Download to read offline
![such as PHEOC. This oversimplification of "method" (and the equally unfortunate stereotypes-and-
backlash it has produced) are examined to show why yes-and-yes are more important.
Later, this section (or a separate page) will include more about 5-step models for Scientific
Method. For now, just describe the historical beginnings of "5-step models" by quoting from a
paper – Epistemology for the Masses: The Origins of “The Scientific Method” in American
Schools – that was published in History of Education Quarterly (2005), was awarded the "Best
Article Prize" (for 2004 & 2005) by the History of Education Society, and was written by John
Rudolph. He explains how John Dewey — whose models initially popularized the concept of a
5-step method for scientific thinking (and Scientific Method) — rejected the concept of rigid
steps in Scientific Method. Rudolph says, about Dewey:
He, of course, never intended that the steps be followed in a lockstep fashion. To correct this
widespread misinterpretation he changed the "steps" to "phases" in the 1933 edition and added a new
section under a separate heading that clearly proclaimed "The Sequence of the Five Phases in not
Fixed." There he tried to explain that the phases "represent only in outline the indispensable traits of
reflective thinking. In practice, two of them may telescope, some of them may be passed over hurriedly,
and the burden of reaching a conclusion may fall mainly on a single phase." He insisted, quite
emphatically, that "no set rules can be laid down on such matters." But the pattern had been set. The
idea of "steps" had become ingrained in the way many thought about what scientists did. [page 375 in
journal, in paper spanning pages 341-376] ..... [Rudolph then explains that scholars] did not uniformly
embrace this multi-step characterization [by those who misinterpreted Dewey] of science. Many
philosophers, scientists, and even educators treated method in a far more nuanced way. It was,
however, invoked often enough when discussing the goals of science education to ultimately provoke a
[negative] response from those who actually engaged in scientific study.
Here are a few good papers about SAPA:
The Science Process Skills - by Michael Padilla, is quoted in my overview of SAPA.
What the Research Says About Science Process Skills - by Karen Ostlund
Students' Understanding of the Procedures of Scientific Enquiry by Robin Millar, examines
several approaches and concludes (re: SAPA) that "The process approach is not, therefore, a
sound basis for curriculum planning, nor does the analysis on which it is based provide a
productive framework for research Unfortunately, due to SAPA the term "process skill" already
has a commonly used meaning, so forced to use "whole-process skill" instead that teaching
Design Process will help students improve their "creative-and-criticalthinking skills, and
the whole-process skills that let them strategically coordinate their thinking-and-actions to form
an effective problem-solving process.”
A process skill should be skill with the process (by coordinating individual skills into an
effectively unified whole that is the process), not just any skill that happens to be used during a
process. But SAPA used the term first, they were good enough to be influential enough to
achieve a takeover of the term, and now it's gone. Sigh. The simple-and-obvious term is gone,
and possible alternatives are more descriptive but less simple. For example, process skill can be
replaced by whole-process skill, or integration-of-parts skill, or parts-combining skill, or skill
with combining parts into a process, or something else that is informative but is more complex
and less elegant.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/introduction2-140928102639-phpapp01/85/Introduction-2-6-320.jpg)
![such as PHEOC. This oversimplification of "method" (and the equally unfortunate stereotypes-and-
backlash it has produced) are examined to show why yes-and-yes are more important.
Later, this section (or a separate page) will include more about 5-step models for Scientific
Method. For now, just describe the historical beginnings of "5-step models" by quoting from a
paper – Epistemology for the Masses: The Origins of “The Scientific Method” in American
Schools – that was published in History of Education Quarterly (2005), was awarded the "Best
Article Prize" (for 2004 & 2005) by the History of Education Society, and was written by John
Rudolph. He explains how John Dewey — whose models initially popularized the concept of a
5-step method for scientific thinking (and Scientific Method) — rejected the concept of rigid
steps in Scientific Method. Rudolph says, about Dewey:
He, of course, never intended that the steps be followed in a lockstep fashion. To correct this
widespread misinterpretation he changed the "steps" to "phases" in the 1933 edition and added a new
section under a separate heading that clearly proclaimed "The Sequence of the Five Phases in not
Fixed." There he tried to explain that the phases "represent only in outline the indispensable traits of
reflective thinking. In practice, two of them may telescope, some of them may be passed over hurriedly,
and the burden of reaching a conclusion may fall mainly on a single phase." He insisted, quite
emphatically, that "no set rules can be laid down on such matters." But the pattern had been set. The
idea of "steps" had become ingrained in the way many thought about what scientists did. [page 375 in
journal, in paper spanning pages 341-376] ..... [Rudolph then explains that scholars] did not uniformly
embrace this multi-step characterization [by those who misinterpreted Dewey] of science. Many
philosophers, scientists, and even educators treated method in a far more nuanced way. It was,
however, invoked often enough when discussing the goals of science education to ultimately provoke a
[negative] response from those who actually engaged in scientific study.
