From recipe to enquiry – a curriculum tool for science teachers to align policy with practice in practical lessons

References

• Abrahams, Ian, and Robin Millar. 2008. “Does Practical Work Really Work? A Study of the Effectiveness of Practical Work as a Teaching and Learning Method in School Science.” International Journal of Science Education 30 (14): 1945–1969. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701749305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abrahams, Ian, and Michael J. Reiss. 2012. “Practical Work: Its Effectiveness in Primary and Secondary Schools in England.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 49 (8): 1035–1055. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Government. 2015. “National STEM School Education Strategy, 2016–2026”.
   Google Scholar
• Bank, Volker. 2012. “On OECD Policies and the Pitfalls in Economy-Driven Education: The Case of Germany.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 44 (2): 193–210. DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2011.639903.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassey, Michael. 1999. Case Study Research in Educational Settings. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, Joanna, Serena McCluskey, Emma Turley, and Nigel King. 2015. “The Utility of Template Analysis in Qualitative Psychology Research.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 12 (2): 202–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.955224
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, Denise, Ann Devitt, Gerry McNamara, Joe O'Hara, Martin Brown, 2018. “Is it all Memory Recall? An Empirical Investigation of Intellectual Skill Requirements in Leaving Certificate Examination Papers in Ireland.” Irish Educational Studies 37 (3): 351–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2018.1484300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bybee, Rodger W. 2014. “The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Personal Reflections and Contemporary Implications.” Science and Children 51 (8): 10–13.
   Google Scholar
• Capps, Daniel K., and Barbara A. Crawford. 2013. “Inquiry-based Instruction and Teaching About Nature of Science: Are They Happening?” Journal of Science Teacher Education 24 (3): 497–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9314-z
   Google Scholar
• Carter, Lynn. 2005. “Globalisation and Science Education: Rethinking Science Education Reforms.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching 42 (5): 561–580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Childs, Ann, and Jo-Anne Baird. 2020. “General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) and the Assessment of Science Practical Work: An Historical Review of Assessment Policy.” The Curriculum Journal 31 (3): 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costello, E., P. Girme, M. McKnight, M. Brown, E. McLoughlin, and S. Kaya. 2020. “Government Responses to the Challenge of STEM Education: Case Studies from Europe.” ATS STEM Report #2. Dublin: Dublin City University. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3673600.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, Barbara A. 2014. “From Inquiry to Scientific Practices in the Science Classroom.” In Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume II, edited by Norman Lederman and Sandra Abell, 529–556. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cullinane, Alison, Judith Hillier, Ann Childs, and Sibel Erduran. 2023. “Teachers’ Perceptions of Brandon’s Matrix as a Framework for the Teaching and Assessment of Scientific Methods in School Science.” Research in Science Education 53 (1): 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10044-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, Zongyi.. 2017. “Rethinking Curriculum and Teaching.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education, edited by G. W. Noblitt, 1–25. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education and Skills. 2017. “STEM Education Policy Statement.” Retrieved June 2023. https://www.gov.ie/en/policy-information/4d40d5-stem-education-policy/#stem-education-policy-statement-2017-2026.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education and Skills. 2023. STEM Education. Implementation Plan to 2026. Retrieved June 2023. https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file = https://assets.gov.ie/249002/3a904fe0-8fcf-4e69-ab31-987babd41ccc.pdf#page = null.
   Google Scholar
• DES. 2023. “STEM Education Policy Focus Group Consultation Report.” March 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Design-Based Research Collective. 2003. “Design-based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry.” Educational Researcher 32 (1): 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, John. [1910] 2012. How we Think. Mansfield Centre, Connecticut: Martino Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, John. [1925] 1958. Experience and Nature. Vol. 471. New York: Dover Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, John. [1938] 2015. “Experience and Education.” The Educational Forum 50 (3): 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131728609335764
   Google Scholar
• Dillon, Justin. 2008. “A Review of the Research on Practical Work in School Science.” King’s College, London: 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• English National Curriculum for Science. 2013. Accessed May 2023. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-science-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-science-programmes-of-study#contents.
