Abstract
Much research has been done on the effectiveness of practical work in the classroom. Studies conclude that the way most teachers apply practical work is not the most effective approach. Some studies ascribe this at least in part to the very design of the practical work. This research project aims to answer the question ‘What design principles do teachers use when designing practical work?’ The research method comprised of structured interviews with 15 active teachers and teacher educators in the Netherlands about the design process of a particular piece of practical work. Interviews were guided by the Practical Activity Analysis Inventory (Millar 2009). Results show remarkable consistency amongst the ways in which teachers design practical work for students in some aspects and clear differences in others. Most teachers indicate that learning activities associated with the domain of ideas play a more significant role in their design than activities exclusively associated with the domain of observables (Abrahams and Millar 2008). Likewise most teachers take great care to provide an appropriate degree of scaffolding, but they differ considerably in their view how much and which scaffolding should be provided. Clear differences arise when considering learning objectives. Few teachers rigorously use learning objectives throughout the design of the activity. In most design processes they only play a marginal role. This holds even more for inquiry objectives. Sometimes these are not even recognized by the designer, even though inquiry activities were—unconsciously—included in the activity created. The results of this study can be useful to identify why so much practical work is ineffective. It seems that the problem does not lie in the primary design-objectives of the practical work, at least when considering experienced teachers. They take great care to enable the student to get to the domain of ideas, although they may lack a solid understanding of what is necessary to get their students there in terms of scaffolding. This study did not look at classroom-implementation, so it may be that the teacher puts less emphasis on the scientific ideas when doing the activity in class. Further research will look into this and identify reasons for possible discrepancies between design-principles and execution in class.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
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.
Abrahams, I., & Reiss, M. J. (2012). Practical work: Its effectiveness in primary and secondary schools in england. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(8), 1035–1055.
Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Murthy, S., & Ruibal-Villasenor, M. (2009). Using action research to improve learning and formative assessment to conduct research. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 5(1), 010109.
Germann, P. J., Haskins, S., & Auls, S. (1996). Analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals: Promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 475–499.
Millar, R. (2009). Analysing practical activities to assess and improve effectiveness: The practical activity analysis inventory (PAAI). York: Centre for Innovation and Research in Science Education, University of York.
Millar, R. (2010). Practical work. In J. Osborne, & J. Dillon (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say: What research has to say. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
Tamir, P., & Lunetta, V. N. (1981). Inquiry related tasks in high school science laboratory handbooks. Science Education, 65(5), 477–484.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all participants in the study for their time and cooperation as well as the (anonymous) referees for their valuable comments to improve the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Spaan, W., van den Berg, E. (2017). Teacher’s Design of Practical Work. In: Greczyło, T., Dębowska, E. (eds) Key Competences in Physics Teaching and Learning. Springer Proceedings in Physics, vol 190. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44887-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44887-9_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44886-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44887-9
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)