by
2010
i
DECLARATION
I certify that to my knowledge, this thesis does not contain, without acknowledgement,
any material previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any institution of higher
education. To the best of my knowledge this thesis does not incorporate any material
previously published or written by another person other than that which has been
referenced appropriately in the text.
Signature: ______________________
Date: __________________________
ii
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to develop substantive theory to explain how Singapore
junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006
revised junior college curriculum. In 1997, a new vision for education in Singapore,
called Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, was introduced to prepare students for
successful living in economies driven by knowledge.
educational initiatives have been implemented in Singapore schools for the past decade.
The 2006 revised junior college curriculum is one such initiative. The revised
curriculum emphasises breadth and flexibility, and is intended to transform an
examination-oriented educational culture in Singapore junior colleges to one driven by
passion for learning.
delivering quality results in the national examinations, the teachers are also expected to
orchestrate progressive pedagogical practices in classrooms.
Current literature on educational change is replete with scholarly advice that for
sustainable change, theoretical understanding of teachers perspectives and practices
with regards to implementing educational initiatives is imperative. However, no theory
on how Singapore junior college teachers put in practice initiatives underpinning the
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision existed prior to this study. In light of these
considerations, this study was undertaken in October 2007 to generate substantive
theory on how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of
science under the new educational framework.
The study was located within the interpretivist research paradigm. The study further
anchored its theoretical position in the social theory of symbolic interactionism.
iii
Grounded theory was adopted as the research methodology, and sources of data
included semi-structured interviews, lesson observations as well as teachers record
books. The data were analysed via open, axial and selective coding.
The theory generated is: Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the
teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum through a threestaged individualised amelioration of the situation of teaching and learning the science
subjects.
The new insights gained from the theory generated in the study are of
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
Page
Declaration
ii
Abstract
iii
Table of Contents
List of Figures
xii
List of Tables
xvii
Acknowledgements
xix
6
7
Change
The Challenge of Acquiring New Professional
Knowledge
The Challenge of Engaging Students
Limited Resources
Meanings Teachers Ascribe Towards Educational Initiatives
10
10
11
12
13
Educational Initiatives
Significance of the Theory Developed in the Study
Enhancing Teachers Professionalism
14
15
16
Initiatives
Contributing Towards Further Research
17
17
Theoretical Framework
17
Research Questions
18
Research Methodology
19
Sampling
19
Data Collection
19
Data Analysis
19
20
20
22
23
27
Kong
The United States
27
Japan
30
Hong Kong
32
33
35
35
Nature of Science
38
40
45
Singapore
Primary Education
50
Secondary Education
52
53
54
Learning Nation
Ability-Driven Education
55
vi
IT Masterplan
57
58
59
62
66
Junior Colleges
Conclusion
68
70
71
Initiatives
Acquisition and Construction of New Professional
71
Knowledge
Engaging Students
75
83
87
88
91
Professional Orientations
Sense of Ownership
Theoretical Understanding on How Teachers Implement
94
98
Educational Initiatives
Conclusion
108
110
Theoretical Framework
110
111
112
113
Research Questions
114
Research Methodology
117
Grounded Theory
117
vii
Research Site
118
119
Data Collection
122
Semi-Structured Interviews
122
Lesson Observations
123
124
124
Data Analysis
124
Open Coding
125
Axial Coding
130
Selective Coding
133
135
Credibility
135
Transferability
135
Dependability
135
Confirmability
136
137
Conclusion
138
140
141
143
144
149
154
158
163
167
171
174
viii
176
176
178
179
182
182
Curriculum Structure
Issues Regarding Students Learning and
185
Development
Issues Regarding the Ability to Teach the
188
191
193
193
Resource Consolidation
196
Pedagogical Adaptation
202
206
206
206
ix
208
208
210
212
214
214
218
224
229
234
Conclusion
240
243
243
246
252
254
254
Assessment Method
255
Curriculum Content
256
257
257
262
264
266
266
Curriculum Change
Implications for the Literature on How Singapore Teachers
271
273
References
275
Appendices
307
Appendix A
307
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Contents
Page
Figure 2.1
47
Figure 2.2
51
Figure 2.3
60
62
70
Figure 3.2
An ICT-Enabled classroom.
86
Figure 3.3
99
of educational initiatives.
Figure 3.4
106
Figure 4.1
120
Figure 4.2a
126
transcripts.
Figure 4.2b
127
interview transcripts.
Figure 4.3a
128
Figure 4.3b
129
Figure 4.4a
131
Figure 4.4b
132
Figure 4.5a
134
xii
Figure 4.5b
134
Figure 5.1
145
Figure 5.2
147
Figure 5.3
153
Figure 5.4
156
Figure 5.5
160
Figure 5.6
162
Figure 5.7
165
Figure 5.8
170
Figure 6.1
178
Figure 6.2
180
rooted.
Figure 6.3
181
183
Figure 6.5
194
196
197
xiii
Figure 6.7b
198
participant.
Figure 6.8
199
200
202
205
Figure 6.12
207
participant.
Figure 6.13
209
213
propositions.
Figure 7.2
215
219
222
225
226
xiv
Figure 7.7
231
teaching effectiveness.
Figure 7.8
232
233
236
238
239
The core theory, the three stages of the core theory, and
242
259
263
264
xv
Figure 8.4
265
xvi
LIST OF TABLES
Contents
Page
Table 2.1
24
Table 2.2
41
48
Singapore Schools.
Table 2.4
49
Schools.
Table 2.5
63
Table 3.1
Student Engagement.
76
Table 3.2
77
Orientations to Learning.
Table 3.3
79
90
with.
Table 3.5
92
Practices.
Table 3.6
94
Table 3.7
100
Table 5.1
142
Table 6.1
191
Facets of Measures.
xvii
Table 6.2
193
Participants.
Table 6.3
203
Participants.
Table 6.4
204
of Pedagogical Practice.
Table 7.1
220
229
235
Table 8.1
261
xviii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In submitting this thesis, I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude to many people around
me, whose encouragement and support I owed for enabling me to realise this almost
impossible commitment.
I would like to firstly thank my supervisor, Dr David Pyvis. I am most grateful for his
sound advice and professional guidance over the years. His detailed reading and helpful
critique did much to strengthen the quality of my work. I am particularly indebted to
him for the many hours he devoted to editing draft chapters, commenting on ideas and
showering me with positive encouragement.
I would also like to thank the academic and non-academic staff of the Graduate School
of Education, The University of Western Australia.
xix
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this study was to generate substantive theory on how Singapore junior
college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised
junior college curriculum. A study on how individuals deal with a particular situation
aims to: discover patterns through a longitudinal investigation on the perspectives of
participants with regards to that situation; how the participants act in light of their
perspectives; and the changes, if any, in the participants perspectives as a result of their
actions (ODonoghue, 2007). Perspectives, here, refer to the frameworks through
which people make sense of the world and it is through these frameworks that people
construct their realities and define situations (Woods, 1983, p.7). Becker and coworkers (cited in Woods, 1983, pp.78) have further described perspectives as a
coordinated set of ideas and actions a person uses in dealing with some problematic
situation.
Since the unveiling of the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision in 1997 by then
Prime Minister of Singapore Goh Chok Tong, many important initiatives have been
introduced in Singapore schools. In January 2006, a revised junior college curriculum
was implemented in all Singapore junior colleges. The 2006 revised junior college
curriculum emphasises breadth and flexibility, and is intended to prepare students to
face the fast changing world of the 21st century (Ministry of Education of Singapore,
2006a). The key changes implemented are as follows. First, all students admitted in all
Singapore junior colleges from 2006 onwards are required to take a contrasting subject
that is outside their area of specialisation. That is to say, each arts major student is
required to take at least one contrasting subject from the mathematics or science
discipline, and each science major student is required to take at least one contrasting
subject from the arts discipline.
redesigned and pitched at three levels of study differing in breadth and depth (Ministry
of Education of Singapore, 2005b). Third, new teaching content has been added to the
curriculum (Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board, 2006). Fourth, there is a
stronger focus on developing in students critical and conceptual thinking skills,
communication skills, and the ability to ask questions and seek answers independently
through the adoption of progressive pedagogies as well as the use of information and
communications technology (ICT) in classrooms (Ministry of Education of Singapore,
2006b).
The science curriculum in Singapore schools is divided into two components: science
content and science practical work (Towndrow, 2008). As the 2006 revisions did not
affect the learning and assessment of science practical work, this study focused only on
the teaching of science content under the new revisions. Traditional science content
teaching has been teacher-centred and the focus in learning is on the acquisition of facts
and formulae for assessment purposes, rather than on acquiring scientific literacy skills
(Lee & Yeoh, 2001). The 2006 revised junior college curriculum therefore hopes to
transform the learning of science content in junior colleges from examination oriented
to one that is passion driven.
