27. Didactics - Learning and Teaching
Paper
Content Analysis of Inquiry-Based Activities in High School Physics Textbooks in Mainland China
Hongyu Peng
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China, People's Republic of
Presenting Author: Peng, Hongyu
The rapid development of technology and the economy underpin the crucial role of science education. Many countries around the globe have made efforts to improve science learning and teaching. Science education has focused on promoting scientific literacy among all students by emphasizing inquiry-based practices. Scientific inquiry has become a significant educational objective of curriculum reforms in numerous countries. Inquiry-based learning, as an instructional pedagogy, includes the process of discovering new causal relations, formulating hypotheses, and testing them by conducting experiments and/or making observations (Pedaste et al., 2015). A great number of research has shown that inquiry-based learning plays a key role in fostering critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and a deeper understanding of scientific concepts (Martina S. J. van Uum et al., 2016; Rönnebeck et al., 2016). In order to promote inquiry-based learning and teaching in classroom, a variety of activities labeled as inquiry, investigation, or research has appeared in science textbooks over the past few decades.
Textbooks play a significant role in shaping what and how science is taught in K-12 classrooms as the primary tool for teaching and learning (Aldahmash et al., 2016; Chakraborty & Kidman, 2022). Therefore, it is essential to evaluate the design quality of inquiry-based activities in science textbooks. Abundant studies have measured the design quality of textbooks using a quantitative method of content analysis. These studies can be categorized into three types based on their focus: instructional design of the inquiry process, openness level of inquiry, and educational goals of inquiry (Ma et al., 2021; Halawa et al., 2023; Yang et al., 2019). However, few studies have analyzed physics textbooks (Vojíř & Rusek, 2019) by specifically exploring inquiry activities focused on learning goals of inquiry (Halawa et al., 2023). To address this research gap, this paper aims to conduct a content analysis of inquiry-based activities in high school physics textbooks used in mainland China. The research questions are as follows:
1. What is the design quality of inquiry-based activities in current high school physics textbooks?
2. In which respects do the current inquiry-based activities need to be improved?
The analysis framework of inquiry-based activities in textbooks should be designed with the educational goals of inquiry-based approach. Existing research of inquiry suggests that an inquiry-based approach should accomplish but is not limited to, the following three educational goals: 1) help students develop an understanding of scientific concepts by doing science; 2) teach students inquiry process skills necessary to conduct a scientific inquiry; and 3) guide students in establishing an understanding about scientific inquiry (Yang & Liu, 2016). Firstly, an inquiry-based approach in K-12 science learning cannot be achieved without scientific knowledge. In science textbooks, the topics of inquiry-based activities should align with the corresponding curricular knowledge objectives. Previous research on evaluating inquiry-based activities has focused on ensuring this alignment (Halawa et al., 2023; Yang et al., 2019). Secondly, inquiry is both the instructional approach and outcomes in science education. As the approach, researchers have identified a set of fundamental inquiry skills that are appropriate for K-12 students and essential for conducting scientific investigations, such as observing, inferring, measuring, and so on (Chakraborty & Kidman, 2022). Inquiry-based activities in textbooks should offer students the chance to apply these skills in a real-life context (Halawa et al., 2022; Yang et al., 2019). As the outcomes, developing a comprehensive grasp of inquiry is one of the educational objectives, as it enhances the ability to conduct effective inquiries. Inquiry-based activities in the textbooks should be provided explicitly with a proper understanding of inquiry (Halawa et al., 2023; Yang et al., 2019).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedContent analysis is an impactful and efficient method for evaluating the quality of textbook design. The ITAI content analysis tool (Yang & Liu, 2016) was used in this paper to assess whether the presentation of textual content in high school physics textbooks supports the educational goals of an inquiry-based approach. The ITAI scales have three dimensions (eg. understanding of scientific concepts, using of inquiry skills, understanding of scientific inquiry), each corresponding to an educational goal of inquiry-based learning. To ensure objectivity, all items were designed with "Yes" or "No" responses, and scoring rubrics were developed to justify different responses. Rubrics have been slightly adjusted based on the content characteristics of physics textbooks. The reliability and validity of the ITAI have been demonstrated, indicating its trustworthiness (Yang & Liu, 2016).
Currently, there are four newly approved high school physics textbooks in Mainland China in total. Two out of the four are widely used in high school and are chosen to be analyzed in this study. The two textbooks were labelled Textbook 1 and Textbook 2. This research adopts the latest versions, the 2020 edition of Textbook 1 and the 2019 edition of Textbook 2. Activities entitled inquiry, research or investigation were identified as inquiry-based activities and selected as samples. Therefore, a total of 38 inquiry-based activities were analyzed in this study. Every inquiry-based activity was labelled by a code, of which the first number referred to the textbook, the second number designated the module, and the last number reflected the order in the module.
