Developing understanding of innovative strategies of teaching science through action research: A qualitative meta-synthesis from Pakistan

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 387-415

  Halai, Nelofer ^a  

^a AGA KHAN UNIVERSITY   (Pakistan)

Author keywords

action research; professional development; qualitative meta synthesis; reflective practice; science education; science teaching; teacher as researcher; teaching strategies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860421754     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-011-9313-0     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development (2009). Dissertation guide for M. Ed. class of 2010. Karachi: Author.
2. Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development website http://www. aku. edu/IED/.
3. Airasian, P. W. & Walsh, M. E. (1997). Constructivist cautions. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(6), 449.
4. Anderson, T. (2002). Reform in science teaching: What research says about inquiry? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
5. Anjum, S. (2005). Implementing the process of science concept development in early childhood education through young children's learning of living and nonliving things: An action research. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
6. Anwar, P. H. (2007). Promoting discussion in a lower secondary science classroom. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
7. Ashraf, H. & Rarieya, J. (2008). Teacher development through reflective conversations-possibilities and tensions: A Pakistan case. Reflective Practice, 9(3), 269-279.
8. Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 258-267.
9. Azim, S. (2006). Authentic assessment: An approach to enhance and assess students' learning. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
10. Bair, C. R. (1999). Meta-synthesis. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), San Antonio, Texas.
11. Barroso, J. & Powell-Cope, G. M. (2000). Metasynthesis of qualitative research on living with HIV infection. Qualitative Health Research, 10(3), 340-353.
12. Chang, G. A. (2007). Innovative strategies to promote students' argumentation in science. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
13. Chin, C. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students' responses. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1315-1346.
14. Cohen, D. K. & Barnes, C. A. (1993). Conclusion: A new pedagogy for policy? In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin & J. E. Talbert (Eds.), Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15. Costu, B., Ayas, A. & Naiz, M. (2010). Promoting conceptual changes in first year students' understanding of evaporation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11, 5-16.
16. Dhindsa, S. H. & Anderson, R. O. (2004). Using a conceptual-change approach to help preservice science teachers reorganize their knowledge structures for constructivist teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(1), 63-85.
17. Duschl, R. A. & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4(1), 37-73.
18. Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
19. Goldston, J. M. & Shroyer, G. M. (2000). Teachers as researchers: Promoting effective science and mathematics teaching. Teaching and Change, 7(4), 327-346.
20. Goodnough, K. (2001). Enhancing professional knowledge: A case study of an elementary teacher. Canadian Journal of Education, 26(2), 218-236.
21. Goodnough, K. (2008). Moving science off the "back burner": Meaning making within an action community of practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(1), 15-39.
22. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (GOP-MOE) (2006). Pakistan education statistics 2005-2006. Retrieved on March 15, 2011 from http://www. moe. gov. pk/Pakistan%20Education%20Statistics-2005-2006T1. pdf.
23. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (GOP-MOE), Islamabad (2009a). National professional standards for teachers in Pakistan. Retrieved on October 10, 2009 from http://www. teachereducation. net. pk/files/National%20Professional%20Standards%20for%20Teachers. pdf.
24. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (GOP-MOE), Islamabad (2009b). National education policy 2009. Retrieved on October 10, 2009 from http://www. moe. gov. pk/.
25. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (GOP-MOE) Islamabad (2009c). National standards for accreditation of teacher education programs. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from http://www. teachereducation. net. pk/files/National%20Professional%20Standards%20for%20Teachers-urdu. pdf.
26. Halai, N. (2006a). Reconceptualising the professional development of inservice science teachers in Pakistan. In J. Earnest, & D. Treagust (Eds.). Education rebuilding in societies in transition: International perspectives (pp. 163-176). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publications.
27. Halai, N. (2006b). Learning to use innovative pedagogy: The experience of a primary science teacher. Science Education International, 17(2), 123-132.
28. Hasnain, U. F. (2007). Developing understanding of a writing frame for explanation in science writing. Unpublished M. Ed. thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
29. Hoodbhoy, P. (2008). Education and the state: Fifty years of Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
30. Imomnazarovna, E. S. (2005). Implementation of teaching based on multiple intelligences in the primary science classroom: action research. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
31. Institute for Educational Development (IED). (1994). Some notes on The Institute for Educational Development (IED) and its future development. Karachi, Pakistan: Author.
32. Iqbal, J. (2009). Feasibility of inquiry-based teaching in a lower secondary class (grade VII) of a government school in Karachi. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
33. Jaworski, B. (1996). The implications of theory for a new masters programme for teacher educators in Pakistan. Oxford Studies in Comparative Education, 6, 65-76.
34. Jenkins, E. W. (2000). Constructivism in school science education: Powerful model or the most dangerous intellectual tendency? Science and Education, 9, 599-610.