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, Sibel, Ebru Kaya, Aysegul Cilekrenkli, Selin Akgun, and Busra Aksoz. 2021. “Perceptions of Nature of Science Emerging in Group Discussions: A Comparative Account of pre-Service Teachers from Turkey and England.” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 19 (7): 1375–1396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10110-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fradd, Sandra H., Okhee Lee, Francis X. Sutman, and M. Kim Saxton. 2001. “Promoting Science Literacy with English Language Learners Through Instructional Materials Development: A Case Study.” Bilingual Research Journal 25 (4): 479–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2001.11074464
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, Brigid, Simon Marginson, and Russell Tytler. 2019. “An International View of STEM Education.” In STEM Education 2.0: Myths and Truths–What has K-12 STEM Education Research Taught us?, edited by A. Sahin, and M. Mohr-Schroeder, 350–363. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Freire, Paulo. 1996. “Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Revised).” New York: Continuum 356: 357–358.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Ireland. 2001. Leaving Certificate Biology Syllabus. Dublin: The Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Ireland. 2002. Biology, Guidelines for Teachers. Dublin: Government Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Ireland. 2003. Biology Support Materials Laboratory Handbook For Teachers. Dublin: Government Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Grunwald, Sandra, and Andrew Hartman. 2010. “A Case-Based Approach Improves Science Students’ Experimental Variable Identification Skills.” Journal of College Science Teaching 39: 3.
   Google Scholar
• Hodson, Derek. 2014. “Learning Science, Learning About Science, Doing Science: Different Goals Demand Different Learning Methods.” International Journal of Science Education 36 (15): 2534–2553. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.899722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofstein, Avi, and V. N. Lunetta. 2004. “The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty-First Century.” Science Education 88 (1): 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, Aine. 2014. “The Design of Leaving Certificate science syllabi in Ireland: An International Comparison” Irish Science Teachers Association.
   Google Scholar
• Ioannidou, Olga, and Sibel Erduran. 2021. “Beyond Hypothesis Testing: Investigating the Diversity of Scientific Methods in Science Teachers’ Understanding.” Science & Education 30 (2): 345–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00185-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishikawa, Mayumi, Ashlyn Moehle, and Shota Fujii. 2015. “Japan: “restoring Faith in Science Through Competitive STEM Strategy.” In The age of STEM, edited by B. Freeman, S. Marginson, and R. Tytler, 81–101. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, Anthony E.. 2013. Educational Design Research, edited by Tjierd Plomp and Nienke Nieveen, 135–150. Netherlands: Slo.
   Google Scholar
• Kidman, Gillian. 2012. “Australia at the Crossroads: A Review of School Science Practical Work.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 8 (1): 35–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Mijung, and Aik-Ling Tan. 2011. “Rethinking Difficulties of Teaching Inquiry-Based Practical Work: Stories from Elementary pre-Service Teachers.” International Journal of Science Education 33 (4): 465–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500691003639913
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kind, Per Morton, et al. 2011. “Peer Argumentation in the School Science Laboratory—Exploring Effects of Task Features.” International Journal of Science Education 33 (18): 2527–2558. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.550952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, Nigel.. 2012. “Doing Template Analysis.” In Qualitative Organizational Research: Core Methods and Current Challenges. Vol. 426, edited by Gillian Symon and Cathy Cassell, 426–449. Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lankshear, Colin, and Michele Knobel. 2004. A Handbook for Teacher Research. Berkshire: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Llewellyn, Douglas. 2013. Teaching High School Science Through Inquiry and Argumentation. California: Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Loughran, John, Amanda Berry, and Pamela Mulhall. 2012. Understanding and Developing Scienceteachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Vol. 12. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Lunetta, Vincent N., Avi Hofstein, and Michael P. Clough. 2013. “Learning and Teaching in the School Science Laboratory: An Analysis of Research, Theory, and Practice.” In Handbook of Research on Science Education, edited by Norman Lederman and Sandra Abel, 393–441. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, Kathleen. 2021. Care and Capitalism. Cambridge: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Malmqvist, Johan, Kristina Hellberg, Gunvie Möllås, Richard Rose, and Michael Shevlin. 2019. “Conducting the Pilot Study: A Neglected Part of the Research Process? Methodological Findings Supporting the Importance of Piloting in Qualitative Research Studies.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 18: 1609406919878341. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10. 1177/1609406919878341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, Jennifer.. 2017. Qualitative Researching. California: Sage
   Google Scholar
• McKenney, Susan, and Thomas C. Reeves. 2018. Conducting Educational Design Research. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McLoughlin, Eilish et al. 2020. “STEM Education in Schools: What Can We Learn from the Research?" ATS STEM Report #1. Ireland: Dublin City University. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3673728
   Google Scholar
• Millar, Robin. 2004. “The Role of Practical Work in the Teaching and Learning of Science.” Commissioned Paper-Committee on High School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences, 308.