Two members with a strong understanding of scientific inquiry took part in the scoring process. Initially, they came together in an online meeting to familiarize themselves with the ITAI tool and its rationale. Subsequently, they individually tried to use the ITAI to assess partially the inquiry-based activities mentioned above, then they had a discussion about the questions in scoring. After ensuring that the evaluation rubrics were understood consistently, they further rated all inquiry activities. A comparison of their assessments revealed a 76.6% agreement. They then also met online to review and discuss some activities on which they had differing assessments, explaining their respective considerations for scoring. Following this, the two scoring members reached 100% agreement and assigned final scores to all the inquiry-based activities. A score of ‘1’ was given for a response of ‘Yes’, and a score of ‘0’ for a response of ‘No’.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsBased on data analysis by dimensions, three core findings were identified in this study. First, the inquiry-based activities are highly related to certain lesson content and physics concepts, which are consistent with curriculum standards. The evaluation results show that the scoring probabilities for all inquiry-based activities in the adopted two textbooks on dimension 1 were relatively high, and all scored 100% on this count. This finding indicated that all inquiry-based activities in textbooks conduced to enhancing the delivering of scientific concepts and knowledge. Second, the current textbooks place an unbalanced emphasis on inquiry process skills. The scoring probabilities for both textbooks on dimension 2 were spotty. Inferring, measuring, and controlling variables are three inquiry skills that are commonly used in both textbooks. Inquiry skills including asking questions, interpreting data, and communicating are more frequently used in Textbook 2 than in Textbook 1. There were several skills rarely involved in current inquiry-based activities, such as classifying, predicting, defining operationally, asking questions, formulating hypotheses, and formulating models. The uneven and inadequate use of these inquiry skills does not contribute to the development of higher-order thinking. Third, current textbooks do not effectively help students develop a thorough understanding of scientific inquiry. The low-scoring probabilities for both textbooks on item 16 (no single set of methods), 18 (scientists influence results), and 19 (procedure influence results) suggest that there is a lack of diversity in the methods used for inquiry-based activities. This indicates that students are often expected to follow a single set of steps to draw the same conclusion, which further means students’ self-directed inquiries are limited. Overall, it is important to carefully consider a well-rounded approach to incorporating process skills, and a suitable number of open-ended questions for students to engage with when creating and revising inquiry-based activities in science textbooks.
ReferencesAldahmash, A. H., Mansour, N. S., Alshamrani, S. M., & Almohi, S. (2016). An Analysis of Activities in Saudi Arabian Middle School Science Textbooks and Workbooks for the Inclusion of Essential Features of Inquiry. Research in Science Education, 46(6), 879–900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9485-7
Chakraborty, D., & Kidman, G. (2022). Inquiry Process Skills in Primary Science Textbooks: Authors and Publishers’ Intentions. Research in Science Education, 52(5), 1419–1433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-09996-4
Halawa, S., Hsu, Y.-S., & Zhang, W.-X. (2022). Inquiry Activity Design from Singaporean and Indonesian Physics Textbooks. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00396-2
Halawa, S., Hsu, Y.-S., & Zhang, W.-X. (2023). Analysis of Physics Textbooks Through the Lens of Inquiry Practices. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 32(4), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00671-4
Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21125
Ma, Y., Wang, T., Wang, J., Chen, A. L. R., & Yan, X. (2021). A comparative study on scientific inquiry activities of Chinese science textbooks in high schools. Research in Science Education, 51(1), 407–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09902-z
Martina S. J. van Uum, Roald P. Verhoeff, & Marieke Peeters. (2016). Inquiry-based science education: Towards a pedagogical framework for primary school teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 450–469.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (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
Rönnebeck, S., Bernholt, S., & Ropohl, M. (2016). Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities. Studies in Science Education, 52(2), 161–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351
Vojíř, K., & Rusek, M. (2019). Science education textbook research trends: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Science Education, 41(11), 1496–1516. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1613584
Yang, W., Liu, C., & Liu, E. (2019). Content analysis of inquiry-based tasks in high school biology textbooks in Mainland China. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6), 827–845. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1584418
Yang, W., & Liu, E. (2016). Development and validation of an instrument for evaluating inquiry-based tasks in science textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 38(18), 2688–2711. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1258499
27. Didactics - Learning and Teaching
Paper
A Comparison of the Structures of Learning Situations in Two Contrasting Disciplines - Physical Education & Science
Yoann Buyck, Florence Ligozat
Université de Genève, Switzerland
Presenting Author: Buyck, Yoann
This paper addresses methodological and epistemological issues raised in using a generic model of didactic analysis of teaching quality (JAD-MTQ) in school subjects taught at lower secondary school.
Since the 2000’s, the Joint Action framework in Didactics (JAD) has been developed in the context of the French-speaking research in Comparative didactics (Mercier et al, 2002; Sensevy and Mercier, 2007; also see Ligozat, 2023). Studies carried out with this framework typically investigate how knowledge contents develop in the teacher and students’ classroom interactions. Over the years, JAD has proved its capacity to analyze classroom practices in various subjects (mathematics, sciences, physical education, French language, etc.; e.g., Amade-Escot & Venturini, 2015; Ligozat et al., 2018; Sensevy, 2011; 2014). To address the feasibility of examining teaching quality from a didactic standpoint, Ligozat and Buyck (in press) suggests a Model for analyzing Teaching Quality grounded in the JAD framework. This model considers three dimensions of teaching: selection of knowledge contents and tasks, structuration of learning situations and organisation of teacher and students’ interactions. This paper will focus on outcomes and issues raised in characterizing the structure of learning situations in the case of a contemporary dance teaching unit, in physical education (PE), in contrast with a physical science unit about the states of the matter, in science.
In JAD-MTQ, learning situations are co-determined by a milieu and a didactic contract (Brousseau, 1997; also see Sensevy, 2014) generated by instructional tasks offered to the students, and from which we can identify some knowledge content development. More specifically, JAD-MTQ considers four criteria for examining learning situations : 1) Continuities in components of the milieu, i.e. how means available for students’ action evolve and support the achievement of successive tasks; 2) Continuities in purposes of the didactic contract, i.e. how purposes pursued by the teacher in assigning a task to the students are connected to each other through the successive tasks; 3) Structure of the overall knowledge content development (KCD), i.e., the logical patterns in the KCD through the successive tasks featuring learning situations for the students; and 4) Partition of responsibilities between the teacher and the students, i.e. the balance between tasks assigned to the students and tasks managed collectively and/or by the teacher herself.
These categories, drawn from the more general JAD framework, have a high potential of genericity to be used about the teaching of different school subjects. However, we also acknowledge that school subjects relying upon different teaching traditions (e.g. Forest, et al, 2018) and undergo various constraints (didactic transposition; Chevallard, 1985/1991; also see Schneuwly, 2021). For instance, a science teaching unit often includes lab work sessions that are run by groups of students, and the results needs to be represented (graphs, diagrams, measurement tables, etc.) and discussed collectively later on to drawn some results; In contrast, a physical education teaching unit requires alternating between technical tasks (focus on teaching sport technical skills) and complex authentic tasks (focus on teaching tactics and strategies through playing a scholar form of the game).
This leads us to the following research questions:
- Is it possible to use the JAD-MTQ criteria for characterizing the structure of learning situations (and hence a dimension of teaching quality) in such different school subjects, as contemporary dance in PE and states of the matter in Science?
- In using these criteria, what do we learn about the specific patterns of knowledge content development in each subject?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe science teaching sequence was recorded as part of a research project comparing science teaching traditions in different countries (see Almqvist et al, 2023). The main objective of the science unit selected is to teach the notions of states of matter and changes of states in physics. The teacher, Beatrice, is a specialist teacher in Science. The unit encompasses 7 lessons of 90 minutes to 12-13 years old students (grade 7). The contemporary dance teaching sequence was recorded as part of a doctoral research aiming at understanding how knowledge contents develop when students assess their peers (Buyck, 2023). The teacher, Patrick, is a specialist teacher in physical PE. The unit encompasses 6 lessons of 90 minutes to 11-12 years old students (grade 6).
In JAD-MTQ, each dimension is explored at a specific level of analysis, featured by a grain-size and a timescale of teaching unit (Tiberghien & Sensevy, 2012) and decomposed into a set of criteria, allowing to reduce the level of inference to be made from classroom video and transcripts. The structure of learning situation is analysed at the meso-level. This level is dependent on the nature of teaching-learning activities and social organizations in subjects privileged by teachers than the macro and micro levels. In considering both the science and the dance teaching sequences, we split this level in two sub-levels: (1) the upper-meso level accounts for the succession of teaching phases of 10-40 min, in which an instructional task is given to the students (within a thematic unit); (2) the lower-meso level accounts for interactive episodes of 2-10 min, in which a topic is discussed (withing a task).
In this contribution, we focus on upper-meso level analysis of the learning situations organized by the teacher for the students. To carry out this analysis, we decompose lessons into teaching phases. In line with the JAD-MTQ criteria, this analysis considers continuities found the milieu (what is accessible in the material and symbolic world, through gestures and discourses) and the purposes of the didactic contract (what must be achieved and understood from the components of the milieu), through the teaching phases (or tasks).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsBeyond statements on the quality of teaching in these two sequences using the JAD-MTQ model (see Ligozat and Buyck, accepted), this paper highlights certain patterns that characterize the ways in which learning situations are structured in each of the subjects concerned, in the context of French-speaking Switzerland.
This PE unit shows a very stable structure from one session to the next in terms of the time allocated to each type of task (introduction, warm-up, technical task, autonomous work, presentation of choreographies) whatever the progress in the sequence. The strong structure of PE seems to lead the teacher to string together tasks that have no direct link together, thus to juxtapose content. In contrast, the Science sequence shows that some tasks are spread over several lessons, indicating the prevalence of the task and its challenges over the structuring of the session in terms of time.
In PE, the rigidity of a predetermined sequence of task types (warm-up, technical task, complex authentic task) seems to govern the choice of tasks, and the content that can be brought out in these tasks, i.e., 1) predetermined structure of task types; 2) choice of tasks; 3) related task content. In Science, it is the content that seems to govern the choice of tasks, and the types of relevant tasks to each content, i.e., 1) choice of content; 2) choice of task; 3) choice of task type.
Finally, we stress the importance of developing comparative studies in Didactics for fostering the development of subject didactics (Ligozat, 2023). We illustrate how looking at two different teaching practices – influenced by subjects through the prism of the same analytical tool (JAD-MTQ) – makes possible to bring out specific features of the way a discipline operates that could not be easily noticed from the sole standpoint of that discipline.
ReferencesAlmqvist J, Lidar M and Olin A (2023). Teaching Traditions in Classroom Practice – A Comparative Didactic Approach. In F Ligozat, K Klette and J Almqvist (Éds.), Didactics in a Changing World: European Perspectives on Teaching, Learning and the Curriculum (p. 55 65). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20810-2_4
Amade-Escot C and Venturini P (2015). Joint Action in Didactics and Classroom Ecology: Comparing Theories using a Case Study in Physical Education. Interchange, 46(4), 413 437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-015-9263-5
Brousseau G (1997). Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics. Didactique Des Mathématiques, 1970-1990. Kluwer Academic Publ.
Chevallard Y (1985). La transposition didactique : Du savoir savant au savoir enseigné (3ème éd. revue et augmentée). La Pensée Sauvage, Ed.
Ligozat F (2023). Comparative Didactics. A Reconstructive Move from Subject Didactics in French-Speaking Educational Research. In F Ligozat, K Klette, and J Almqvist (Éds.), Didactics in a Changing World: European Perspectives on Teaching, Learning and the Curriculum (p. 35 54). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20810-2_3
Ligozat, F., & Buyck, Y. (in press). Comparative Didactics. Towards a « didactic » framework for analysing teaching quality. European Educational Research Journal.
Ligozat F, Lundqvist E and Amade-Escot C (2018). Analyzing the continuity of teaching and learning in classroom actions: When the joint action framework in didactics meets the pragmatist approach to classroom discourses. European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 147 169. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117701923
Mercier A, Schubauer-Leoni, ML and Sensevy G (2002). Vers une didactique comparée. Editorial. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 141(Numéro thématique), 5 16.
Schneuwly B (2021). « Didactiques » is not (entirely) « Didaktik ». The origin and atmosphere of a recent academic field. In E Krogh, A Qvortrup and S Ting Graf (Éds.), Didaktik and Curriculum in Ongoing Dialogue (p. 164 184). Routledge Taylor & Francis.
Sensevy G (2011). Overcoming Fragmentation: Towards a Joint Action Theory in Didactics. In B Hudson & MA Meyer (Éds.), Beyond Fragmentation : Didactics, Learning and Teaching in Europe (p. 60 76). Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Sensevy G (2014). Characterizing teaching effectiveness in the Joint Action Theory in Didactics: An exploratory study in primary school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(5), 577 610. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.931466
Sensevy G and Mercier A (Éds.). (2007). Agir Ensemble : L’action didactique conjointe du professeur et des élèves. Presses universitaires de Rennes.
Tiberghien A and Sensevy G (2012). The Nature of Video Studies in Science Education. In D. Jorde & J. Dillon (Éds.), Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Retrosspective and Prospecctive (p. 141 179). SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-900-8_7
|