Mehan, 2002) as teachers are meaning makers who will appraise and reappraise the
changes imposed on them (Walker, cited in Henze, Van Driel & Verloop, 2007, p.1820).
The substantive theory developed in this study, therefore, has the potential to offer
insights to deepen our understandings on how teachers deal with the implementation
of educational initiatives.
Under the new educational paradigm, traditional teaching methods such as drill and
practice, one-size-fits-all instruction, and providing standard formulae and model
answers are now regarded as undesirable and are to be discontinued in schools
(Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 03, October 2005). Replacing these classroom
practices are progressive pedagogical approaches such as collaborative learning and
differentiated teaching.
teachers as well as students in active learning, and in experimenting with new ways of
thinking, doing and solving problems (Tan, C, 2006c).
Most students in Singapore junior colleges major in science. The science subjects
offered are physics, chemistry and biology. Science education plays a pivotal role in
Singapores ambition to be a research and development hub in science and technology
(Lui, 2006). Moreover, a good science education is instrumental in imparting the skills
and knowledge students need for successful living in the new economy (Teo, 2000). In
2006, 82 per cent of the students newly admitted to junior colleges were science major
students, while the remaining 18 per cent of the students majored in arts (Ministry of
Education of Singapore, 2007a). With regard for the importance of science education to
the economic development of Singapore, this study focused on the teaching and
learning of science in junior colleges under the new educational framework.
Singapore junior college science teachers are likely to face new demands when teaching
their science subjects under the new revisions (Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 02,
July 2006). These demands are as follows. First, they are required to pitch their level
of teaching according to the academic background of students. For example, if they are
teaching a class of arts major students, they are required to recognise the knowledge
background and epistemological orientation of these students for effective teaching and
learning.
Under the new revisions, for each science subject, there are now three
different levels of study (Higher One, Higher Two and Higher Three), each of which
differs in breadth and depth, and each of which has its own set of syllabus. Second, the
junior college science teachers are required to teach new content that has been added to
the science curriculum. Third, the science teachers are expected to adopt a more
student-centred teaching approach in classrooms as well as to integrate ICT into their
teaching.
Fourth, the science teachers are required to prepare students for new
assessment criteria which focus more on critical analysis, and not just the regurgitation
of facts and formulae. A theoretical understanding of how Singapore junior college
science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior
college curriculum therefore has the potential to contribute to the successful realisation
of the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision.
The
phenomenon of what teachers do and think with regards to putting in practice the
intended curriculum initiatives is determined by the challenges teachers encounter
during the implementation process as well as the meanings teachers ascribe to the
initiatives. The review of literature pertaining to this study is thus organised in three
parts.
The first part discusses the challenges teachers face when implementing
educational initiatives. The second part examines the meanings teachers ascribe to
intended curriculum initiatives. The third part reports on the theoretical propositions
asserted by researchers on how teachers implement educational change. These three
bodies of literature collectively provided the necessary conceptualisation and
contextualisation of this study. The review also identified gaps in current educational
literature on how teachers deal with educational change.
many concepts, facts, and theories required by the syllabus (Barnett & Hodson, 2001,
p.426).
collaborative working communities among peers and experts to acquire the additional
knowledge needed to teach new science content and to facilitate progressive teaching
practices in classrooms (Anderson, 2002).
perspectives and practices of Singapore junior college science teachers with regards to
the acquisition of knowledge to effectively teach their science subjects under the revised
junior college curriculum.
Fear and anxiety about science as a subject may also result in students exhibiting
reluctance and resistance to engage in student-centred learning approaches, and instead
rely heavily on teachers to transmit conceptual knowledge. Students generally regard
science as a difficult subject to study (Bennett, 2003; Osborne, Simon & Collins, 2003;
Simon, 2000), and it is common to find students exhibiting anxiety towards the learning
of science (Udo, Ramsey & Mallow, 2004). The level of anxiety in the learning of
science in students is related to their self-efficacy beliefs (Britner & Pajares, 2006;
Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003), and students are likely to exhibit more enthusiasm
participating in student-centred learning activities in the presence of a safe, supportive
and caring environment (Rosiek, 2003; Campbell et al., 2001). It is therefore important
for teachers to be able to construct such a learning environment in order to promote
active participation from students in student-centred instructional activities.
objective of classroom lessons (Windschitl, 2002; Bell, 1998), teachers are likely to
resort to the traditional way of teaching by factual reproduction of concepts and
formulae instead of guiding students through inquiry-based learning (Windschitl, 2002;
Hodson, 1998).
experience a lack of time for lesson preparation especially in planning for studentcentred activities (Rigano & Ritchie, 2003) as well as ICT learning activities (Bennett,
2003; Granger et al., 2002).
There is still a lack of empirical evidence on what sort of educative materials are
necessary to assist teachers in conducting the teaching practices often prescribed in
reformed curricula (Schneider & Krajcik, 2002).
resources may result in teachers not being able to effectively implement curricula
initiatives according to reformers intentions (Fensham, 2006; Schneider & Krajcik,
2002).
Logistical difficulty in the use of ICT is, too, a challenge teachers often
encounter (Bennett, 2003; Granger et al., 2002). More studies are therefore necessary to
deepen our knowledge with regards to helping teachers deal with the issues
concerning insufficient time and inadequate resources (Liew, 2005).
10
much enthusiasm by teachers (Churchill & Williamson, 2004; Fishman & Krajcik, 2003;
Datnow & Castellano, 2000). On the other hand, teachers are likely to abort initiatives
that they regard as threats to achieving quality academic grades in examinations
(Owston, 2007; Ko, 2000).
Therefore, as
Roehrig, Kruse and Kern (2007) argue, school leaders are responsible for helping
teachers understand the purpose of educational change. However, they observe that a
vacuum of leadership exists in many schools, and teachers are often left to make
individual decisions about if and how to implement educational initiatives (Roehrig,
Kruse & Kern, 2007, p.904).
11
teaching (van Veen & Sleegers, 2006, p.92). Based on their personal epistemological
orientations, teachers adopt different teaching roles in the classrooms (Lloyd & Rezba,
2004). Teachers, therefore, will be very concerned on how their teaching roles in the
classrooms are impacted as a result of changes in educational policies.
Teachers beliefs about teaching and learning play a fundamental role in facilitating or
interfering with successful implementation of curricula initiatives (Kang & Wallace,
2005). As it is difficult to expect teachers to realign their epistemological beliefs in
light of educational reforms (Smith & Southerland, 2007), implementing curriculum
initiatives that contradict their orientations towards teaching and learning can be a very
painful task for teachers.
Sense of Ownership
Teachers do not wish to be mere implementers of curriculum initiatives; teachers want
to be consulted on the prospective changes to curriculum matters (Evers & Arat, 2004;
Hairon, 2003). Teachers sense of ownership towards curriculum initiatives is therefore
critical towards the successful implementation of these initiatives (Evers & Arat, 2004;
Vidovich & ODonoghue, 2003).
observe that teachers are more engaged and are more successful in implementing
curriculum changes when they are involved at the planning stage of the curriculum
revisions. Kirk and MacDonald (2001), however, argue that teachers make only a small
contribution to curriculum discourses and their ownership of curriculum change is
limited. Singapore junior college science teachers sense of ownership towards the
initiatives underpinning the revised junior college curriculum was investigated in this
study.
12
Fullan (2007, p.11), therefore, believes that success in educational reforms can be
achieved by reconciling and combining top-down and bottom-up forces of change.
Barab and Luehman (2003) further posit that teachers implement curricula initiatives in
light of classroom culture. This classroom culture is a multi-faceted construct that
includes: teaching resources; teachers beliefs as well as students aptitudes and
13
attitudes. Local adaptation and curricular diffusion are also important phenomena
that occur during the implementation process. These issues were examined in this study.
Two key observations can be made from the review of literature. First, teachers may
have a different set of concerns with regards to the implementation of educational
initiatives as compared to that of reformers and this could affect the implementation
outcome. Therefore, it is imperative that teachers perspectives and practices must first
be understood in order for any implementation of educational change to be successful.
Second, there is still insufficient knowledge to help teachers overcome the challenges of
implementing educational initiatives and accommodate the changes involved during the
implementation process.