   Google Scholar
• Millar, Robin. 2009. “Analysing Practical Activities to Assess and Improve Effectiveness: The Practical Activity Analysis Inventory (PAAI).” York: Centre for Innovation and Research in Science Education, University of York.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. 2012. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• NCCA. 2019. Accessed May 2023. https://ncca.ie/media/5387/bp-lc-pcb-sep-2019.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Nieveen, Nienke, and Elvira Folmer. 2013. “Formative Evaluation in Educational Design Research.” Design Research 153: 152–169.
   Google Scholar
• Nistor, A., A. Gras-Velazquez, N. Billon, and G. Mihai. 2018. “Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education Practices in Europe” [Scientix Observatory Report]. Brussels: European Schoolnet. http://www.scientix.eu/observatory.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2016. PISA 2015 Results: Policies and Practices for Successful Schools (Vol. 2). Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, Natalie. 2022. “Bridging the Epistemic Divide: A Design Based Research Project on Laboratory Work at Upper Second Level in Ireland.” PhD diss., National University of Ireland Maynooth.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, Jonathan. 2015. “Practical Work in Science: Misunderstood and Badly Used?” School Science Review 96 (357): 16–24.
   Google Scholar
• Pedaste, Margus, Mario Mäeots, Leo A. Siiman, Ton De Jong, Siswa AN Van Riesen, Ellen T. Kamp, Constantinos C. Manoli, Zacharias C. Zacharia, and Eleftheria Tsourlidaki. 2015. “Phases of Inquiry-Based Learning: Definitions and the Inquiry Cycle.” Educational Research Review 14: 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp, Tjeerd.. 2013. “Educational Design Research: An Introduction.” In Educational Design Research, edited by Tjeerd Plomp and Nienke Nieveen, 11–50. Enschede: Slo.
   Google Scholar
• Priestley, Mark, Daniel Alvunger, Stavroula Philippou, and Tina Soini, eds. 2021. Curriculum Making in Europe: Policy and Practice Within and Across Diverse Contexts. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Scientix. 2018. Education Practices in Europe. Retrieved June 2023. http://www.scientix.eu/documents/10137/782005/STEM-Edu-Practices_DEF_WEB.pdf/b4847c2d-2fa8-438c-b080-3793fe26d0c8.
   Google Scholar
• Sharpe, Rachael, and Ian Abrahams. 2020. “Secondary School Students’ Attitudes to Practical Work in Biology, Chemistry and Physics in England.” Research in Science & Technological Education 38 (1): 84–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1597696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiel, Gerry, et al. 2016. “Ireland on Science, Reading Literacy and Mathematics in PISA 2015.”
   Google Scholar
• Short, James. 2021. “Commentary: Making Progress on Curriculum Reform in Science Education Through Purposes, Policies, Programs, and Practices.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 32 (7): 830–835. DOI: 10.1080/1046560X.2021.1927309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson, Mary, and Jennifer Tuson. 2003. “Using Observations in Small-Scale Research: A Beginner’s Guide. Revised Edition. Using Research. University of Glasgow, SCRE Centre, 16 Dublin Street, Edinburgh, EH3 6NL Scotland (SCRE Publication no. 130).
   Google Scholar
• Spradley, James. 2016. Doing Participant Observation. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
   Google Scholar
• State Examinations Commission. 2021. Date accessed, August 2022. https://www.examinations.ie/statistics/?l = en&mc = st&sc = r21.
   Google Scholar
• State Examinations Commission [SEC]. 2013. Leaving Certificate Examination 2013, Chief Examiner’s Report, Physics Retrieved May 2023 from https://www.examinations.ie/archive/examiners_reports/Chief_Examiner_Report_Physics_2013.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Tasiopoulou, Evita, et al. 2022. “European Integrated STEM Teaching Framework October 2022”, European Schoolnet, Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Thijs, Annette, and Jan Van Den Akker. 2009. Curriculum in Development. Enschede: Slo, Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Akker, Jan, et al. eds., ed. 2006. Educational Design Research. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, Etienne. 1999. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
   Google Scholar
• Yoon, Hye-Gyoung, Yong Jae Joung, and Mijung Kim. 2012. “The Challenges of Science Inquiry Teaching for pre-Service Teachers in Elementary Classrooms: Difficulties on and Under the Scene.” Research in Science Education 42 (3): 589–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9212-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, Anat, and Rosemary Hipkins. 2018. “How “Tight/Loose” Curriculum Dynamics Impact the Treatment of Knowledge in two National Contexts.” Curriculum Matters 14: 31–47. https://doi.org/10.18296/cm.0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar