Name: Jody Kittell
Article: APS
An Analysis of Labwork Tasks Used in Science Teaching at Upper Secondary School and University Levels in Several European Countries .
Tiberghien, A., Veillard, L., Le Marechal, J., Buty, C., & Millar, R., (2001). , Science Education, 85, 483-508.
SUMMARY:
This article describes the results of a study of the similarities and differences in laboratory tasks used in science education at upper secondary school and university level, in the three main science subjects-physics, chemistry, and biology-in seven European countries. The data source for the study was a collection of 75 laboratory instruction sheets for use at school level in five countries, and 90 for use at university level in six countries. The tool for analysis was a “map” (or classification system) for labwork tasks. The categories defined in the “map” are intended learning outcome (learning objective) and design features of the task. While some differences are noted between the science subjects and between educational levels, the dominant impression from this analysis is of similarity across educational levels, science subjects and countries. Some coding categories arise only very infrequently, suggesting that some possible designs of labwork tasks are very seldom used. The findings indicate the potential usefulness of this classificatory “map” as a tool for monitoring practice and for raising questions about the use of labwork in science education.
This study deals with the analysis of regular laboratory activities. One type of analysis system takes the planning of the tasks (the planned activities and the planning of effective activities) as its reference, with the categories corresponding to different phases in carrying out a laboratory activity. The second type of analysis system is based on competency. This refers to learning objectives that include skills, declarative knowledge, and reasoning processes such as observing, making hypotheses, measuring, and so on. The teacher often uses these categories for student assessment during the session. The third type of analysis system is based on a theoretical framework concerning students’ activities in relation to the laboratory situation. In this approach, the interaction between students’ views/conceptions and an element of the practical situation is central.
In conclusion, the “map” was found to be an effective tool for designing a teaching sequence of a series of laboratory activities which takes into account the range of activities that is necessary to promote understanding of the ‘knowledge to be taught’ in relation to the relevant available information. The map, therefore, is a guide to making such activities explicit, where the underlying theoretical hypotheses are shared and the learning hypotheses are made explicit. This type of tool is quite relevant because recent studies have shown that the way questions are formulated deeply influences the students’ activities.
REACTION:
I found this lengthy article to be a bit confusing and misleading. It seems that the analysis of the labwork was not addressed in the way I presumed. I was also under the impression that the “map” was a tool for the student as well as the teacher, however, the “map” provided in the article seems directed toward the teacher for assessment of the quality of the lab design firstly and student learning secondly. I also expected the results to be directed more toward the information the students learned and how they learned it. This is why I am confused; on one hand, the explanations of the results do not seem to focus on learning outcomes, but then on the other hand, the charts provided with the explanations do.
If I just focus on the charts provided as the explanation of results, I am satisfied with the article in the respect that it outlines the student’s strengths and weaknesses in performing the designated expectations of the lab. I do think the use of a “map” or some other type of evaluation form is valuable in assessing student knowledge and comprehension as well as a way of evaluating the teacher in his/her development and instruction of a laboratory exercise.