14
grounded theory generated in this study, founded on the theoretical position of symbolic
interactionism, presents to readers contextual realities with regards to teaching and
learning of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum. Developed from
teachers actual experiences in teaching a curriculum based on new ideologies in
education, the theory itself is a valuable resource for pre-service education. A good preservice teacher education program is one which provides prospective teachers with
curriculum materials to examine real life situations in schools (Fullan, 2007). Most
teacher education programs, as observed by Liston and Zeichner (2006), give little
attention to the social, political and cultural context in schools.
Second, the theory generated in this study offers a common language for practitioners to
talk about regarding their professional practice. Professional development of teachers
is not about sending teachers to workshops or courses, but providing platforms for
15
professional sharing on issues that are able to resonate with their teaching experiences
(Ostermeier, Prenzel & Duit, 2010; Fullan, 2007). The theory developed in this study
reflects teachers perspectives and practices, and such reflection, according to
ODonoghue (2007, p.63), provides excellent opportunities for teachers to judge and
appraise their actions as well as to make improvements to their professional world.
Such understanding is
16
(Blumer, 1969, pp.25). The first premise is: human beings act toward things on the
17
basis of the meanings that the things have for them. The second premise is: the
meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social interaction that one
has with ones fellows. The third premise is these meanings are handled in, and
modified through, an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things
he encounters.
The concept of how individuals deal with a particular situation is consistent with the
theoretical
underpinnings
(ODonoghue, 2007).
widely
articulated
within
symbolic
interactionism
perspectives of the participants with regards to a specific phenomenon and the actions
the participants take in light of their perspectives.
Research Questions
The central research question, based on the theoretical position of symbolic
interactionism, was: how do Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the
teaching of their science subjects with regards to the 2006 revised junior college
science curriculum?
18
Research Methodology
Grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) was used as the research methodology to
generate theory on how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the
teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum. Grounded
theory involves the use of systematic procedures of collecting data, coding data to
identify categories, and connecting categories to form an abstract theory that explains a
process (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
Sampling
The study was conducted in a government junior college. Theoretical sampling was
used in the study. A group of 12 teachers, of whom five were physics teachers, five
chemistry teachers, and two biology teachers, were recruited as participants. Maximum
variation sampling (Mertens, 1998) was further used to select these participants to
provide differences in teaching subject, gender, years of teaching experience and the
background of the students they were teaching.
Data Collection
The primary sources of data in this study were semi-structured interviews, classroom
observations and teachers record books.
official records and public documents such as ministerial releases. Data gathering
commenced in October 2007. The interviews with the participants were recorded using
a digital voice recorder. After recording, the interviews were transcribed verbatim.
Data Analysis
Data analysis comprised three major levels of coding namely, open coding, axial coding
and selective coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
19
transcripts, field notes and related documents. Memos and diagrams (Strauss & Corbin,
1990) were used in all the three levels of coding.
20
the vignettes of five study participants, explaining how they dealt with the teaching of
their science subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
These
vignettes serve as a precursor to the presentation of the developed theory in Chapter Six.
Chapter Seven delineates the five subsidiary propositions asserted to explain within the
theory how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the specific issues
related to the teaching of their science subjects under the new educational framework in
Singapore junior colleges. Chapter Eight concludes the thesis by providing an overview
of the study, recapitulating the key premises of the theory developed, highlighting the
theorys importance in guiding educational policy and practice as well as offering
recommendations for improving teachers professionalism and promoting a successful
realisation of the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision.
21
CHAPTER TWO
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
INTRODUCTION
As emphasised in the previous chapter, the 2006 revised junior college curriculum is
an initiative grounded in the new interpretation of education in Singapore. The new
educational vision, named Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, is intended to provide a
more holistic form of education in Singapore schools so as to equip students with the
skills and knowledge judged useful for Singapores development of a knowledge-based
economy and for successful living in a globalised world.
In this chapter, the background and context to the study are provided. There are five
sections to this chapter. The first section examines the impact of globalisation on
education and highlights the changes made to broad education policies in response to
the resulting effects of globalisation by drawing cases from selected countries as well as
the case of Singapore.
22
The need to increase the average level of education in the labour force and to
provide more opportunities for adults to return to school to obtain new skills due to
changes made to the organisation of work and to the work people do;
23
In their Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the 21st
Century, Delors and his committee (1996) argue that education should be grounded in
four fundamental types of learning, so as to equip students adequately to live and work
in a complex inter-dependent world that is driven by knowledge. The four fundamental
types of learning are further termed as the Four Pillars of Knowledge, and they
comprise: Learning To Know; Learning To Do; Learning To Live Together; and
Learning To Be. Table 2.1 outlines the meanings of these four pillars of knowledge as
explained by Delors and his committee (1996).
Table 2.1
The Four Pillars of Knowledge.
Pillar
Meaning
Learning To Know
Learning To Do
Learning To Live
Together
human activities.
Learning To Be
Carnoy and Rhoten (2002) caution against disregarding the impact of globalisation on
education, since education is responsible for preparing young people to work and live
with the hyper-complexity associated with the 21st century (OECD, 2001, p.48).
Moreover, according to Lee (2005, p.169), the emergence of knowledge-based
economies has redefined the place and role of knowledge in society. A simple but
24
lucid definition of a knowledge-based economy has been given by Powell and Snellman
(2004):
We define the knowledge economy as production and services based
on knowledge-intensive activities that contribute to an accelerated pace
of technological and scientific advance as well as equally rapid
obsolescence. The key components of a knowledge economy include a
greater reliance on intellectual capabilities than on physical inputs or
natural resources, combined with efforts to integrate improvements in
every stage of the production process, from the R&D lab to the factory
floor to the interface with customers. (p.201)
Edwards and Usher (2008) further identify that discussions on the impact of
globalisation and the emergence of knowledge-based economies on curriculum and
pedagogy in schools are concerned with the following two areas:
One is those matters that need to be covered in learning encounters
where the aim is to enable learners to engage as global citizens or
consumers covering, for example, issues such as global values, social
justice, sustainable development, and environmental education. The
second is an examination of the impact of information and
communication technologies, of space-time constraints, and of
emerging form of global education enabled by these developments.
(p.53)
Many countries have thus recognised an imperative need to reshape and realign their
educational policies in order to equip their citizens with the necessary knowledge and
25
skills to live and work in knowledge-based economies (Power, 2007). The next part of
the section highlights the major educational changes that have been implemented in he
United States, Japan and Hong Kong. Educational change, here, refers to innovations
implemented at classroom or school level as well as to reforms of the whole or parts
of the education system of a country (Poppleton & Williamson, 2004, p.9). The United
States and Japan were specially chosen for this discussion on educational change
internationally as the educational system in these two countries were often used for
comparative and evaluative purposes by officials in the Ministry of Education of
Singapore. Former Prime Minister of Singapore Goh Chok Tong has the following
compliments (cited in Tan & Ng, 2005) in regards to top schools in the United States:
Their best schools produce well-rounded, innovative students by
putting them through a diverse and challenging curriculum. Their
academic institutions and research laboratories are at the forefront of
ideas and scientific breakthroughs, and infused with entrepreneurial
spirit. And they have developed strong links between academia and
industry, society and government. We in Singapore should learn from
these strengths of the American system. (p.1)
Singapore also drew on Japanese educational formulations. For example, the then
Education Minister of Singapore Tharman Shanmugaratnam (Tharman, 2005b) made
the following observation:
The Japanese have implemented changes in education with great zeal.
They made huge cuts in the curriculum, reduced curriculum time, and
introduced new, integrated learning subjects in all schoolsWe can
learn from their experience. (p.3)
and Hong Kong are important financial centres in East Asia, both societies have a
majority of Chinese population who can speak English, and both have well developed
education systems that are constantly carrying out reform (Ng & Chan, 2008).
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is a major educational change to improve
student achievement in American schools (Essex, 2006). The Act aims to equip
students with the knowledge and skills for the world of work in the new economy
(Department of Education of the United States, 2007). Two key changes due to the
implementation of the Act are the adoption of annual assessments and the use of
scientifically proven effective teaching methods. The following quote from Essex
(2006) explains the requirements involved with regards to the adoption of assessments:
By the 200506 school year, states must develop and implement
27
On the use of scientifically proven effective teaching methods, Essex (2006) elaborates
as follows:
No Child Left Behind places emphasis on determining which
educational programs and practices have been proven effective through
rigorous scientific research. Federal funding is targeted to support
these programs and teaching methods that work to improve student
learning and achievement. (p.8)
The Department of Education of the United States (2007) has reported that the No
Child Left Behind policy has reduced achievement gaps in reading and mathematics
between African-American nine-year-old students and their white peers. In addition,
more reading progress has been made by nine-year-old students since the introduction
of initiatives underpinning the policy, and mathematics scores for fourth- and eighthgraders as well as nine- and 13-year-old students have reached new heights. These
achievements are also reported in empirical studies (Supovitz, 2009).
