Science as a Part of Science and Maths Subjects - Essay Example

PRACTICAL WORK IN SCIENCE LESSONS: HOW EFFECTIVE IS IT AT ACHIEVING ITS AIMS? By Introduction Science, as part of science, technology, engineering and maths subjects (STEM) is recognized as a determinant subject in not only students’ success, but also that of economies. This is because graduates of STEM subjects join fields that are important in steering economies such as undertaking significant research, inventing unique entrepreneurship, and driving science-based innovations. This therefore highlights the fact that science is an important subject that should be taught to students from as early as elementary (primary) school level. In fact, most governments have made science a mandatory subject at the foundational levels of school. Science is important in that even though the students may not choose science-based majors in the future, science enables them twofold by; acquiring scientific literacy, and being enabled to continue learning past formal education. In elaboration, science is important in that the learners can; develop skills required to understand their environment and solve problems, develop curiosity which is an important ingredient to learning, develop a language for communicating and describing ideas and observations, and finally understanding the world around them. Following the above definitions, the question arises as to who lies with the mandate of teaching science effectively. As Fensham (2012, p. 70) stated, “The future of science education does not lie primarily in the curriculum or in technology but with teachers of science.” In this statement, it is evident that the teacher, or the approach applied by the teacher towards disseminating scientific knowledge is critical. To this day, inquiry-based learning, that is, learning integrated with practical justification through practice, is regarded as the most effective way of teaching science. Inquiry-based learning has therefore been incorporated in the teaching and learning of science as it is expected to further the dissemination of knowledge through theory and practice combined. In the light of this, the following study will focus on teaching and learning of science with regards to how effective practical work is in supplementing student progress. Rationale Science as a subject has been in existence since the beginning of learning. As such, much has been researched and concluded regarding its teaching, learning and application. However, most of these recent studies on the subject focused on its general application not realizing that it differs from stage to stage. For instance, what is learnt at stages 3 to 5 is not necessarily what will be learned in higher stages. These and other reasons have led to dissatisfaction in evaluating the effectiveness in practical methods applied in teaching and learning science. As such, this study acquires its relevance in that unlike previous studies, it will analyse the effectiveness of the use of inquiry-based learning (practical) in disseminating scientific knowledge to learners aged between 11 to 18 years. This is because it is the foundational stage of science learners and impacts on their future interaction with the subject. Key terms 1) Pedagogy This is the approach (method) and practice of teaching in theoretical or academic contexts (Kincheloe 2005, p. 53). 2) Teacher-directed instruction This is the teaching approach where the teacher states facts which the students are supposed to learn without any form of justification such as an experiment (Jackson 2009, p. 6). 3) Inquiry-based instruction This refers to a teaching method in which a teacher-directed instruction is followed by a practical investigation to ascertain the stated facts (Chitman-Booker & Kopp 2013, p. 15). 4) Elementary school This is a school for the first four to six grades. It is also known as primary school (MacMillan, 2005, n.p.). Literature Review Slavin, Lake, Hanley, and Thurton (2012, p. 3) acknowledge that science is a prioritized subject in many countries in the world as part of the STEM cluster. This is because this cluster is critical in determining the countries’ futures. Again, Kilpatrick and Quinn (2009, p.) add that this has made science a critical subject, and especially how it is taught in elementary school level because it is at this stage that the learners will develop attraction or repulsion to the subject. Slavin, Lake, Hanley, and Thurton (2012, p. 3) state that the inquiry-based approach of teaching and learning science has been applied for long since it goes beyond stating the facts by allowing students to conduct practical evaluations. However, they posit the query that, “Yet beyond this agreement, what do we know about what works in elementary science?” Taylor and Bilbrey (n.d.) conducted a three-year study at an Alabama rural elementary school to investigate the effectiveness of inquiry-based instruction in improving the achievement of fifth graders in maths and science. A standardized achievement test score for 6 years prior to the integration of inquiry-based classroom instruction was used. This was the period when teacher-directed instruction was the only approach used (2). After comparing the two time contexts, Taylor and Bilbrey found out that inquiry-based instruction had a distinct impact on improving student achievement in both science and mathematics. This was indicated by the fact that the target school showed an improvement in scores in the three-year period when the teacher-directed approach of instruction was replaced with an inquiry-based approach to learning. Additionally, the approach showed not only showed positive impacts on the