Conclusions of IAP Workshop on Evaluation of Inquiry-Based Science Education Programme Organized by the Inter Academy Panel and hosted by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Stockholm, Sept. 21-23, 2005
1) Background
A large number of countries have ongoing Inquiry Based Science Education (IBSE) Projects in primary schools. Many other countries have groups of scientists and educators that are seriously considering to initiate similar projects. The Academies of Sciences of the World, represented by the Inter Academy Panel on International Issues (IAP) have selected the problem of the improvement of the quality and pertinence of Science Education as one of the priority issues in which they can work in close collaboration with each other. This decision has resulted in the establishment of an IAP Program on Science Education. This program is undertaking the generation of regional efforts in the Americas, Africa and Asia to stimulate collaboration among the Academies of each region. The European Region has also been very active and has succeeded in launching a science education programme with the initial participation of 12 countries. This programme is in direct contact with the IAP efforts. These regional efforts are concentrating on the application of the IBSE methodology as a way of raising the quality and the meaning of science education. At the global level, the IAP Program of Science Education has decided to address the problem of evaluation of IBSE projects and to explore the possibility of the establishment of an international instrument that would provide assistance to those projects that would like to undergo evaluation and that fulfil the minimum requirements to implement such an evaluation exercise. As an activity to discuss this topic the IAP Science Education Program, with the most valuable help of the Swedish Royal Academy of Science and an International Organizing Committee, convened a Workshop on Evaluation of Inquiry-Based Science Education Programmes. This workshop which included 60 participants from 26 different countries met in Stockholm, September 21-23, 2005. Many of the presentations and the main conclusions of this workshop will appear in the IAP Web page (www.interacademies.net/iap) and a joint ICSU/IAP Web on teaching science (www.icsu.org/1_icsuinscience/CAPA_TeachSci_1.html).
Some of the main conclusions of the workshop are:
• IBSE projects in pre-school and primary education pursue goals that go beyond the acquisitions of facts and the understanding of scientific principles by the students. These goals include the understanding of the scientific process and through this understanding, the practice of critical thinking in solving problems in every day life situations, the stimulation of behaviour modes (collaboration with others, appreciation of science, etc) and the capacity to evaluate evidence. Important results that derive from this methodology are also the appreciation and enjoyment of science, the infusion of its values such as search for truth and rigor, the practice of working in groups, tolerance for different ideas, capacity to communicate results. • The evaluation of the attainment of all the different goals of IBSE is a complex matter. Much of the progress that can be achieved by the IBSE methodology can only be appreciated if it is measured in the socio-cultural context in which the IBSE project is being implemented. This means that the evaluation exercise has to include “in situ” observation and information gathering that cannot be accomplished merely through an internationally administered written test. However, there can be guidelines and protocols prepared internationally that can be useful to local teams in order to evaluate these aspects and that would facilitate comparison of actions undertaken in different countries. • In the evaluation of IBSE projects is necessary to accomplish two main objectives: 1) to improve the effectiveness of the science education that projects are providing by identifying the aspects that must be corrected or that must be strengthened; 2) to answer the “accountability” question as to justify the resources spent by society in the implementation of this methodology. The second objective has implicit the requirement to demonstrate that the IBSE methodology is better than the traditional methodologies of teaching in the attainment of science learning by the children in primary school. • Some existing large international tests have flexibility and could be adapted to include special groups of schools (those specifically implementing IBSE methodologies) as well as sets of new questions designed to test aspects such as the application of scientific principles in new situations, interpretation of evidence data, and critical thinking which are important outcomes of IBSE. The feasibility of this adaptation seems worthwhile to explore. • In addressing the accountability objective of evaluation, the comparison between IBSE and other traditional teaching methods requires carefully controlled methods. Due to the difficulty in the use of randomized group assays in these comparisons, the most promising approach is the set up of quasi experiments that would test the hypothesis that the IBSE methodology is better than the other traditional methods. • An international platform should describe a core set of components that can be flexibly used by evaluation exercises in different countries. This international core can be equated to the crown of a flower, which can be adapted to the different needs of countries which would add the pertinent additional components, as petals to that flower. • The IAP should set up a multinational Working Group of experts on science education that would build on the discussions of the Stockholm Workshop to produce a Report containing a Proposal of an International Platform that could assist the IBSE projects of different countries in implementing evaluation exercises or preparing for carrying those exercises in the future. These Experts should come from the following 9 countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, India, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States. The participants from Australia, India and Sweden will act as Co-Chairs of the Working Group. The Coordinator of IAP Science Education Program should consults with the Academies of those countries as to the names of the persons that should be invited to be part of this Working Group. Once the Working Group is convened, the Working Group itself can recruit some more members that can significantly contribute to its mission. However, the number of participants should be kept under 15 and should maintain its multinational character. • The Working Group should conduct much of its work through electronic means, however, two meetings of the Group are planned during the first half of 2006. These meetings will be hosted by the U.S. and the French Academies and the W.G. should have a draft report ready by July 2006 and should present this report for discussion in a Workshop in which many of the countries potentially implementing evaluation exercises would be invited to attend.
Terms of Reference for the IAP Working Group on Evaluation of IBSE Projects
The task of the Working Group The Working Group has the task of producing a Report that will contain a proposal to create an International Platform that could provide assistance in the evaluation of IBSE projects and programmes carried out in different countries of the world. • This proposal should include an analysis of the existing research evidence that is relevant to the components that should be part of a flexible scheme which can be adapted to evaluate different aspects of an inquiry-based science education project. • The proposal should consider the possibility that one of the existing international tests (PISA, TIMSS) could be adapted to test the comprehension of scientific principles, the capacity to apply the scientific process, and the exercise of critical thinking which the IBSE methodology tries to develop in students. • The proposal should also include clear recommendations as to the procedures that would enable an evaluation to carry out carefully controlled “quasi experiments” which can allow the comparison of the success of the IBSE method versus the more traditional expository teaching methods used in different countries. • The proposal should provide details of the methods and procedures that could be used to evaluate the performance of IBSE projects in their contextual surroundings and that include: classroom observation; survey and interview of teachers, students and parents; student notebook analysis; class attendance statistics; effects of the science projects on the performance of the students in language and mathematics; school community involvement; etc. It should, however, allow for supplementation of these components with Ad Hoc elements that the different countries would like to add. • The report should address operational issues that describe the conditions, the timing and the international participation in experimental evaluation procedures that could be executed in projects with different times of implementation of IBSE methodology. In this section, recommendations should also be addressed to projects that are just starting and, in which provisions should be made to facilitate their eventual evaluation. • Members of the Working Group are encouraged to consult with national or regional experts on science education in order to introduce in the report a diversity of opinions form which a working consensus can be built. VOLTAR
|
