Abstract
This chapter reports on the effectiveness and practicality of abstracting essential pedagogical methods that aim to promote high level thinking among junior secondary science students. Strategies include intensive professional development programmes and the design of lesson materials that can be integrated into the existing science curriculum in Hong Kong schools. The professional development workshops focus on the distinction between the “Cognitive Skills Enhancing Lessons” (CSE) and regular science lessons. Teachers were stimulated to discuss ways in which to get students to discuss, think about and respond to teachers’ questions, and how to stimulate students to ask questions. Classroom implementations of the CSE teaching materials tailor-made for the Hong Kong junior secondary science curriculum were initiated for three secondary two classes. This chapter reports on the findings from the pre and post interviews, as well as interviews during the classroom implementations with all the participating teachers and a sample of six students from each class. Findings report on what teachers think about the CSE method, their general feelings about using CSE, their comments on the materials, the difficulties (if any) they met, the benefits to students, and the perceived feasibility of implementing CSE-infused science activities designed by the project team in local classrooms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Adey, P. (1992). The CASE results: Implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 137–146.
Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (1993). An exploration of long-term far-transfer effects following an extended intervention programme in the high school science curriculum. Cognition and Instruction, 11(1), 1–29.
Adey, P., Hewitt, G., Hewitt, J., & Landau, N. (2004). The professional development of teachers: Practice and theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Adey, P., Robertson, A., & Venville, G. (2002). Effects of a cognitive acceleration programme on year 1 pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 1–25.
Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (1999). Integrating the Cognitive Research Trust (CoRT) programme for creative thinking. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17(2), 13–139.
Barak, M., & Shakhman, L. (2008). Fostering higher-order thinking in science class: Teachers’ reflections. Teachers and Teaching, 14(3), 191–208.
Baum, R. (1990). Finishing touches—10 top programs. Learning, 18(6), 51–55.
Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I. Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.
Cheng, K., & Yip, H. (2006). Facing the knowledge society: Reforming secondary education in Hong Kong and Shanghai. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Cotton, K. (1988). Classroom questioning: Close-up No.5. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Cotton, K. (1991). Teaching thinking skills. Retrieved July 28, 2008, from Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory’s School Improvement Research Series Web site: http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/6/cu11.html
Curriculum Development Council. (2002). Science education: Key learning area curriculum guide (Primary 1 – Secondary 3). Hong Kong: Printing Department of the HKSAR Government.
Education Commission. (2000). Reform proposals for the education system in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China: Printing Department.
Freseman, R. D. (1990). Improving higher order thinking of middle school geography students by teaching skills directly. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova University.
Herrnstein, R. J., Nickerson, R. S., de Sanchez, M., & Swets, J. A. (1986). Teaching thinking skills. American Psychologist, 41, 1279–1289.
Hudgins, B., & Edelman, S. (1986). Teaching critical thinking skills to fourth & fifth graders through teacher-led small-group discussions. Journal of Educational of Educational Research, 79(6), 333–342.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Lee, G., & Kwon, J. (2001). What do we know about students’ cognitive conflict in science classroom: A theoretical model of cognitive conflict process. In Proceedings of the annual meeting of the association for the education of teachers in sciences (19p). Costa Mesa, CA, January 18–21, 2001, ED 453 083.
Matthews, D. B. (1989). The effect of a thinking-skills program on the cognitive abilities of middle school students. Clearing House, 62(5), 202–204.
McGuinness, C. (1999). From thinking skills to thinking classrooms. A review and evaluation of approaches for developing pupils' thinking. London: HMSO.
Nisbet, J. (1993). The thinking curriculum. Educational Psychology, 13, 281–290.
Pearson, P. D. (1982). A context for instructional research on reading comprehension. Champaign, MA: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.
Piaget, J. (1983). Piaget’s theory. In P. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1). New York: Wiley.
Pogrow, S. (1988). A thinking skills program for at risk students. Principal, 67(4), 19–24.
Robinson, I. S. (1987). A program to incorporate High-Order thinking skills into teaching and learning for grades K-3. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova University.
Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of Educational Research, 78(2), 330–363.
Sternberg, R. G., & Bhana, K. (1986). Synthesis of research on the effectiveness of intellectual skills programs: Snake-Oil remedies or miracle cures? Educational Leadership, 44(2), 60–67.
Swartz, R. J. (1991). Infusing the teaching of thinking into content instruction. In A. L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Swartz, R. J., & Parks, S. (1994). Infusing the teaching of critical and creative thinking into content instruction. Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Books & Software.
Tenenbaum, G. (1986). The effect of quality of instruction on higher and lower mental processes and on the prediction of summative achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 80(2), 105–114.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
World Bank. (2003). Lifelong learning in the global knowledge economy: Challenges for developing countries. Washington, DC: Author.
Zohar, A. (2004). Elements of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge regarding instruction of higher-order thinking. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(4), 293–312.
Zohar, A. (2006). The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher-order thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 331–377.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. (2003). Higher-order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145–181.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cheng, M.M.H., SO, W.W.M. (2011). The Infusion of Strategies for Generating High Level Thinking into the Junior Secondary Science Curriculum. In: Cheng, M.M.H., So, W.W.M. (eds) Science Education in International Contexts. SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-427-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-427-0_4
Publisher Name: SensePublishers
Online ISBN: 978-94-6091-427-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)