general institution, but also impacted greatly on special subgroups at the target school. Students living in poverty, female students, and black students also showed significant improvement in science achievement (p. 12). Conclusively, the authors stated that teacher-directed science as well as instructional periods provided an interactive and supportive learning environment which led to increased science achievement (p. 13). Elementary and middle school classrooms are better off applying more inquiry-based teaching than pure theory in cultivating engagement, interest, and motivation in learning science (Harris &Rooks 2010, p. 227). According to Harris and Rooks, the approach taken by teachers in managing their classrooms is critical in determining students’ learning. Again, they assert that one effective approach of implementing this is by teaching science using inquiry-based approaches. This approach, if applied in teaching science in 11 to 18 year olds arouses their curiosity and interest of learning in that they get to interact with science in ways that “mirror the authentic practices of scientists” (p. 228). As such, they recommend that science teachers should spend more time in actively involving activities such as carrying out investigations than they spend on seatwork and recitation. This, they add, deepens the students’ understanding of the nature of science. Harris and Rooks present findings from recent studies which show that student learning improves when instructors incorporate reforms to use approach-based teaching and learning methods. This is further supported by Williams and Linn (2002, p. 415). They state that there is an enhancement in the motivation, engagement, and interest in science by students when theory-based approaches are replaced with inquiry-based instruction methods of teaching. As such, Harry and Rooks recommend that teachers in elementary schools should reconfigure their classrooms to promote inquiry-based science learning environments. This, they state, can be achieved through; having knowledge, the use, and interpretation of scientific explanations, producing and assessing scientific proof and explanations, understanding and developing the nature of scientific knowledge, and finally participating prolifically in scientific processes and discourse (2010, p.229). Sandifier and Haines conducted a survey on forty-four teachers from an elementary school in Baltimore to determine amongst other things, the impact of large-scale science teaching reforms. These reforms include the use of science aids and kits in allowing for practical investigations and experiments by elementary school students (year, p. 1). The survey was based on the understanding that positive attitude, understanding, and skill development in science was attainable through the use of experimental procedures and scientific reasoning to investigate real-life phenomena. The majority of the teacher respondents felt that when science equipment and materials were readily available for hands-on science teaching, administrators supported science reform efforts, and professional development was provided for them, improvements in elementary science learners were recorded (p. 2). To justify that practical teaching had significant efforts in teaching science, the authors presented findings provided by teachers regarding the support and availability of materials required in science lessons. They found out that when school administrators provided the required materials, there were improvements in science scores. Again, when such efforts were begun then later abandoned, the learners would show a respective decrease in scores (p. 3-4). Collectively, the findings showed that teachers strongly agreed with the fact that science learners needed hands-on (practical0 programs. This assertion was made by 75% of the teachers targeted in the survey (p. 7). The concept of using inquiry-based approaches in teaching and learning science, which Barron and Darling-Hammond (2008, p.3) refer to as “project-based learning,” (PBL), is perceived of as necessary for survival in the twenty-first century (Ginns & Watters n.d., p.287). Barron and Darling-Hammond state that unlike in the past, that is, in the 1900s, most jobs only required employees to follow already-devised procedures. Today, however, specialized skills or knowledge in that today’s employee has to be able to collaborate, communicate, collect, research, analyse, and synthesize information. To do this, they claim, students, as early as elementary school, have to be taught to do these. Barron and Darling-Hammond present collective studies that have been conducted in the past to provide proven effectiveness of using inquiry-based learning approach to students. Of all the findings, the most important and outstanding one is that project-based learning, in places that it has been used, enhanced the learning of science. As they write, “students who may struggle in traditional instructional settings have often been found to excel when they work in a PBL context” (p. 5). In this conclusion, “traditional” settings refer to teaching approaches that applied more recitation and theory than they applied practical work. As such, Barron and Darling-Hammond imply that practical science lessons are overly significant in supplementing student progress in that students excel better in project-based learning than in traditional non-inquiry approaches. Similarly, Ergul et al. (2011) conducted an investigation to determine the effects of inquiry-based science teaching on elementary school students’ science process skills and attitudes. They used 241 elementary school students. Their study was based on the fact that science