Canadian Initiatives in Science Education

1
Canadian Initiatives in Science Education

• Dr. Frank Jenkins
• Centre for Mathematics Science and Technology
  Education (CMASTE)
• University of Alberta, Edmonton AB
• for The Royal Society of Canada

2
Canadian Initiative 1 (1984)

• Science Council of Canada Study
• Report 36 (from a five year study) in 1984
• Science for Every Student Educating Canadians
  for Tomorrows World
• Major Finding 1 (of 6)
• Science is rarely taught adequately (if at all)
  in elementary schools across the country.
• Recommendation 1 (of 8)
• Guaranteeing science education in every
  elementary school (I.e., 15 of time)

3
STS Science Education and Curriculum Emphases

• Science technology society (STS) science
  education drives many curricula in Canada.
  Although science content prevails in every unit
  of study, each unit may have a curriculum
  emphasis. For the IANAS project this means that
  only one unit out of three would emphasize
  science inquiry, although all involve laboratory
  work.

4
A Science Curriculum Emphasis

• The natures of scienceall kinds
• Scientific problem solvingquestions
• Scientific processesfor problem solving e.g.,
  predicting analyzing
• Scientific skillsdont get stuck here
• Scientific attitudes e.g., openmindedness,
  tolerance of uncertainty, and critical mindedness

5
Canadian Initiative 2 (1997)

• Pan-Canadian Protocol for Collaboration on School
  Curriculum--
• a common framework for science learning outcomes
  (kindergarten-Grade 12)
• Council of Ministers of Education, Canada
• Used by provincial curriculum developers
• In Canada there is provincial jurisdiction over
  education--there is no common curriculum.

6
Learning Outcomes 1 (by Grade 6)

• Demonstrate that science and technology use
  specific processes to investigate the natural and
  constructed world or to seek solutions to
  practical problems.
• demonstrate (and describe) processes for
  investigating scientific questions and solving
  technological problems
• demonstrate and explain the importance of
  selecting appropriate processes (for above)

7
Learning Outcomes 2 (by Grade 6)

• compare the results of their investigations to
  those of others and recognize (the variation)
• describe how results of similar and repeated
  investigations may vary (and explain)
• demonstrate specific terminology
• demonstrate the importance of using the languages
  of science technology
• for communicating (and to compare) ideas,
  processes results

8
CRYSTALs (2005-09)

• Centres for Research in Youth Science Teaching
  and Learning (5-6 in Canada)
• Nationally funded centres by NSERC
• Research, research translation and outreach are
  required elements. Collaboration among
  scientists, education researchers teachers is a
  required element of the program.
• U of A (our) proposal
• Create text visual resources, instructional
  strategies, assessment tools and curriculum
  outcomes for improving scientific reasoning
  (inquiry).

9
Science Inquiry Focus, Explore Investigate,
and Reflect Interpret

• Focus
• on topic familiar to students
• provide opportunities for students to express
  their ideas about this topic
• provide opportunities for students to generate
  why/what questions about the topic.
• Focus allows for
• recognition of students existing ideas
• linking with other peoples ideas
• acceptance that some things are not yet
  understood about the topic.

10
Science Inquiry Focus, Explore Investigate,
and Reflect Interpret

• Explore and investigate
• explore materials
• explore variety of learning resources
• plan investigation to gather and record evidence
• transform data into evidence supporting or
  reflecting beginning ideas
• construct a model or explanation for natural
  event.
• Explore and investigate allows for
• students to become familiar with materials
• students to plan ways of gathering evidence
• use of evidence to support or refute ideas.

11
Science Inquiry Focus, Explore Investigate,
and Reflect Interpret

• Reflect and interpret
• present/communicate findings of investigation
• critique the evidence gathering process
• how could we improve this?
• what evidence do we have to support this
  idea/explanation
• be willing to modify an explanation on the basis
  of evidence
• generate further questions to extend the inquiry.
• Reflect and interpret allows for
• recognition that beginning ideas may not be
  productive
• modification of beginning ideas in light of
  evidence
• new explanations may be needed
• students to integrate knowledge.

12
Reaching/Thinking Ahead

• Curriculum for Inquiry
• Peer review
• Refereed journal
• Abstract
• Sample size
• Random sample
• Double blind

• Replication
• Anecdotal study
• Correlational study
• Control study
• Reliable (consistent)
• Valid (accurate)
• Internal consistency
• External consistency

13
Reaching/Thinking Ahead

• The natures of scientific knowledge and the rules
  for the knowledge game e.g.,
• Describe, explain, and predict
• Empirical and theoretical
• Different processes for different kinds of
  inquiry e.g., Prediction or not.
• The language of the resources, the teachers, and
  the tests is key.

14
Reaching Ahead --Secondary Emphasis

• Create-Test-Use Work
• Inductive
• create
• Hypothetico- inductive
• test
• Hypothetico- deductive
• test
• Deductive
• use

• Evidential-Bases
• Laboratory work
• Demonstration
• Field work
• Paper pencil lab
• Thought experiment
• Animation/Simulation
• Video experiment
• Video analysis
• Probe-ware lab
• Remote access

15
Canadian Committee

• Our Canadian committee has not decided on actions
  for the inquiry-based elementary science
  education.
• Susan Barker has applied for a SSHRC grant to
  work with IANAS.
• Pat Rowell is working on IBSE projects in South
  Africa and Western China (funded by CIDA).
• Pat Rowell is working on the IAP Program
  Evaluation Committee as an IANAS representative.
• Frank Jenkins is Outreach Coordinator for CRYSTAL
  Albertagathering research and creating
  prototypes.
• Frank Jenkins continues to work on and research
  chemistry textbooks with an inquiry approach.

16
Canadian Committee

• Howard Alper, U of Ottawa ON, CA
• Co-chair of IANAS, Royal Society of Canada
• Ratna Ghosh, McGill U, Montreal QB, CA
• Barbara Vanderhyden, U of Ottawa ON, CA
• Patricia (Pat) Rowell, U of Alberta AB, CA
• Frank Jenkins, U of Alberta, Edmonton AB
• fjenkins_at_ualberta.net, www.ioncmaste.ca