Here are a few good papers about SAPA:
The Science Process Skills - by Michael Padilla, is quoted in my overview of SAPA.
What the Research Says About Science Process Skills - by Karen Ostlund
Students' Understanding of the Procedures of Scientific Enquiry by Robin Millar, examines
several approaches and concludes (re: SAPA) that "The process approach is not, therefore, a
sound basis for curriculum planning, nor does the analysis on which it is based provide a
productive framework for research Unfortunately, due to SAPA the term "process skill" already
has a commonly used meaning, so forced to use "whole-process skill" instead that teaching
Design Process will help students improve their "creative-and-criticalthinking skills, and
the whole-process skills that let them strategically coordinate their thinking-and-actions to form
an effective problem-solving process.”
A process skill should be skill with the process (by coordinating individual skills into an
effectively unified whole that is the process), not just any skill that happens to be used during a
process. But SAPA used the term first, they were good enough to be influential enough to
achieve a takeover of the term, and now it's gone. Sigh. The simple-and-obvious term is gone,
and possible alternatives are more descriptive but less simple. For example, process skill can be
replaced by whole-process skill, or integration-of-parts skill, or parts-combining skill, or skill
with combining parts into a process, or something else that is informative but is more complex
and less elegant.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/introduction2-140928102639-phpapp01/75/Introduction-2-6-2048.jpg)
More Related Content
Introduction (2)
- 1. B.M.M. TRAINING COLLEGE KOTTARAKKARA ONLINE ASSIGNMENT Name :JIJIN.J Candidate Code :13350017 Optional Subject :Physical Science
- 2. TOPIC: NUFFIELD SCIENCETEACHING PROJECT & SCIENCE AS A PROCESS APPROACH
- 3. INTRODUCTION United Stateseducational curriculum has faced many ups and downs since time immemorial The pioneers of reforms in the system had positive aspects that they thought education would boost . In particular , Thomas Jefferson had strong beliefs that democracy and independence would impact on or rather act as the youth 's main road towards survival . As a minister in Europe , the experiences he had encountered influenced his thinking in trying to compare systems abroad and United States . In deed the unique political atmosphere and social setting revealed the importance of creating a public education program . The icon understood the importance of knowledge although in his time , there was no public education system . Learning would instill power , safety , happiness innovation and development . He campaigned for a public university /college that would recruit every other student for the purposes of learning Due to economical imbalance , there were limited academic opportunities for the poor only wealthy families ' children accessed the level required to join universities . As a result , only the rich would qualify for leadership position . In turn , this threatens America 's democratic rights and freedom . Competence , skills , talents and knowledge would all then go to waste as imperialism took over power . In his view , a mix of rich and poor persons with competence would present good leadership . The idea was not readily accepted though , others believed that the educated and hence the wealthy had the mandate to rule on common 's people behalf Even after clear explanation of advantages that would result in institutionalizing a public education , like replacement wealth based leadership to a merit reflective one . Alexander Hamilton opposed the public system arrangement . Setting up public universities would facilitate democracy and equality , key for development . Although the bills for the latter were not voted in , further efforts at least achieved the establishment of elementary schools and later on , a university in Virgin other strategies laid in the establishment of public educational system that wanted religion and education separated A Yale report (2008 ) also showed undying need to create a more diverse curriculum in higher education , although it had earlier gone in defense for conservation of traditional learning and teaching methods , where a set of identified s in classical language , scientific nature and literature were offered to every student . The system had been followed for a long time and the male students were the main beneficiaries while the female students had gone unconsidered . Every institution seemed to follow Harvard or Michigan who were embarking on an elective approach constituent of diversified curriculum with modern and social science and humanistic courses . The urge to initiate new changes into the curriculum was facilitated by activism for intellectual culture while basing success and excellence on merit , competence , skills and knowledge . All major players after protesting at the end agreed that United States education needed improvement almost admitting that the system was imperfect (Assessment , 2008 . Determination and hope that the defects spotted in the system would be eradicated remained high . Changes...