process skills are important in learning science because they increase the permanence of learning, activate thinking, actively involve students, allow the students to acquire research methods and ways, and finally see students undertake the responsibility of their learning (p. 49). The investigators were able to discover multiple reasons why teaching science using an inquiry-based approach at elementary is beneficial to their learning. First, they compare children scientists, stating that both are driven by curiosity. Therefore, by presenting them with [physical] materials guided by theory at such early stages, their curiosity is fed, thus effectiveness in teaching and learning is achieved (p. 50). Again, when children are taught science process skills, they are being taught to use the same activities (measurements, observation, proposing hypotheses, creating experiments, and drawing conclusions) in real life in the future (p. 51). In this, permanence of learning is developed. Olson and Louks-Horsley (2000, p.66) state that the stages and processes required in completing an investigation contribute to students’ learning. This is because inquiry-based science teaching methods engage children in physical exercises and encourage them to learn more. Again, science process such as comparing, contrasting, hypothesizing, and observing were directly related to students’ development in finding answers, solving problems, making decisions, thinking critically, and satisfying their concerns. These, as Ergul et al. (2011, p. 51) define them, are the processes of learning. Concisely, inquiry-based learning not only enables students to learn science, but also helps them to learn how to identify problems, analyse them, and solve them in real life. According to Carrier (2009, p. 35), hands-on approaches in teaching science are effective not only for students, but for their teachers as well. She, however insists that the practical approach should mostly target students, “science education in elementary schools should expand beyond the four walls of the classroom.” She says that this is because, “many opportunities abound in the outdoor setting for learning about science.” Clearly, this implies that outdoor settings play an integral part in enhancing the effectiveness of teaching and learning science. The problem, however, she reveals, is that most elementary school teachers are not equipped with sufficient inquiry-based teaching methods (p. 36). This has been one redundant factor to effective dissemination of scientific knowledge to elementary school learners. In a study meant to evaluate what teachers felt about outdoor settings being used to teach science, it was proven that when teachers were trained in conducting such, science learning was easier for the students. This is because, as the participants responded, outdoor settings excited children, thus provoking their curiosity and desire to learn (p. 42). As such, the training of elementary school teachers on conducting outdoor lessons has a direct correlation with the effectiveness of learning and teaching students. The correlation is that with trained teachers, the students’ desire to learn science was increased, thus, the elementary school students, developed positivity towards science and were likely to major in related subjects later in life (p. 43). Practical work also mediates between science and literacy in the classroom for young science learners. Elliot (2010) explains how. First of all, he asserts that science can be learned more effectively and naturally in social contexts that support collaboration (p. 1). This, as he explains, can be achieved by enabling students to use draw on real-world evidence in generating questions, arguments, and explanations. More importantly, it is important that students be supported so they develop positive attitudes and habits towards learning science. This is where practical work comes in. At the elementary school level, students find science as an overly new language (p. 2). This is because they are introduced to new terms which they never got exposed to before. New words such as “pistil”, “matter”, “electrostatic”, and “competition” come into play (p. 4). Additionally, some terms in science are only mentioned in scientific names and they can be hard for the young science learners to get used to. Practical work makes the memorization process much enjoyable and simpler in that students can be made to experiment or physically handle items and learn their respective [new] names. This is what Elliot (2010, p. 3) defines as “sources of inspiration” in helping children to learn science. “Ideas can be generated through practical work and the use of drawings… ask children to visualize or draw their ideas and discuss them with a partner before they start writing.” In a summary, Elliott recommends that the for the science learning demands of elementary school to be met, there should be reconstruction of the curriculum. In attaining science skills, literacy is paramount, and use of inquiry-based approaches to teaching and learning science is one of the proven means of ensuring that students’ learning experiences are enhanced (p. 4). On a wider context, and not just in the elementary range, hands-on (practical) science work is known to have significant impacts on effective learning in students. The effectiveness provided by practical work in science cannot be achieved in any other way. The key channels through which this is enabled are provided by Demkanin, Kibble, Lavonen, Mas, and Turlo (2008, p. 7-8). First, they state that inquiry-based science learning support activity and intention. This means that the learner takes responsibility for their