Increased
28
Officials from the Department of Education of the United States (2007, p.3) have
announced that the No Child Left Behind Act has evolved from an idea to a law to a
way of life. In this regard, they elaborate as follows:
Today, educators, public officials and the media are engaged in a
nationwide conversation, debating whether academic standards are
high enough, assessments are fair enough, and enforcement is tough
enough. This conversation would not be occurring without No Child
Left Behind. (p.3)
Some researchers, however, are sceptical towards the beneficial claims of the No Child
Left Behind policy. For example, Balfanz, Legters, West and Weber (2007) believe
that the reported achievement gains could be due to factors such as: teaching to the test,
poorly constructed assessments; the way the data were analysed; and changes in student
population tested. Hursh (2007) also reports of teachers narrowing curriculum content
and of schools discriminating against low performing students in order to raise test
scores.
29
Japan
In 2002, new initiatives were implemented in Japanese schools to address the
inadequacies in the education system so as to develop in students sufficient creativity
and analytical thinking to meet the new economic challenges (Green, 2000, p.425).
These new initiatives labelled as The Model for Japanese Education in the Perspective
of the 21st Century were compiled by the Central Council for Education (CCE) of the
Ministry of Education of Japan (Motani, 2005). According to Green (2000, p.425), the
CCE recognised that the Japanese economy has to move ever more rapidly towards the
high-technology, high value-added areas of production and services if it is to keep
competitive and this requires higher skills and more innovation, and such
transformation requires the people to have qualities and ability to identify problem
areas for themselves, to learn, think, make judgments and act independently and to be
more adept at problem-solving. The new initiatives signal a paradigm shift in the
education system of Japan, discarding the rote-learning approach and providing more
opportunities for critical and analytical thinking, in order to prepare students to work
and live in an increasing complex world (Motani, 2005, p.311).
The educational initiatives introduced in 2002 aim to encourage a zest for living and to
provide a relaxed education for Japanese students (Motani, 2005). According to the
Ministry of Education of Japan (cited in Motani, 2005, p.311), zest for living means a
capacity to identify a problem, learn and think by herself or himself, make judgment
assertively, take action, and find better ways to solve a problem, no matter how much
the society changes; it is also a rich humanity, that knows her/his boundaries, cooperates with others, whose heart empathises with others and is moved by various
things, while relaxed education refers to a a relaxed, humane state, as opposed to a
competitive, stratifying environment. A relaxed education, seen as a remedy to
30
alleviate the stress in Japanese students due to the excessive competitive examinations
(Green, 2000), is necessary for the cultivation of zest for living.
A significant change to the national curriculum under the new framework of education
in Japan is the introduction of Integrated Studies, a unit designed to encourage more
student-centred, problem-solving pedagogy with no recommended textbooks from the
Ministry of Education of Japan. The introduction of Integrated Studies, according to
Motani (2005, p.310), indicates the possibility that a structural shift has occurred and
the country has decided to address the issues of citizenship, democracy, and justice to
prepare Japanese children for an increasingly interdependent, global, and multicultural
world through public education.
undertake a research project on topics they find particularly interesting. Teachers play
the role of coordinators rather than of knowledge disseminators.
As no explicit
curriculum guidelines and teaching materials are provided for the Integrated Studies
unit, both teachers and students have to seek out resources and information relevant to
the projects undertaken (Bjork, 2009).
31
Hong Kong
In 2000, the Education Commission of Hong Kong recommended reforming the
education system, with the objective of constructing a system conducive to life-long
learning and all-round development. A new vision for education for Hong Kong in the
21st century was drawn up. The new vision termed Learning For Life, Learning
Through Life aims to enable every person to attain all-round development in the
domains of ethics, intellect, physique, social skills and aesthetics according to his/her
own attributes so that he/she is capable of life-long learning, critical and exploratory
thinking, innovating and adapting to change; filled with self-confidence and a team
spirit; willing to put forward continuing effort for the prosperity, progress, freedom and
democracy of their society, and contribute to the future well-being of the nation and the
world at large (Education Commission of Hong Kong, 2006, p.5). According to Chan
(2010), the educational changes reflect Hong Kong governments belief that human
capital is the key to economic growth in a globalised world.
Several strategies were adopted to realise the new vision. First, the selection criteria of
student admission to schools were widened to include non-academic attainments.
Second, the national curriculum was revised to accommodate an inter-disciplinary
format of education. Third, assessment methods were revamped to assess students
creativity, critical thinking abilities and communication skills. Fourth, new teaching
methods were introduced to provide students with comprehensive and balanced learning
experiences. The reforms represent the following shifts in educational priorities in
Hong Kong: from subject-oriented to generic knowledge and skills in terms of
knowledge organisation; from traditional classroom teaching and learning to diversified
modes of learning in terms of teaching strategies; and from competitive examinations to
divergent modes of assessment (Kennedy, Fok & Chan, 2006).
32
Under the new educational policy, Hong Kong schools are given the autonomy to
design their own educational strategies. This policy of decentralisation is regarded as a
step towards providing quality education in Hong Kong schools (Ng & Chan, 2008).
The flexibility by school principals and teachers in deciding resources and plan
curriculum activities according to the needs of their students is, however, confined
within an operational framework decided by the Education Department of Hong Kong.
Additional duties are also expected from teachers with the introduction of the
educational changes. Hong Kong teachers are expected to fulfil the professional roles
stated in the The Teacher Competencies Framework and the Continuing Professional
Development of Teachers published by the Hong Kong Education and Manpower
Bureau in 2004 (Cheung, 2008). Researchers such as Chan (2010) and Cheung (2008)
believe that Hong Kong teachers are likely to experience dilemmas when operating
within this paradox of centralisation within a decentralisation paradigm (Ng & Chan,
2008, p.498).
33
regarded as inadequate for producing the students Singapore needs for its new economy.
Education reforms both in content and practice have been deemed necessary. Policies
of reform were announced in 1997, when then Prime Minister of Singapore Goh Chok
Tong unveiled a new vision for education in Singapore. This new vision, named
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, is described by Goh (1997) as providing an
environment for total learning, involving all stakeholders in education and strategy, and
for the purpose of ensuring the economic competitiveness of the nation.
Many
34
such initiative. The Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision and the 2006 revised
junior college curriculum are discussed in greater detail in the later sections of this
chapter.
The
35
should now be the goal of science education in schools (Brown, Reveles & Kelly, 2005;
Hodson, 2003; Grber et al., 2001; Bell, Lederman & Abd-El-Khalick, 2000; DeBoer,
2000). The National Research Council of the United States (cited in Grber et al., 2001)
defines scientific literacy as the knowledge which enables people to use scientific
principles and processes to make personal decisions, and to participate in dialogues of
scientific issues that impact society. Harlen (2001) labels scientific literacy as the
capacity to use science knowledge to identify questions and to draw evidence-based
conclusions in order to understand and help make decisions about the natural world and
the changes made to it through human activity. Lee and Yeoh (2001) further describe
scientific literacy as the knowledge about science, and the ability to think critically and
creatively about the natural world.
A scientific literate student, according to Grber and co-workers (2001), would possess
the following competencies: subject competency which involves the ability to
understand the various domains of science; epistemological competency which involves
the ability of having a systematic approach of using science to understand the world;
social competency which involves the ability to work in teams to solve problems
involving science; procedural competency which involves the abilities to observe and
evaluate phenomena, comprehend graphic representations, generate and test hypotheses;
communicative competency which involves the abilities to use and understand scientific
language in discussions and reports; and ethical competency which involves the abilities
to understand norms in location and time, and value hierarchies. These competencies
would allow students to function as useful citizens who can not only cope with the fastpaced changes in this technological world but also to comprehend better the various
issues related to science, for example, global warming and genetically modified foods
(Toh & Tsoi, 2008). Scientific literacy also has the role of preparing students to be
36
informed citizens capable of using science and technology wisely to solve the various
global problems in the society (Dawson & Venville, 2008; Roth & Dsautels, 2004).
Citizenship education, which is for all students, has a similar integral component to that
of scientific literacy, which is to equip students with the ability to comprehend socioscientific issues that arise due to the complex interactions between science and society
(Colucci-Gray et al., 2006).
