher who is charged with the education of students only a year junior to college freshmen. High school teachers in the United States must be credentialed as a secondary science teacher, demonstrate subject matter competency in every subject that they will be teaching, and must continually engage in professional development in the teaching and learning of their discipline throughout their career as a science teacher. With the 2002 federal No Child Left Behind legislation, the onus is upon each precollege science teacher to become “highly qualified” in terms of formal university-level training in science education. However, no such required professional training or measurable standards for teaching are required in institutions of higher education. Many policy documents have suggested standards of teaching practice in postsecondary science education (National Research Council, 1996, 1997; Siebert and McIntosh, 2001), but the extent of implementation of these ideals is unclear and has gone relatively unstudied, although national and regional accreditation boards do look at outcomes, asking colleges and universities to assess what their students have gained from four years of study at their institutions. Nonetheless, there is a striking reversal of accountability that happens when one crosses the precollege teaching to college-level teaching boundary (Table 1). During the K–12 school years, society expects K–12 teachers to be responsible for student learning. Salaries of teachers in many states are tied to student test scores, and poor student performance can potentially invoke penalties. At a college or university, several variables in the educational universe shift. Students are the ones responsible for learning. The evaluation and compensation of college-level teachers is not DOI: 10.1187/cbe.05–12–0132 Address correspondence to: Kimberly Tanner (kdtanner@sfsu.edu). CBE—Life Sciences Education Vol. 5, 1–6, Spring 2006

Alberto Vinicio Baez was a pioneer in the field of international science education. He was a physicist who played a leading role in UNESCO’s efforts to support science education globally. His research in the physics of light led to the development of an X-ray microscope and of imaging optics. He participated in projects to improve science education in high schools in the United States in the 1950s, a period of intense interest on this topic. In 1961 he was invited to join UNESCO to establish the Division of Science Education. In this position he wrote numerous papers, organized and participated in regional and international conferences, and studied and supported the development of projects to advance science and technology education in developing countries, with a special focus in secondary schools. The programme established the importance of science education, developed low-cost science kits, films and a structured, high-quality curriculum to support physics teachers in Latin America, chemistry education in Asia, biology education in Africa and mathematics education in the Arab States. Baez’s chief intellectual contributions to the field of science education centered on the development and dissemination of the ideas that it was necessary to democratize access to high-quality education in developing countries, that science education should focus on developing the capabilities needed to solve practical problems, and on the role of interdisciplinarity and social responsibility as core foundations of science education. He also articulated why high-quality science and technology education to improve living conditions in developing nations would contribute to addressing common global challenges faced by humanity, particularly achieving sustainable forms of human environmental interaction, reducing poverty and uncontrolled demographic expansion, and promoting peace. His writings and work to improve science education in developing countries reflect a theory of educational change that recognizes the synergies that result from engaging multiple stakeholders to initiate and sustain innovation and to institutionalize large-scale change. He favoured approaches that brought together scientists and teachers, and

Referebces

Research Article| May 01 1998 A Study of the Role of Research Scientists in K-12 Science Education Marvin Druger, Marvin Druger Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar George Allen George Allen Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The American Biology Teacher (1998) 60 (5): 344–349. https://doi.org/10.2307/4450492 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Marvin Druger, George Allen; A Study of the Role of Research Scientists in K-12 Science Education. The American Biology Teacher 1 May 1998; 60 (5): 344–349. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/4450492 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe American Biology Teacher Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright The National Association of Biology Teachers Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Contents: Preface. Part I: Introduction to Interdisciplinary Science and Language Arts Instruction. V.L. Akerson, T.A. Young, Why Interdisciplinary Language Arts and Science Instruction? J.C. Richards, Interdisciplinary Teaching: History, Theory, and Interpretations. T.D. Sadler, Sociocultural Perspective on Scientific Literacy and Learning Science. Part II: The Influence of Interdisciplinary Science and Language Arts Instruction on Children's Learning. J.A. Morrison, Teachers' Use of Science Notebooks to Assess Understanding of Science Concepts. D.T. Crowther, J.R. Cannon, Using the THC Model of Science Investigation and Science Notebooking in Elementary and Middle-Level Science Classrooms. D.A. Powell, R.J. Aram, Children Publish in Science as a Way of Knowing. D. Crowther, M. Robinson, A. Edmundson, A. Colburn, Preparing English Language Learners in the Science Classroom. C. Gile, Inquiry Curriculum in the Primary Grades. Part III: Research on Preparing Elementary Teachers to Use Interdisciplinary Science and Language Arts Instruction. W.P. Bintz, S. Moore, Using a Literature-Based Text Cluster to Teach Science. J.C. Richards, K.T. Shea, Interdisciplinary Teaching in the Primary Grades: Preservice Teachers' Dilemmas and Achievements Connecting Science, the Arts, and Reading. J.A. Morrison, Using Science Notebook Writing to Promote Preservice Teachers' Understanding of Formative Assessment. I. Graves, T. Phillipson, Using Critical Literacy in the Science Classroom. S.J. Britsch, D.P. Shepardson, CLASP: An Approach to Helping Teachers Interpret Children's Science Journaling. L.Y. Lu, Semiotics for Integrating Geosciences Into Literacy in Teacher Education. V.L. Akerson, Using Action Research Projects to Help Preservice Elementary Teachers Effectively Use Interdisciplinary Language Arts and Science Instruction. Part IV: Conclusions and Recommendations. V.L. Akerson, T.A. Young, What Do We Know From Our Research? What Do We Still Need to Know? Conclusions and Recommendations.

This research discusses "The Application of Experimental Methods in Science Learning in SDN Inpres Bumi Bahari." By raising the issue: 1. How is the application of experimental methods in learning science in SDN Inpres Bumi Bahari? 2. What are the obstacles to the application of experimental methods in learning science in SDN Inpres Bumi Bahari, and how is the solution to overcome the application of experimental methods in learning science in SDN Inpres Bumi Bahari?. The research used is qualitative research. This study uses data collection techniques through observation, interviews, and documentation. While the data analysis technique used is data reduction, data presentation, and data verification as well as checking the validity of the data. The results showed that the application of the experimental method in learning science about the photosynthetic material had been carried out several stages, namely: the preparation stage, the implementation stage, and the closing stage. In the preparation phase, the teacher must convey the learning objectives to be achieved. Furthermore, the implementation stage contains an explanation of the material, a demonstration of performance, and photosynthesis observation activities on botanical plants. Finally, the concluding stage contains a repeat of photosynthetic observations of the students that are carried out on botanical plants. There are several obstacles that are found in the application of experimental methods in learning science in SDN Inpres Bumi Bahari, namely: lack of students' attention to the experimental method in learning science, material about photosynthesis in the classroom. The way that can be taken to solve this problem is to invite students to work together in the learning process in the classroom so that students can easily capture and understand the lessons explained by the teacher. This can be done by the teacher to students so that students easily understand and comprehend the learning given and explained by the teacher