- 4. NUFFIELD SCIENCE TEACHINGPROJECT The Science Teaching Project began in 1962 under the leadership of the Foundation's Director Leslie Farrer-Brown. It sought to modernise science education for all 5- to 18-year-olds. It began with O level courses in biology, chemistry and physics, followed by mathematics and junior science courses for 5- to 13-year-olds, a science course for teaching in secondary modern and comprehensive schools, and a suite of advanced level science courses. It was the first large-scale attempt to reform both teaching approaches and content in school mathematics and science.There was no one Nuffield style: the teams of biologists, chemists and physicists worked largely independently and approached the challenge rather differently. Nuffield approach to finding the best person for the job and then giving them resources to build a team to develop materials and try them out in schools. They also shared a commitment to teaching for understanding through hands -on practical work in the context of modern science. High level consultative committees added authority to the projects and made strong links with the professional wor ld of science. Nuffield Chemistry in the 1970s The O-level courses were characterised by their reliance on practical work carried out by students and the spirit of inquiry that infused the teaching.One consequence was that a great deal of effort was invested in developing new practical activities and the associated apparatus. Much of the equipment developed for the courses is still in use in schools today.The guidance about practical work in the guides for teachers was exceptionally detailed and unusually well illustrated. Much of this work still has value today as shown by the Practical Physics, Practical Chemistry, and Practical Biology websites. The Nuffield Foundation took the decision to manage the projects in-house and set up the Nuffield Science Teaching Project. Nuffield had a publications unit which was responsible for the design and editorial aspects of publications, and set high standards. The publishing partner at this stage marketed and distributed the books which were edited, illustrated and designed by Nuffield. The long-term consequence for Nuffield of this method of working was an increasing focus on publications. The publications unit also developed the use of short 8-mm film clips played through clunky loop projectors in an attempt to realise on screen the kinds of animation, visualisation and contexualisation of science that can be achieved successfully today with the help of new multimedia technologies.New approaches to assessment were an essential feature of the new projects. They were developed in partnership with three of the leading examining boards. At that time the examining teams took up the challenge of finding ways to examine in the spirit of the new courses. The London Board (as it then was) set up an R & D unit to develop new approaches to examining for the new chemistry course many of which are still in use today.The O-level projects established such a strong brand that even today many people associate ‘Nuffield Science’ with their
- 5. approach. About 20%of schools took up the courses. This was encouraged by LEAs that offered new laboratories and grants for equipment to those that did so. The Biology, Chemistry and Physics courses were revised in the 1970s, and this time there were textbooks for Physics and Chemistry as well as Biology. This was a major change in Nuffield thinking in response to research which revealed widespread demand for pupils’ books. As before, the courses covered the age range 11 to 16, split into two-year introductory courses followed by three years of preparation for O-level examinations.The Nuffield O-level science courses were developed in academic grammar and independent schools and were intended for the top 25% of the student ability range. The developers introduced concepts at O-level which are now seen as being much more appropriate for post-16 courses. The courses were adapted in many areas of Britain to create CSE courses which gave access to the Nuffield approach to a wider range of students.The books were widely translated including editions in Spanish, Italian, Dutch, German, Turkish and Japanese. Nuffield project team members and teachers were involved in introducing the teaching approaches in countries including Malaysia.The O-level courses ran for over 20 years until the coming of the National Curriculum, GCSEs, and Nuffield Co-ordinated Sciences. CURRICULUM PROJET Since 1962, the Foundation has supported some 60 major curriculum projects and countless smaller ones. The largest and best known projects have been in science and mathematics, but the story goes much wider, covering languages (ancient and modern), design and technology, economics and business, English, history and more besides.Information about all our major curriculum projects is available on this website. Projects are categorised first by subject and then chronologically by age group. If you have any feedback or any additions to suggest. SAPA (Science: A Process Approach) and Scientific Method A Process Approach and A Framework for Scientific Method "SAPA did not try to describe how these these ‘integrated skills’ are combined into a framework for an overall process of problem solving." In a whole-parts-whole perspective on instruction, they focused on the parts, not the whole. Or, viewed from a perspective of analysis-and- synthesis, they analyzed the whole process into process-parts, but didn't synthesize these parts back into a coherently unified whole process.* SAPA developed a very thorough system for curriculum & instruction; I haven't studied this, but I'm sure it contains a lot of implicit organization. But I don't think they ever explicitly proposed an organized framework for a deeper integration of their integrated skills. SAPA's reluctance to propose a framework was motivated by their backlash against oversimplistic step-by-step models of The Scientific Method,