DeBoer (2000) argues that to achieve scientific literacy in students, science curriculum
in schools should include: teaching and learning about science as a cultural force in the
modern world; teaching the application of science in everyday living; discussion of
science issues as reported in the media; learning about science as a particular way of
appreciating and examining the natural world; and examining the relationship between
science and technology (DeBoer, 2000). Furthermore, according to Millar and Osborne
(2006, p.413), to inculcate scientific literacy in students, the science curriculum in
schools should aim to sustain and develop the curiosity of students about the natural
world and build up their confidence in their ability to inquire about its phenomena as
well as to help students acquire a broad, general understanding of the important ideas
and concepts of science that have an impact in the society, and be able to use their
knowledge to make decisions about societal science issues.
Contained within the definitions of scientific literacy is the concept of science for all.
The goal of a science for all education runs parallel to the outcomes of scientific
literacy (Fensham, 2006). Scientific literacy has, within itself, a broad and functional
understanding of science for all students and not just for a group of students specialising
in science and technology (DeBoer, 2000). Thus, every student, regardless of his or her
area of specialisation, should be scientifically literate so as to live and work in the
37
globalised society, and all students should be able to evaluate and discuss societal
science issues, such as biotechnology, and develop scientific ways of thinking (Bramble,
2005).
Researchers and scholars have also identified that to achieve scientific literacy in
students, it is critical to include the nature of science in the school science curriculum
(Osborne et al., 2003; Moss, Abrams & Robb, 2001; Bell, Lederman & Abd-El-Khalick,
2000; Sorsby, 2000; McComas, Clough & Almazroa, 1998) as well as to use
constructivist-based student-centred learning approaches in classroom teaching (Hodson,
2003; Grber, et al., 2001; Rennie, Goodrum & Hackling, 2001). These concerns are
discussed below.
Nature of Science
According to McComas, Clough and Almazroa (1998, pp.45) the nature of science is
a fertile hybrid arena which blends aspects of various social studies of science
including the history, sociology, and philosophy of science combined with research
from the cognitive sciences such as psychology into a rich description of what science is,
how it works, how scientists operates as a social group and how society itself both
directs and reacts to scientific endeavours. They further add that teaching the nature
of science involves discussing the intersection of the philosophy, history, sociology,
and psychology of science.
Learning the nature of science is vital to the development of scientific literacy as this
body of knowledge provides students with the understanding on the limitations of
scientific knowledge; the various ways of learning science; the ethics of scientific work;
and the history of science (Afonso & Gilbert, 2010). Bell, Lederman and Abd-El-
38
Khalick (2000) describe the nature of science as overlapping with that of scientific
processes. According to them, teaching the nature of science can be used to highlight
that science knowledge is: tentative; empirically based; subjective; partly the product of
human inference, imagination, and creativity; socially and culturally embedded; and
involves a combination of observation and inferences.
The diverse meanings of the philosophy, history, sociology, and psychology of science
with their broad classifications have made teaching the nature of science in schools a
challenging task (Sorsby, 2000). In addition, it is difficult to derive the nature of
science into specific instructional objectives for teaching and assessment purposes (Lee
& Yeoh, 2001). Donnelly (2001), in analysing the various policy documents for the
national curriculum for England and Wales, has found out that there are discrepancies
regarding the meaning of the nature of science among educators. He further remarks
that there is an underlying and deeper meaning in teaching the nature of science which
is to engage students individuality and judgment in the course of science education
rather than to teach the nature of science as a subject. According to McComas,
Clough and Almazroa (1998), the nature of science need not be a specific discipline to
be taught in the classroom. The nature of science can be taught in schools through
activities such as debates over scientific concepts.
39
40
Table 2.2
New Orientations to Teaching and Learning of Science to Achieve Scientific Literacy.
More of
Teacher
Student
Instructional Activities
Processing information.
Student-directed learning.
information.
Facilitating student thinking.
hypothesising information.
Modelling the learning process.
Differentiated learning.
problems.
Less of
Transmitting information.
Teachers-prescribed activities.
Memorising information.
Completing of worksheets.
answers to problems.
41
41
Important characteristics of a
42
centred learning approach that has been actively promoted is group learning or
collaborative learning (Grber et al., 2001; Hodson, 1998; National Research Council of
the United States, 1997). Group learning or collaborative learning involves students
working in groups to achieve a common goal with each member of the group
contributing in an individually accountable way (National Research Council of the
United States, 1997).
The use of ICT in science lessons is also identified by researchers and scholars as
critical towards developing scientific literacy in students (Millar & Osborne, 2006;
Chang & Tsai, 2005; Bennett, 2003; Poole, 2000). The use of ICT in schools would
refer to the use of hardware, such as desktop and portable computers, projection
technology, data-logging devices and digital recording equipment, software applications
such as multimedia resources and generic software, and information systems such as the
internet and intranet (Hennessy, Ruthven & Brindley, 2005). One aspect of the nature
of science, as mentioned earlier, is to understand how scientists work, and ICT is
almost an indispensable tool in the work of scientists. According to Poole (2000),
scientists make use of ICT to: search and collect information; handle data from
experiments; model ideas; present information and research findings; and collaborate
with other scientists.
43
students to attain the similar set of skills on the use of ICT as mentioned above, and
science teachers are encouraged to infuse ICT in tutorial instruction on science content
as well as to use dataloggers and spreadsheets for information processing and
calculations in experimental work (Bennett, 2003).
The positive impact on learning through the use of ICT has been proclaimed by
researchers such as Bell, Urhahne, Schanze and Ploetzner (2010), Mokhtar (2005),
Chen and Hung (2003), as well as Goby and Lewis (2000). The use of ICT in learning
facilitates the transformation of students from passive learners to active, independent,
creative and analytical ones (Mokhtar, 2005, p.30).
Computer-mediated learning
Thus, major reforms in science education are centred on achieving scientific literacy in
students. The success of such reforms certainly depends on how science teachers tailor
their teaching to include the learning of the nature of science and facilitating
constructivist-based student-centred learning in the classrooms. The following sections
furnish an overview of the educational landscape in Singapore and examine the
educational initiatives introduced to achieve scientific literacy in Singapore students.
44
Teachers Union (2004, p.4), it is critical, for Singapores survival, that a strong link
between education and economy is maintained, and therefore any restructuring or finetuning of the education system is largely in response to the changing economic
environments, both local and global.
45
The stages of education in Singapore are structured into three parts that follow a sixfour-two model: six years of primary school, four years of secondary and two years of
pre-university education. The school system is structured in such a way that children
are provided with at least ten years of basic education before they enter the working
world. Currently, the course curriculum at each level of education is categorised into
three key components, namely, life skills, knowledge skills and content-based subject
disciplines (Ministry of Education of Singapore, 2006b).
overview of the structure in the Singapore education system while Table 2.3 outlines the
three key components in the course curriculum in Singapore schools.
46
Years of Schooling 14 11
10 7
65
41
Privately-Funded schools
96
Institute
of
Technical
Education
11 10
Polytechnics
Junior Colleges/
Centralised
Institute
15 12
19 16
Typical Age
Universities
Secondary 5 N
GCE N Level Examination
Special/Express
Course
(Secondary 1 4)
Normal (Academic)/
Normal (Technical) Course
(Secondary 1 4)
47
Figure 2.1
47
Table 2.3
Key Components in the Course Curriculum in Singapore Schools.
Life Skills
Knowledge Skills
Content-Based Subject
Disciplines
Aim
Course
Examinable academic
Components
as Co-curricular Activities,
Project Work.
National Education.
Mathematics, Sciences.
48
48
Each stage of education aims to inculcate in students a set of attributes. These attributes,
called the Desired Outcomes of Education, are presented in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4
The Desired Outcomes of Education in Singapore Schools.
Primary
Secondary
Pre-University
Be able to distinguish
for others.
social responsibility
Be able to build
contribution.
others.
Be enterprising and
Have an entrepreneurial
about things.
innovative.
Possess a broad-based
Be able to think
express themselves.
independently and
education.
creatively.
habits.
aesthetics.
Love Singapore.
Singapore.
to lead Singapore.
The remaining parts of this section discuss, in greater detail, primary, secondary and
pre-university education in Singapore.
49
Primary Education
The overall aim of primary education in Singapore is to provide students with a good
foundation in English, mother tongue language, science and mathematics (Ministry of
Education of Singapore, 2006b).
commencing primary school at the age of six. As shown earlier in Figure 2.1, primary
education consists of a four-year foundation stage from Primary One to Primary Four,
and a two-year orientation stage from Primary Five to Primary Six.
