evidence-based continuous professional development (cpd) of chemistry teachers in an inquiry...
TRANSCRIPT
Evidence-based Continuous Professional
Development (CPD) of chemistry teachers
in an inquiry laboratory
Dorit Taitelbaum
Ph. D. Advisors: Prof. Avi Hofstein
and Dr. Rachel Mamlok-Naaman
abcdefgijklABCD
Weizmann Institute of Science
Department of Science Teaching
In collaboration with Miriam Carmeli
The Inquiry Chemistry Laboratory in Israel (ICL)
Uniqueness
100 inquiry-type experiments
Main characteristics:Working in small groupsPhrasing different inquiry questionPreparing “Hot Report”Having students presentation
Integral part of students’ final assessment (20%)
Conducting pre-inquiry experiment
Making observations
Raising questions
Choosing one research question
Constructing a relevant hypothesis
Designing an appropriate inquiry experiment
Making and organizing observations
Analyzing and summarizing the inquiry experiment
Presenting the results to the whole class
Raising more advanced questions
Students’ inquiry skills
What do we mean by accomplished teaching in the Inquiry Chemistry
Laboratory (ICL)?
Chemistry teachers’ skills
Help students to:
- Solve problems
- Ask high-level questions
- Hypothesize regarding certain unsolved
experimental problems
Encourage students to share their knowledge with peers
A flavor from the inquiry chemistry laboratory (ICL)
Summer induction course
Development of learning materials (teacher's guide)
WorkshopClassroom-laboratory
observations
Evidence-based portfolio Forum on the web
The evidence-based CPD model for chemistry teachers
The study
Research questions:
1. What kinds of strategies did the teachers use while conducting the inquiry-type experiments?
2. How did the teachers cope with collecting artifacts, turn them into evidence, and use them
to construct their portfolios?
Research population
All participating teachers were novice to the inquiry approach
7 high-school chemistry teachers participated in the study each year, during 3 years. (In the first year, a pilot study was conducted)
Each teacher had a different professional background
Research tools
Classroom-laboratory observations
Three teachers were observed and videotaped during 2-3 inquiry-type activities each year
Several qualitative research tools
Interviews
Semi-structured in-depth interviews with each teacher immediately
after each observation
Teacher portfolio
Each teacher was asked to build a portfolio concerning the whole year
Documentation of the workshops
All the workshops’ meetings were documented using
videotape/audiotape
Data analysis
A diversity of qualitative research tools
Steps in the process of analysis
Transcription of the videotapes, interviews, workshop’s meetings
Definition of categories and criteria
Interpretation to the data
The multiple sources enable us to validate the results and make triangulations
Variables that were assessed
First category: Dilemmas concerning group work
Ways of grouping the students
The same groups or different groups? Homogeneous or heterogeneous groups?
The time that the teacher spent with each group and the number of times that the teacher approached each group
Hesitating or approaching?
Teachers' challenges
Discussing but not revealing
The criteria
What happened during these 5 months of the school year?
Workshop
A teacher has to organize and plan the lessons well, in order to cope with a lot of uncertainty that is rooted in teaching using the ICL approach
The teachers claimed that:
Exchanging ideas with peers and the providers, getting relevant feedback and support were very essential
Variables that were assessed
Evidence-based portfolio
What happened during these 5 months of the school year?
The teachers claimed that:
They became more reflective, and their anxiety concerning the implementation of the program decreased.
The fact that they were encouraged to document their work, together with the process of investigating it during the inquiry-type experiments, contributed significantly to their work.
Variables that were assessed
Second category: Teachers’ challenges concerning summary discussions
Planning the discussion
Involving as many students as possible
Variables that were assessed
In-Depth Interviews
“At the beginning I thought that if I would summarize everything by lecturing to the class - that will be the right thing to do. But that’s not enough … Later I said to myself, let’s change, let the students talk. Then I thought, that I will let them present, and indeed it became more varied and colorful, with PowerPoint presentations. I started with a “dry routine” discussion, but then I moved on and “passed them the ball”. I made them more and more activate”.
Teacher centered toward Student centered
In-Depth Interviews
“For the student, part of the learning process is studying for the test, organizing the learning materials. In the inquiry unit there is no such thing. So how can you give the student an overall perspective on the activity? This should be done during the summary discussion”
Summary
Teachers had to develop two main teaching strategies that were essential to the inquiry approach:
the management of the group work the management of the summary discussion
The most powerful components of the CPD model were: the workshop, the pieces of evidence and the videotaped observations
Bringing artifacts from the laboratory and turning them into evidence was not a trivial task. It was also time consuming