- 6. such as PHEOC.This oversimplification of "method" (and the equally unfortunate stereotypes-and- backlash it has produced) are examined to show why yes-and-yes are more important. Later, this section (or a separate page) will include more about 5-step models for Scientific Method. For now, just describe the historical beginnings of "5-step models" by quoting from a paper – Epistemology for the Masses: The Origins of “The Scientific Method” in American Schools – that was published in History of Education Quarterly (2005), was awarded the "Best Article Prize" (for 2004 & 2005) by the History of Education Society, and was written by John Rudolph. He explains how John Dewey — whose models initially popularized the concept of a 5-step method for scientific thinking (and Scientific Method) — rejected the concept of rigid steps in Scientific Method. Rudolph says, about Dewey: He, of course, never intended that the steps be followed in a lockstep fashion. To correct this widespread misinterpretation he changed the "steps" to "phases" in the 1933 edition and added a new section under a separate heading that clearly proclaimed "The Sequence of the Five Phases in not Fixed." There he tried to explain that the phases "represent only in outline the indispensable traits of reflective thinking. In practice, two of them may telescope, some of them may be passed over hurriedly, and the burden of reaching a conclusion may fall mainly on a single phase." He insisted, quite emphatically, that "no set rules can be laid down on such matters." But the pattern had been set. The idea of "steps" had become ingrained in the way many thought about what scientists did. [page 375 in journal, in paper spanning pages 341-376] ..... [Rudolph then explains that scholars] did not uniformly embrace this multi-step characterization [by those who misinterpreted Dewey] of science. Many philosophers, scientists, and even educators treated method in a far more nuanced way. It was, however, invoked often enough when discussing the goals of science education to ultimately provoke a [negative] response from those who actually engaged in scientific study. Here are a few good papers about SAPA: The Science Process Skills - by Michael Padilla, is quoted in my overview of SAPA. What the Research Says About Science Process Skills - by Karen Ostlund Students' Understanding of the Procedures of Scientific Enquiry by Robin Millar, examines several approaches and concludes (re: SAPA) that "The process approach is not, therefore, a sound basis for curriculum planning, nor does the analysis on which it is based provide a productive framework for research Unfortunately, due to SAPA the term "process skill" already has a commonly used meaning, so forced to use "whole-process skill" instead that teaching Design Process will help students improve their "creative-and-criticalthinking skills, and the whole-process skills that let them strategically coordinate their thinking-and-actions to form an effective problem-solving process.” A process skill should be skill with the process (by coordinating individual skills into an effectively unified whole that is the process), not just any skill that happens to be used during a process. But SAPA used the term first, they were good enough to be influential enough to achieve a takeover of the term, and now it's gone. Sigh. The simple-and-obvious term is gone, and possible alternatives are more descriptive but less simple. For example, process skill can be replaced by whole-process skill, or integration-of-parts skill, or parts-combining skill, or skill with combining parts into a process, or something else that is informative but is more complex and less elegant.
- 7. A Product Evaluationof Science - A Process Approach. Wideen, Marvin Frank Besides evaluating the Science-A Process Approach (SAPA) program, this study was undertaken to permit some assessment of generally accepted notions of curriculum change. It was proposed that students pursuing the SAPA program, when compared with those in a traditional program, would show a better understanding of science processes, have an improved attitude toward science, prefer science related activities to those in other subjects and have a more positive attitude in general. It was also hypothesized that no differences would exist in terms of science knowledge. Four measures were used to test the hypothesis that teachers in the treatment groups would show better attitude toward science, more abstract belief systems and a better understanding of science processes. Twenty-six teachers and 555 students were the subjects in the study. Measures were administered as pre- and posttests. Treatment involved use of the science program and the accompanying inservice education provided for the teachers. Analysis of variance and covariance were used in factorial designs employing appropriate main effects to test the various hypotheses. Results supported the statement that SAPA had a consistent effect on student process skills related to the cognitive domain. The treatment improved teacher understanding of science processes. (Author/EB) Descriptors: Curriculum, Doctoral Dissertations, Educational Research, Elementary School Science, Evaluation CONCLUSION Nuffield science teaching project sought to modernise science education for all 5- to 18-year-olds. It began with O level courses in biology, chemistry and physics, followed by mathematics and junior science courses for 5- to 13-year-olds, a science course for teaching in secondary modern and comprehensive schools, and a suite of advanced level science courses. It was the first large-scale attempt to reform both teaching approaches and content in school mathematics and science.There was no one Nuffield style: Science-A Process Approach (SAPA) program, was undertaken to permit some assessment of generally accepted notions of curriculum change. It was proposed that students pursuing the SAPA program, when compared with those in a traditional program, would show a better understanding of science processes, have an improved attitude toward science, prefer science related activities to those in other subjects and have a more positive attitude in general. It was also hypothesized that no differences would exist in terms of science knowledge. Four measures were used to test the hypothesis that teachers in the treatment groups would show better attitude toward science, more abstract belief systems and a better understanding of science processes.
- 8. REFERENCE www.nuffieldfoundation.org/curriculum-projects www.nationalstemcentre.org.uk/elibrary/collection/nuffield-chemistry www.dawnpub.com/why-the-process-approach www.islephysics.net