My primary research interest is the development of critical thinking skills through science education, especially positioned in my area of experience - India. While the term critical thinking has lost currency in the US (replaced by argumentation and sense-making most recently), the term is still much used in the Indian context alongside higher-order thinking skills (HOTS).
My readings have just begun but I decided to start with one research paper that captures the ground reality of the construct and a position paper by the organisation responsible for curriculum development in India.
1. Learning Science in Classrooms, Nurturing Thinking Skills by Priyanka Sharma
In this study, Sharma explored the goals of science teaching by Indian teachers teaching across K-12, how their understanding is operationalised in the classroom and how well classroom teaching of science aligns with the goals of science education as stated in the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) curriculum. She sampled 98 teachers teaching across diverse conditions (urban context, language of instruction, educational qualification, gender and grade level), first through small focus groups and then through individual questionnaires. The most common reason for teaching science was identified to be the development of practical experimental skills followed by the development of comprehension of science concepts and then the acquisition of science knowledge. The teaching practices most used by teachers was either reading material from the textbook, or lecture using a blackboard. Other teaching practices such as demonstrations, experiments, use of multimedia were either very rarely (<25% of time) or never used. The use of questioning students as a teaching method was largely restricted to a means of awarding marks to students after a topic was taught and drew mostly from the textbook. Questioning as a means to encourage student thinking, identify background knowledge, engage students was done by only 7-13 teachers in the study and only a similar number drew on real life experiences of students as a source of questions. The researcher’s analysis of policy documents on science education shows a discrepancy between the stated goals of science education, namely the need for inculcating scientific inquiry and temper among school children (NCERT, 2006) and the practice of teaching science in the classroom. Teachers in the study opined that obstacles like large class sizes, lack of training in innovative teaching methods and administrative issues prevented them from using more inquiry based approaches.
The student experience of learning science remains limited to rote memorisation instead of actual comprehension of science knowledge and processes. There is limited to no discussion of the nature of science. There is a collusion between curriculum, assessment, teaching and educational administration that encourages the perpetuation of science education that is restricted to the transmission of science knowledge. It would have been good to have information about the exact cities the study participants were drawn from and the nature of the schools due to the large variation that exists in India. However, studies like this show that there is tremendous space and need for more sophisticated science education in India, especially in light of current education policy as stated by the National Council for Education Research and Technology (NCERT) in 2006.
2. Position Paper of National Focus Group on Teaching of Science by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT)
The position paper, written in 2006, animates the current policy direction of the government of India on science education, especially at the school level. The National Education Policy 2020 clearly derives from many of the considerations and recommendations of the position paper. It notes how science education has been compulsory up to Class 10 but the curriculum lacks relevance and quality. It acknowledges the existence of isolated cases of excellence in science education and individuals who, despite the system, excel in science. The three main lacunae the authors identify are a failure to achieve equity in and through science education, a failure to foster innovation and creativity and the present system of examinations that stymie most interventions.
The position paper is interesting in its explicit and clear enunciation of scientific literacy as a stated goal of science education. The paper also recognises the importance of designing science education for the majority of students who would not pursue careers in science and technology. It has a focus on equity, sophistication and nuance in science education and recognises the critical role of teachers in enacting effective science education.
Teacher training is seen as crucial to any largescale improvement in science education. It suggests a complete overhaul of the current system of teacher education including modernisation of the syllabus and focus on science practices and the nature of science. It recognises the importance of teacher autonomy but quality control and oversight are required to ensure standards are maintained
It is critical of the current examination system which encourages rote learning, sacrifices student engagement and deep learning while creating an environment of anxiety and fear leading to poor student mental health; this is applicable to both the end of school Board examinations and the numerous entrance examinations required for admission to varied undergraduate programs. The quality of questions in Board examinations is also a topic of concern for the authors.
I find it surprising that this document written 18 years ago has a much broader and sophisticated conception of science education than I have seen enacted through curriculum or practice during my career as a teacher. The focus on equity and inquiry, the criticism of the examination system and the thrust to teacher training pre-service and in-service feel revolutionary, mostly since little has changed in the education landscape since then. Many of their criticisms still hold true, their recommendations still unenacted and their vision still relevant. However, the stated position of the NCERT being as mentioned above creates a space for continued research and design of solutions that are within the ambit of the existing system.
These two documents begin to reveal an interesting gap between policy and practice. Though the papers are not recent, my experience teaching in India suggests that very little has changed on the ground. There are areas of consonance such as the imperative for effective teacher training, and the re-evaluation and reform of the examination system. My future reading will be on newer studies that have been conducted, especially trying to understand why there is such slow progress in realising the NCERT goals of science education. It does however give me hope for future improvement and indicates a distinct research space I can occupy.
References:
1.
Sharma, P., (2017). Learning
Science in Classrooms, Nurturing Thinking Skills. Journal of Indian
Education, Vol. XLII(1), pp. 66-84 https://www.ncert.nic.in/pdf/publication/journalsandperiodicals/journalofindianeducation/JIE_may_2016.pdf#page=68
NCERT, 2006.
Position Paper of National Focus Group on Teaching of Science. National Council
of Educational Research and Training. New Delhi.
No comments:
Post a Comment