At the end of Primary Four, students sit for a school-based examination. The students
are then banded according to their academic results in this examination. This system,
called Subject-based Banding offers primary school students greater flexibility in
deciding their course of study based on their academic abilities (Ministry of Education
of Singapore, 2009a). Students are given the option to offer their stronger subjects at
the standard level, or to offer their weaker subjects at the foundation level.
Subject-based banding begins in Primary Five and continues in Primary Six. At the
end of the six-year primary education, all students sit for the Primary School Leaving
Examination, a major national examination which determines students progression to
secondary schools and their course of study in secondary schools. The key processes
involved in primary school education are depicted in Figure 2.2.
50
At
Primary
Four
At
Primary
Five
At the
end of
Primary
Five
At
Primary
Six
At the
end of
Primary
Six
Figure 2.2
51
Secondary Education
There are three courses of study in secondary schools, namely, Special, Express and
Normal.
The Normal course is further divided into Normal (Academic) and Normal
(Technical). Students in the Normal (Academic) course will study academicallybased subjects while those in the Normal (Technical) course follow a practice-oriented
curriculum. All students in the Normal course sit for the General Certificate of
Education Normal Level Examination at the end of the four-year course. Students who
satisfy the requirements are enrolled in a fifth year of study at the same secondary
school where they will sit for the General Certificate of Education Ordinary Level
Examination at the end of the year.
As shown earlier in Figure 2.1, there are three choices of post-secondary education.
Pre-university education in junior colleges is the most direct path towards university
education and is meant for students who are more academically inclined (Goh, 2002;
Tan & Ho, 2001). Students need to have a certain standard of academic achievement in
the General Certificate of Education Ordinary Level Examination in order to be
admitted for pre-university study in junior colleges.
52
students sit for the national General Certificate of Education Advanced Level
Examination. Admission to local universities is largely determined by the grades
students obtain in this major national examination. Junior colleges adopt a lecturetutorial system which serves as a gradual introduction to tertiary education, and to
develop independent learning and self-discipline in students.
Moreover, a pre-university
education in junior colleges is regarded as the most viable option for students who
aspire to a university education.
The government-aided and independent junior colleges are given more freedom, as
compared to the government junior colleges, to design their own curricula to allow their
students to experience a more holistic form of education.
allowed to stray from the key national initiatives.
53
chemistry and biology. Science education in Singapore plays a pivotal role towards the
countrys development as a research and development hub, and has a crucial role in
imparting the skills and knowledge to prepare Singapore students for knowledgebased employment (Lui, 2006).
As can be seen in Figure 2.1, high-stakes national examinations are conducted at the end
of primary, secondary and pre-university courses. The academic grades obtained from
these high-stakes examinations often determine students progression and pathways
along the stages of education (Tan & Ng, 2005; Gregory & Clarke, 2003; Cheah, 1998).
The majority of Singapore students are required to sit for at least three high-stakes
national examinations in the process of advancement from primary to university
education. A typical first year junior college student would therefore have had ten years
of prior education and have sat through two high-stakes national examinations.
54
In regards to the meanings of Thinking Schools and Learning Nation, the Ministry of
Education of Singapore (2007b) elaborates as follows:
Thinking Schools will be learning organisations in every sense,
constantly challenging assumptions, and seeking better ways of doing
things through participation, creativity and innovation.
Thinking
The
The pursuit of the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision has required a change in
mindset concerning classroom teaching in Singapore schools. Since the unveiling of the
vision, many key supporting initiatives have been introduced in all areas of education,
ranging from early childhood to tertiary education. Initiatives, which have a direct
impact on teachers classroom practices, namely, Ability-Driven Education,
Information Technology (IT) Masterplan, Innovation and Enterprise, and Teach
Less, Learn More, are discussed below.
Ability-Driven Education
The Ability-Driven Education initiative, introduced in 1999, aims to equip and prepare
students to meet the challenges in a knowledge economy by taking into consideration
their individual abilities and talents, rather than the sole reliance on examination grades
(Tan, C, 2005a). The Ability-Driven Education initiative represents a paradigm shift
from an Efficiency-Driven Education (Tan, C, 2005a).
55
producing skilled workers for the economy in the most efficient way. In contrast, an
ability-driven education aims to identify and develop the talents and abilities of every
student to the maximum. Former Senior Minister of State for Education, Peter Chen,
(cited in Tan, C, 2005a) provides the following justification on the need for this
initiative:
The education system in a knowledge economy should be to provide a
balanced and well-rounded education that will develop every
individual morally, intellectually, physically, socially and aesthetically
so that his or her full potential can be realised. (p.447)
Under the new revisions in the junior college curriculum, each content-based subject
discipline had been redesigned and pitched at three levels of study differing in breadth
and depth.
Students thus have more flexibility and choice regarding the level of
mastery they wish to pursue in that particular subject. The 2006 revised junior college
curriculum, discussed in more detail in the later sections of this chapter, is intended as
a step, under the umbrella of Ability-Driven Education, towards providing greater
flexibility and diversity in preparing students for a university education. To harness
students individual talents and abilities in an ability-driven education system, teachers
are expected to explore different pedagogical methods that are innovative, interactive
and enjoyable (Tan, C, 2005b).
56
IT Masterplan
The IT Masterplan in the Singapore education system is a blueprint for the integration
of ICT in teaching and learning. Two such blueprints were introduced: IT Masterplan
I in 1997 and IT Masterplan II in 2002. These two initiatives are intended to help
schools design and conduct ICT-infused lessons so as to foster a more innovative and
student-centred learning environment to develop critical thinking skills in students
(Deng & Gopinathan, 2005; Mokhtar, 2005). The IT Masterplan I presents an overall
map on the use of ICT in Singapore schools in order to provide every student access to
an ICT-rich curriculum and school environment (Mokhtar, 2005). The IT Masterplan
II further focuses on the integration of ICT into the curriculum design and the creation
of a more student-centred learning environment (Deng & Gopinathan, 2005).
In addition to the benefits proclaimed by the use ICT in teaching and learning,
Singapore government leaders regard good ICT knowledge as indispensable to working
ably in a knowledge-based economy. Recently, Singapore unveiled plans to be an
Intelligent Nation in 2015 (Siew, 2006). Singapore government leaders envisage that
by 2015 in Singapore, ICT will touch all aspects of peoples lives and affect how they
live, learn, work and play (Tham, 2006). Therefore, it is critical to develop ICT literacy
in every student.
While the Ministry arguably has been generous in providing monetary support to equip
schools with the necessary infrastructure for ICT-based learning, the onus is on school
teachers to effectively utilise and integrate the ICT resources for quality teaching and
learning.
57
quote
by
then
Minister
for
Education
of
Singapore,
Tharman
58
The Prime
The following excerpt from the speech by then Minister for Education of Singapore
Tharman Shanmugaratnam at the Ministry of Education Work Plan Seminar in 2004
(cited in Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 03, October 2005) is provided to
illuminate the essence of Teach Less, Learn More:
It [Teach Less, Learn More] is a call to educators to teach better, to
engage our students and prepare them for life, rather than to teach for
tests and examinations. (p.5)
Teachers are regarded as the heart of Teach Less, Learn More (Contact The
Teachers Digest Issue 03, October, 2005, p.5), as the success of the initiative is
understood to depend on how teachers construct their pedagogical practices. Teachers
are expected to adopt progressive pedagogical approaches, instead of the more
traditional teaching methods, to enhance the quality of learning in classrooms. In
particular, the drill and practice, one-sized-fits-all instruction, and giving formulae
and standard answers methods of teaching (Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 03,
October 2005, p.10), to which Singapore teachers are so familiar and accustomed, are to
59
Less:
To rush through the syllabus
Out of fear of failure
To dispense information only
For a life of tests
Less:
The subject
Grades-centric
Product
Textbook answers
Figure 2.3
Less:
Drill and practice
One-size-fits-all instruction
Telling
Summative and quantitative testing
Set formulae and standard answers
While the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision espouses a more holistic form of
education, high-stakes examinations are not discarded.
Essentially, then, there is a paradox in requiring teachers to promote independent selfdirected learning in students while still demanding teachers to produce quality academic
results in the national examinations, as Hung and co-workers remark:
Schools are therefore put in a position of having to think out of the box
while doing well within the box. This is no simple feat. (p.213)
The issue of how teachers deal with the implementation of initiatives underpinning the
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision is a pertinent concern among international
and local educators (Tan & Ng, 2005; Koh, 2004). The theory developed in this study
to explain how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of
science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum thus has great potential to
facilitate further deliberations on the practicality of implementing initiatives
underpinning the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision in Singapore schools.