learning. From the teacher’s instructions, students are expected to design a practical method of coming up with findings. In this way, they know their intention, thus employ activity to guide them. By doing it in groups, collaborative learning, evaluation and planning is learnt. Second, practical work supports students’ self-evaluation. This happens in that when teachers provide the materials for the learners to test their ideas, they are able to know whether their ideas are workable or not. This facilitates learning. Third, practical work in science provides reflection for the learners. This happens in that from reflecting upon their own learning, and being able to conduct investigations in their own, the learners become less dependent to their instructors. In this way, their metacognitive skills develop. Fourth, group work, which is usually applied during practical sessions, fosters interaction and collaboration of learners. In this, they share their ideas, thus share knowledge. This too, supports effective learning. Fifth, students learn the art of construction and application. Less theory means the instructor provides instructions or guidelines and the learners are expected to turn them into workable structures. For instance, the teacher may prompt the students to conduct an experiment demonstrating diffusion in liquids. The students have to come up with a workable experiment. Through their ability to construct and apply such, they learn faster and better. Finally, the most important element of practical learning is that it enables the learner to contextualize their learning. Better put; in conducting physical investigations, students are able to connect science to real life. In application, if students are taught on different types of clouds while outside their classrooms, they are likely to always identify clouds on their own from that day, onwards. This knowledge will be applied in their lives henceforth. This hands-on approach is readily workable as compared to the scenario where they are taught on types of clouds while sitting in class and seeing printed images of clouds. Unlike the above authors who felt that science taught through an inquiry-based approach was the best, Abrahams and Millar (2008, p. 1946) feel that the matter is overly controversial. They agree that science is unique from most other subjects at elementary school because it applies practical work. They further agree that use of practical work at lower levels of education create the curiosity of students to learn science past primary school level. Roberts (2002) also supports this, stating that school science laboratories are a concern to science learning in that for children to progress in science, hands-on skills and physical evidence were necessary. Again, Roberts defined practical work in science as “a vital part of students’ learning experiences because it determined their likelihood to study science at higher levels” (p.66). Abrahams and Millar (2008, p.1946) further stated that students found practical work in science being enjoyable as a learning method. This finding was drawn from an experiment conducted on 1,400 students in which 71% of the participants indicated preferring doing experiments in class as the most enjoyable way of experiencing science (p.1946). The controversy arises from the actual study conducted on students aged 11 to 16 years in 25 science lessons in England. The results indicated that practical work in science only made the children to do what was intended but did not make them use (apply) their learning to reflect upon or guide their actions with regard to learning science (p.1953). In their conclusions, Abrahams and Millar stated that while practical work was capable of positively influencing science learning, how it was disseminated determined its effectiveness; thus the controversy (p.1964). Application: Developing an Inquiry-Based Science Pedagogy The review above justified that indeed, an inquiry-based science teaching approach has multiple advantages that collectively lead to effectiveness in learning and teaching science. However, in addition to justifying this aim, another matter of concern sufficed in the review; that lack of training elementary teachers on conducting inquiry-based science lessons contributed to ineffectiveness in teaching and learning science (Levstick & Tyson 2010, p.262). Apart from lack of specific training, elementary school curriculums usually offer science lessons a very short time as compared to other subjects. This is supported by Beerer and Bodzin (2004, p.2-3) who reveal that teaching science at elementary schools is usually quite challenging. The reasons they offer for this occurrence are; one, while grade K-5 science lessons were allocated 25 minutes daily on science instruction in most American schools, languages and arts were allocated 114 minutes, and mathematics was allocated 53 minutes. Second, most elementary school science teachers do not offer the science subject the criticality it deserves (Harlen 2008, p.10). Third, most elementary teachers held limited content knowledge in science. Four, formal coursework limited their experience in presenting practical work in science. Five, and finally, most elementary school science teachers lacked administrative support which meant they lacked the materials and science kits required in the teaching of science. Following the above revelations, and in drawing guidance from the review, it is possible to develop an all-round inquiry-based science pedagogy that will incorporate student and teacher’s needs. In addressing the challenges that face dissemination of science at elementary levels then applying the highlighted methods of