35. Jessani, I. S. (2007). Integration of science, technology and society (STS) approach in teaching chemistry at higher secondary level. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
36. Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (2009). Energizing learning: The instructional power of conflict. Educational Researcher, 38(1), 37-51.
37. Kanjee, K. A. (1999). A constructivist approach to the teaching and learning of science. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
38. Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 567-605). Beverley Hills: Sage.
39. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R. & Retallick, J. (2004). The action research planner (2nd ed.). Pakistan: Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development.
40. Khamis, A. & Sammons, P. (2007). Investigating educational change: the Aga Khan University Institute for Educational Development teacher education for school improvement model. International Journal of Educational Development, 27(5), 572-580.
41. Khan, A. M. (2009). Understanding how the inquiry strategy works in a physics classroom at secondary level in a Pakistani private school context. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
42. Khanam, N. (2002). Use of observation skills as a teaching/learning strategy in primary science classroom. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
43. Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34-46.
44. Liem, L. T. (1987). Invitation to science inquiry (2nd ed.). Chino Hills: Science Inquiry Enterprises.
45. Longfield, J. (2009). Discrepant teaching events: Using an inquiry stance to address students' misconceptions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(2), 266-271.
46. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J. & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95-132). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
47. Martin, M. A. & Hand, B. (2009). Factors affecting the implementation of argument in the elementary science classroom. A longitudinal case study. Research in Science Education, 39(1), 17-38.
48. Meher, R. (1995). Exploring concept mapping as an approach to science teaching in lower secondary school in Pakistan. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
49. Mehrunisa, (2000). The enhancement of primary students' participation in science through teacher's questioning. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
50. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J. & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984-2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
51. Mir, K. (2008). Implementing 'assessment as learning' to develop students' conceptual understanding in a secondary school chemistry classroom of a government school in Karachi. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
52. Muhammad, S. (1998). The use of discrepant events as an alternative science teaching strategy in lower secondary classrooms. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
53. Mustafa, S. (1998). Discrepancy: an innovative strategy for promoting studies' learning in science. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
54. Muzaffar, S. (1999). Students' questioning in a primary science classroom. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
55. Najam, A. (2008). Educational apartheid. Chowk: Ideas, identities and interactions. Retrieved on March 18, 2011 from http://www. chowk. com/Views/Education/Educational-Apartheid.
56. Pardhan, H. & Mohammad, R. F. (2005). Teaching science and mathematics for conceptual understanding? A rising issue. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 1(1), 1-20.
57. Pedretti, E. & Hodson, D. (1995). From rhetoric to action: Implementing STS education through action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5), 463-486.
58. Ponte, P., Beijard, D. & Ax, J. (2004). Don't wait till the cow come home: Action research and initial teacher education in three different countries. Teacher and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 10(6), 591-621.
59. Prawat, R. S. (1989). Teaching for understanding: Three key attributes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 315-328.
60. Robinson, M. (2009). Practitioner inquiry in South Africa schools: What, how and why (not). Educational Action Research, 17(1), 121-131.
61. Rutherford, F. J. & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
62. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
63. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
64. Siraj, S. (2002). Inquiry-based science teaching: an action research study. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
65. Smerdon, B. A., Burkam, D. T. & Lee, V. E. (1999). Access to constructivist and didactic teaching: Who gets it? Where is it practiced? Teachers College Record, 1001(1), 5-34.
66. Social Policy Development Centre (SPDC) (2003). The state of science education (chapter 6). In Social Development in Pakistan 2002-2003: The State of Education in Pakistan. http://www. spdc. org. pk/Publications. aspx.
67. Somekh, B. (2005). Action research: A methodology for change and development. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
68. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1999). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
69. Suri, S. (2007). Active reading strategy (DART) to facilitate students' understanding of science concepts in a secondary science classroom of a community-based school in Karachi, Pakistan. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.
70. Tiberghien, A., Jossem, E. & Barojas, J. (1998). Connecting research in physics education with teacher education. I. C. P. E Book, International Commission on Physics Education.
71. UNESCO (2006). Situation analysis of teacher education: Towards a strategic framework for teacher education and professional development in Pakistan. Paris: UNESCO and USAID.
72. White, R. & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
73. Zehra, E. (2000). Organizing group work in primary science classrooms. Unpublished master's thesis, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development, Pakistan.