61
Vision for
Education
Key
supporting
initiatives
Teach Less,
Learn More
Thinking Schools,
Learning Nation
Ability-Driven
Education
IT Masterplan
Innovation
and Enterprise
Figure 2.4
Location of the 2006 revised junior college curriculum within the new
The key changes to education in Singapore junior colleges, with the implementation of
the 2006 revised junior college curriculum are as follows. First, the examinable
academic subjects under the new junior college curriculum have been redesigned and
pitched at three levels of study differing in breadth and depth (Ministry of Education of
62
Singapore, 2005b). This is to allow the junior college students more choices in the
subjects they wish to study as well as in the level of mastery they wish to pursue in that
particular subject. In order to distinguish between the three levels of study, the subjects
are labelled as Higher One (H1), Higher Two (H2) or Higher Three (H3), each of
which differs in breadth and depth, and each of which has its own syllabus. Table 2.5
shows the differences between the three levels. All the science subjects (physics,
chemistry and biology), are offered at all of the three levels of study (Ministry of
Education of Singapore, 2006a).
Table 2.5
The Three Levels of Study for the Academic Subjects.
H1 Subjects
H2 Subjects
H3 Subjects
Equivalent to half of
H2 subjects in breadth
variety of learning
but similar to H2
subjects in depth.
college curriculum.
63
Second, all students admitted in all junior colleges from 2006 onwards are required to
take a contrasting subject that is outside their area of specialisation, so as to provide a
multi-disciplinary pre-university education (Ministry of Education of Singapore, 2005b).
For example, each arts major student is required to take at least one contrasting subject
from the mathematics or science discipline, and each science major student is required
to take at least one contrasting subject from the arts discipline. The contrasting
subject can be taken at the H1 or H2 level. Contrasting subjects are taken into
account for admission into the two local universities, the National University of
Singapore (NUS) and the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) (Singapore
Examinations and Assessment Board, 2006).
Third, there is an incorporation of new content and topics into the science curriculum to
equip students with knowledge concerning recent trends in science development as well
as in the niche research areas in science (Ministry of Education of Singapore, 2005a).
Fourth, there is a stronger focus on developing understanding, critical thinking, the
ability to ask questions to seek answers and solutions, higher-order thinking skills,
conceptual thinking, and communication skills through student-centred learning
methodologies and the use of ICT in classrooms (Ministry of Education of Singapore,
2006b). Fifth, the format of the General Certificate of Education Advanced Level
Examination, which is jointly developed by the Ministry of Education of Singapore,
University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate and Singapore Examinations
and Assessment Board, has been revised to accommodate the changes made to the
junior college curriculum. A greater emphasis on knowledge processing and application
is sought, as is emphasis on higher-order thinking and analytical skills (Ministry of
Education of Singapore, 2005a).
64
65
objectivity;
integrity;
skills of enquiry;
initiative;
inventiveness.
The science
66
teachers are also required to teach new content that has been added to the revised
curriculum. The new curriculum content covers recent advances in science knowledge
as well as the niche research areas in science. The science teachers are now expected to
adopt progressive and innovative teaching approaches in classrooms as well as to
integrate ICT into their teaching.
assessment criteria which focus more on critical analysis and higher-order thinking
rather than the mere regurgitation of facts and formulae. The tried and tested methods
of teaching are no longer considered to be sufficient to prepare students under the new
assessment format, which emphasises critical analysis.
It is in the light of these innovations and demands that this study examined the issue of
how junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of their science subjects
under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum. In terms of the new paradigm of
education described earlier in this chapter, science teachers are now expected to adopt
progressive teaching practices to infuse in students higher-order thinking and critical
analytical skills, but this same population of teachers is also expected to continue to
deliver good academic results in the national examinations. In the past, the emphasis on
examination results has pushed science teachers to use rote-learning and textbook and
teacher-centric practices. The challenge now for science teachers in Singapore junior
colleges is to accommodate traditional and new educational priorities. The revisions
introduced to Singapore junior colleges signal that the old ways of learning such as
those that rely on individual and dialectic forms of instruction must give way to more
social and distributed epistemologies and that learners need to possess dispositions
not just to learn, but to learn in socially adaptive and technologically enriched ways
(Hung et al., 2009, p.213). Ng (2007, p.243), however, cautions that the quest to
67
achieve the best of both worlds may end up achieving neither of both worlds. This
is a dilemma for science teachers working in junior colleges in Singapore.
CONCLUSION
This chapter has provided the background and context to the study. The chapter is
organised in five sections. The first section examined the links between globalisation
and education policies, and presented cases of education change undertaken to meet the
challenges of globalisation in three countries as well as the case of Singapore. The
second section discussed the role of science education in preparing students to live and
work in a globalised world. The third section provided the overall structure and stages
of education in Singapore schools. The fourth section elaborated on the Thinking
Schools, Learning Nation vision and explained the meanings and intentions of the key
initiatives underpinning this new vision of education in Singapore.
furnished details of the 2006 revised junior college curriculum and identified the new
considerations in the teaching and learning of science in Singapore junior colleges as a
result of the changes introduced to the science curriculum.
To summarise, the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision, launched in 1997, aims
to prepare Singapore students for the world of work, and to facilitate the countrys
transformation into a successful knowledge-based economy. This new paradigm of
education in Singapore espouses a more holistic form of learning, involving the
development of analytical and communication skills through progressive pedagogical
practices and a de-emphasising on the role of examination grades to guide teaching.
Since the introduction of the new vision of education, many supporting key initiatives
had been implemented in Singapore schools. Key initiatives that have a direct impact
on teachers are those of Ability-Driven Education, Information Technology (IT)
68
These
initiatives are intended to transform education in Singapore schools from examinationoriented to passion-driven. However, despite the introduction of these initiatives, the
academic results of students in the national examinations remain the crucial assessment
on the quality of teaching in Singapore schools. Therefore, in pursuing the vision of
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, teachers are expected to teach differently for
different outcomes and yet achieve academic excellence in examinations, an outcome
that has traditionally been associated with teacher-centred classroom practices that are
now regarded as undesirable.
With effect from January 2006, a revised curriculum was implemented in all Singapore
junior colleges.
69
CHAPTER THREE
LITERATURE REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
The process of implementing educational initiatives is simply determined by what
teachers do and think about the initiatives (Fullan, 2007, p.129). A review of relevant
literature revealed that the phenomenon of what teachers do and think about
implementing educational initiatives is largely influenced by the challenges teachers
face during the implementation process as well as the meanings teachers ascribe to the
educational initiatives that are being implemented.
70
outcome of implementation, are largely determined by how teachers deal with these
challenges.
Teachers
71
Subject matter content knowledge not only refers to the understanding of facts, ideas
and concepts within that subject but also to the ways these facts, ideas and concepts are
related and organised, and the methods to test for their validity and reliability
(Calderhead, 1996). Good subject matter content knowledge in teachers is essential for
the development of students correct conceptual understanding about the subject that is
being taught (Ball, 2000). Pedagogical knowledge encompasses a broad understanding
of effective classroom management and instructional strategies, as well as issues on
how students think and learn (Borko & Putnam, 1996). Pedagogical content knowledge,
a concept developed by Shulman (1987, 1986), refers to the amalgamation of subject
matter content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge in a specific context. Teachers
with good pedagogical knowledge would have an understanding of: students prior
knowledge; the best way to present concepts to students for their comprehension; the
most appropriate instructional approach in the teaching of the content; and the
misconceptions students may have and the methods to rectify these misconceptions
(Chen, 2008). Hashweh (2005, p.290) further presents pedagogical content knowledge
as a collection of teacher professional constructions and as a form of knowledge that
preserves the planning and wisdom of practice that the teacher acquires when repeatedly
teaching a certain topic.
72
While
pedagogical knowledge provides teachers with the broad knowledge of teaching and
learning methods, pedagogical content knowledge allows teachers to organise
instructional activities that meet both the objectives of the curriculum and the learning
needs of the students.
(cited in Osborne, Simon & Collins, 2003, p.1069) point out that because teachers did
not have the content knowledge, errors of fact were made and opportunities to elaborate
on student understandings and to diagnose misunderstandings were missed.
73
Under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum, Singapore junior college science
teachers are likely to be involved in teaching arts major students. The science teachers
would therefore need to take into consideration the epistemological aspect of these
students for effective teaching and learning (Schommer-Aikins, Duell & Barker, 2003).
Non-science major students have been reported to encounter difficulties in interpreting
scientific data (Bramble, 2005).
scientific data for graph plotting and problem solving are integral components of
science subjects such as physics, Singapore junior college science teachers may need to
readjust their existing pedagogical content knowledge to help the arts major students
understand the science content well.