effective teaching and learning of science, workable science pedagogy can be developed. The first step in developing effective science pedagogy is applying professional development to ensure that elementary school science teachers have the required instructional strategies, knowledge, and appropriate skills that would help the students to achieved recommended standards in science (Loucks-Horseley et al. 2009, p.49). This is important because having teachers with the right perception and attitude of science determines the learning and/or teaching of science to students (Driel, Verloop, & Vos 1998, p.675; Alake-Tuenter et al. 2013, p.15). As such, the right teachers should exist and be ready to accept the reforms of applying inquiry-based science learning. From there, applications from the review can be applied in devising a workable pedagogy that can be applied in a science lesson as developed below; At the beginning of the lesson, the teacher should realize that science incorporates both theory and activity and should therefore allocate appropriate time for each (Alsop & Hicks 2013, p.119). Therefore, they should provide the students with the basic knowledge about the activity that is to follow later. The instructions should be designed to enable the students to conduct an investigation then make conclusions on their own. For instance, the teacher can introduce the topic about a flower having many parts. Thereafter, they may provide the students with flowers and make them open them up to reveal the parts. From here, they can explain each part as the students learn practically. Second, a science teacher should plan for the inquiry-based teaching and learning approach to support self-evaluation by students (Lakshmi 2004, p.232). Self-evaluation means that the materials or kits provided during the lesson should achieve this in every student. On the parts of a flower example, before giving out the names of the parts, the teacher can draw forms that look like these parts and ask the students to see if they can find them inside the flower. From this, the students can evaluate whether they are able to connect theory and practical work. This would not only excite them but also draw their curiosity whenever they have practical science lessons. The third element of disseminating science knowledge is by providing work that prompts reflection and application. In short, the teacher might provide a setup and ask the students to state what they think the experiment is intended to do or show (Psillos&Niedderer2006, p.147). From their answers, the teacher can learn want the students were able to learn from the instructions or theory offered prior to the experiment. In this way, the students would conduct the experiment knowing what to expect. In the parts of a flower lesson, the teacher may hold the internal parts of a flower and ask the students which part they think is female or male. In this way, reflection and learning both occur. Group work is an integral part of inquiry-based teaching. As stated earlier, it is a method through which ideas are shared, thus knowledge (Harlen & Qualter 2014, p.316). The science teacher should organize the practical lessons so that they are done in groups, and that each student has a role to play in their constituent groups. Apart from sharing ideas, the students cooperate in learning. As such, each student learns and shares something with the other. In the parts of a flower experiment, the students can be divided into two groups in which one should indicate the female parts of a flower while the other the male. In the groups, each student may be assigned a specific part of the flower in which they are to present before the others. In this way, each student will know of a specific part and demonstrate it to the rest. By the end of the lesson, all the parts will have been discussed and knowledge shared. Construction and application should be incorporated in the developing pedagogy. This means that students can set up their own experiments to demonstrate a scientific ideology. In a nutshell, the teacher only needs to highlight a scientific principle or fact, and the students are expected to turn it to a workable framework. A successful setup means that they understand how science works. Knowledge acquired through trial and error is exciting to students and is never forgotten (Hatley& Whitehead 2006, p.65). In application, the science teacher may explain to the students that female flowers are usually attractive so that bees can aid in pollination. From this, they can ask the students to find out what makes the female flowers attractive. If they provide answers such as colored petals, sweet scent, and nectar, they will have successfully decoded how science works. This knowledge of evaluating, explaining, and making conclusions is applicable even in real life. The final element applicable in developing workable science pedagogy is enabling students to contextualize their learning. This means enabling them to apply the knowledge they acquire from the lessons in real life. Contextualizing what they learn at school in real life means they learn to perceive of science as being real, interesting, and a subject that is worth observing (Flick & Lederman 2007, p.82). In short, they will always develop new perspectives of viewing things they perceived of as normal. For instance, they will know that roses (flowers) are sweet-scented and brightly colored to attract bees. Again, they will learn that the thorns on roses are meant to protect the rose from harm. Collectively, all these would point at effective learning attained through application of an inquiry-based approach of disseminating scientific knowledge. Conclusion In this study, the importance of science as part of the STEM cluster is acknowledged in that it contributes to educational and economic development. As such, this is the reason why science is a compulsory subject in most schools from elementary level up. Again, it indicates that science is taught at elementary level so that the learners acquire scientific literacy and also get exposure to science so they can learn in later in life. Science stands out from other subjects in that it applies both theory and practical work in its teaching and learning. However, the effectiveness of the practical (inquiry-based) approach has for long being questioned. This controversy formed the basis of the study. In the review of multiple literatures and studies done by previous scholars, the study justified that inquiry-based learning is significantly effective in teaching and learning science. Generally, most of the authors agreed that practical work creates curiosity to learn, helps students relate science to real life, helps students understand scientific concepts better, encourage students to further their studies in science, enables them to identify, evaluate, and solve problems in life, and more importantly increases their understanding and performance in the important subject. Following the review, an all-round science teaching pedagogy has been developed, with elaborations on what it takes for practical work to attain effectiveness in teaching and learning science. In conclusion, both the review and pedagogy indicate that upon applying guided approaches, inquiry-based approaches to teaching indeed enhance the effectiveness of supplementing student progress in science. Bibliography Abrahams, I, & Millar, R 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. Alake-Tuenter, E, Biemas, H, Tobi, H, & Mulder, M 2013, “Inquiry-based Science Teaching Competence of Primary School Teachers; A Delphi Study,” Teaching and Teacher Education 35. 1: 13-24. Alsop, S, & Hicks, K 2013, Teaching Science: A Handbook for Primary and Secondary School Teachers. New York: Routledge. Barron, B, & Darling-Hammond, L 2008 “Teaching for Meaningful Learning” in Powerful Learning: What We Know About Teaching for Understanding. John Wiley & Sons. Beerer, K, & Bodzin, A 2004, “Promoting Inquiry-based Science Instruction: The Validation of the Science Teacher Inquiry Rubric (STIR)”, Association for the Education of Teachers of Science. Nashville. Carrier, S 2009, “The Effects of Outdoor Science Lessons with elementary School Students on Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy,” Journal of Elementary Science Education 21.2: 35-48. Demkanin, P, Kibble, B, Lavonen, J, Mas, J, &Turo J 2008, Effecitve use of ICT in Science Education.Socrates/ University of Edinburg. Driel, J, Verloop, N, & Vos, W 1998, “Developing Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 35. 6: 673-695. Elliott, P 2010, “Science and Literacy in the Elementary Classroom,” Research Monograph 26.1: 1-4. Ergul, R, simsekli, S, Calis, S, &Ozdilek, Z 2011, “The Effects of Inquiry-based Science Teaching on Elementary School Students’ Science Process Skills and Science Attitudes,” Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy (BJSEP) 5.1: 48-69. Fensham, P 2012, Developments and Dilemmas in Science Education. New York: Routledge. Flick, L, & Lederman, N 2007, Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science: Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Teacher. Springer Science & Business Media. Ginns, I, & Watters, J n.d., “Beginning Elementary School Teaches and the Effective Teaching of Science,” Journal of Science Teacher Education10.4 : 287-313. Hariss, C, & Rooks, D 2010, “Managing Inquiry-based Science: The Challenges in Enacting Complex Science Instruction in Elementary and Middle School Classrooms,” Journal of Science Teachers Education 21.1: 227-240. Harlen, W 2008, “”Science as a Key Component of the Primary Curriculum: A Rationale with Policy Implications. Perspectives on Education.1-44. Harlen, W, & Qualter, A 2014, The Teaching of Science in Primary Schools. New York: Routledge. Hatley, D, & Whitehead, M 2006, Teacher Education: Curriculum and Change. Taylor & Francis. Jackson, C 2009, Effects of Teacher-directed and Student-centered Instruction on Science Comprehension of Eight Grade Students. Michigan: Northern Michigan University. Kincheloe, J 2005, Classroom Teaching: An Introduction. Peter Lang. Lakshmi, G 2004, Methods of Teaching Life Sciences.Discovery Publishing House. Levstick, L, & Tyson, C 2010, Handbook of Research in Social Studies Education. New York: Routledge. Loucks-Horseley, S, Stiles, K, MUndry, S, Love, N, &Hewson, P 2009, Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics.SAGE Publications. Macmillan Dictionary 2015, “Elementary School,” Available at http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/elementary-school [4 May, 2015]. Psillos, D, &Niedderer, H 2006, Teaching and Learning in the Science Laboratory. Springer Science & Business Media. Sandifer, C, & Haines, S n.d., “Elementary Teacher Perceptions of Hands-On Science Teaching in an Urban School System: The Greater Educational Context and Associated Outcomes,” Research in Higher Education Journal. 1-17. Slavin, R, Lake, C, Hanley, P, & Thurston, A 2012, “Effective Programs for Elementary Science: A Best-Evidence Synthesis,” Best Evidence Encyclopedia. 1-30. Taylor, J, & Bilbrey, J n.d., “Effectiveness of Inquiry based and teacher directed instruction in an Alabama elementary school,” Journal of Instructional Pedagogies.1-17. Williams, M, & Linn, M 2002, “WISE Inquiry in Fifth Grade Biology,” Research in Science Education 32.1: 415-436. Read More