74
professional knowledge when teaching their science subjects under the revised junior
college curriculum. As detailed in the previous chapter, the revised science curriculum
has incorporated new science content, adopted a new mode of assessment which places
a stronger emphasis on higher-order thinking abilities, and advocated the use of
progressive pedagogies in the classrooms.
opportunity to understand how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the
issue of acquiring new professional knowledge to effectively teach their science
subjects under the revised junior college curriculum.
Engaging Students
As explained in the previous chapter, reforms in science education usually demand
science teachers to adopt progressive teaching approaches in the classrooms. In such
learning environment, students are expected to undertake a greater responsibility in
planning, organising, and synthesising the subject content (Wu & Huang, 2007,
p.730).
75
Table 3.1
Student Engagement.
Three Facets of
Student Engagement
Behavioural
Emotional
Cognitive
Wu and Huang (2007) further investigated if there is any difference in the levels of
behavioural, emotional and cognitive engagement in students between teacher-centred
and student-centred instruction. They report that while student-centred instruction is
better able to engage students emotionally vis--vis teacher-centred instruction, the
mode of instruction has little impact on students performances on achievement tests.
76
They believe that different instructional approaches merely provide students with
different opportunities to engage emotionally, but not necessary cognitively, in the
learning of science.
Therefore, to engage students in their learning, it is also important for teachers to take
into consideration students approaches and orientations towards knowledge acquisition.
According to Felder and Brent (2005), students approaches to studying and orientations
to learning can be characterised in the three ways shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2
Students Common Approaches to Studying and Orientations to Learning.
Approach
Orientation
Characteristics
Surface
Reproducing
Deep
Meaning
Strategic
Achieving
77
In addition, students seem to prefer instruction that matches their learning style
preferences (Terry, cited in Melton, 2003). In this regard, Felder and Spurlin (2005)
elaborate as follows:
Some [students] prefer to work with concrete information (facts,
experimental data) while others are more comfortable with abstractions
(theories, symbolic information, mathematical models). Some are
partial to visual presentation of information pictures, diagrams,
flowcharts, schematics, etc., and others get more from verbal
explanations. Some like to learn by trying things out and seeing and
analysing what happens, and others would rather reflect on things they
plan to do and understand as much as they can about them before
actually attempting them. (p.103)
Thus, not all students welcome opportunities to interact and collaborate with peers for
knowledge acquisition. According to Melton (2003), there are no less than twenty
instruments available for use in determining students learning styles. One particular
instrument, the Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales, is highlighted here
due to its relevance to the context of this study.
specifically to be used with senior high school students (Melton, 2003), the level in
which Singapore junior college students are studying.
Table 3.3
Students Learning Styles as Identified in the Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning
Style Scales.
Categories
Characteristics
Competitive
Collaborative
Participative
Avoidant
Independent
Dependent
As mentioned in the previous chapter, researchers and scholars are urging teachers to
promote student-centred learning in classrooms to achieve scientific literacy in students.
79
sums up the reason why students may be resistive towards changing their preferred style
of learning:
Human nature being what it is, however, it tends to seek its motivation
in the agreeable rather than in the disagreeable, in direct pleasure rather
than in alternative pain. (p.29)
Teachers are likely to revert to traditional methods of teaching when they perceive that
their efforts to promote student-centred modes of learning are regarded as wasteful
digressions by their students (Nanwani & Ang, 2006, p.616). Students approaches to
studying and orientation to learning are also influenced by their knowledge background
(Davis, 2003), as well as their motivation and attitudes towards teaching and learning
(Kahle & Boone, 2000). Nanwani and Ang (2006) observe that majority of Singapore
secondary school science students are not really interested in learning science although
the students claim to be academically strong in this discipline. Singapore junior college
science teachers perspectives on the learning attitudes of their students were examined
in this study.
The dominant epistemological approach students adopt towards the study of science is
that of positivism (Samarapungavan, Westby & Bodner, 2006), and their preferred
style of learning science is through rote memorisation and mathematical computation
80
(Tan & Ng, 2005; Yerrick, Pedersen & Arnason, 1998). Despite the widely reported
advantages on constructivist-based learning, students may still rely strongly on teachers
to provide them with facts and knowledge (Klein, 2001). Students have been found to
often regard the knowledge attained directly from teachers as a safer and more
trustworthy option than the knowledge acquired through constructivist-based learning
activities which are perceived as risk taking affairs (Campbell et al., 2001; Wallace &
Lounden, 1998). This explains why students are generally happy to receive direct
transmission of facts from teachers, memorise these facts and regurgitate them in
examinations (Monk & Dillon, 2000). Students may be inclined to adopt the safe
option particularly when examination grades are at stake. Thus, to construct their
own knowledge in learning may not be a priority to students (Fairbrother, 2000). This
is especially so for students who adopt a surface approach in learning and who often
cannot appreciate the efforts made by teachers to promote active learning in the
classroom (Campbell et al., 2001). Though students may be engaged in student-centred
learning activities, as insisted upon by their teachers, their lack of appreciation and
understanding of such learning activities may impede the quality of their learning (Keys
& Bryan, 2001). Students who are accustomed to rote learning may resist changes
towards other forms of knowledge acquisition such as group learning where they need
to play a more active role during lessons. As these empirical studies suggest, students
inclination towards teaching and learning can direct teaching practices in classrooms.
This was one of the main issues examined in this study.
81
Simon, 2000). Anxiety towards the learning of science is prevalent among students and
the level of anxiety appears to be higher in the arts major students who are studying
science as a minor subject (Udo, Ramsey & Mallow, 2004). Science anxiety refers to
feelings of tension and stress that impede with the knowledge construction,
development of skills and abilities in the learning of science (Britner & Pajares, 2006).
The level of engagement in various science learning activities by students is also
affected by their self-efficacy beliefs, which are in turn affected by their degree of
science anxiety (Britner & Pajares, 2006; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003).
Asking
students, who exhibit fear and anxiety towards the learning of science, to construct their
own knowledge can be a daunting and stressful task for the students (Kember, 2001).
Hargreaves (1998) has commented that good teaching has to do with positive emotions.
It will not be wrong to also say that good and effective learning has to do with positive
emotions. Thus, teachers need to understand that students have to handle both the
cognitive and emotional aspects in classroom learning (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003).
82
These empirical studies, therefore, highlighted the need to examine the influence of
students attitudes towards teaching practices. The teacher participants in this study
were enquired on their perspectives with regards to students approaches towards
learning.
implementing curricula initiatives (Keys, 2005; Peers, Diezmann & Watters, 2003).
The following comment by a research participant in the study conducted by Peers,
Diezmann and Watters (2003) is presented to illustrate this point:
The time demands on teachers are growing and growing and
growingIts not that the [teachers] dont want to [do a good job
implementing the science syllabus]. Its that they physically dont have
the time. (p.100)
The issue of limited time is likely to influence teachers on their choices of classroom
practices. In a rush to complete the required syllabus, teachers are likely to resort to the
traditional teaching of chalk and talk at the expense of using student-centred learning
83
which is more time consuming, or teach by rote memory whereby students are
encouraged to memorise and reproduce verbatim textbook phrases (Windschitl, 2002;
Hodson, 1998). The quality of science learning certainly does commensurate with the
amount of teaching time teachers have (Rennie, Goodrum & Hackling, 2001, p.492).
The participants in this study were enquired if they faced similar concerns.
Teachers are encouraged to use a broad range of teaching strategies in the classroom to
offer students a variety of creative and imaginative learning experiences so as to capture
their interest and active participation.
include making models of DNA in a genetics laboratory or having students ride carts
round a circular track to appreciate the concept of angular momentum (National
Research Council of the United States, 1997). Planning and executing such innovative
and creative teaching practices certainly require more planning and instructional time
which may not always be available to teachers. The main concern for teachers is to
finish teaching the prescribed syllabus and teachers often face insufficient curriculum
time to do so (Windschitl, 2002; Bell, 1998). The process of how the study participants
balanced the need to finish teaching the prescribed syllabi and introduced innovative
ways of teaching their science subjects was examined in this study.
The availability of resources for lesson preparation and classroom teaching is another
major concern for teachers.
84
2002). However, there are few textbooks or instructional materials that are devoted to
the new teaching methods and new subject content often required by reformed curricula,
and this could result in teachers being unable to effectively implement the changes
prescribed in the new curricula demands (Kesidou & Roseman, 2002; Schneider &
Krajcik, 2002). The availability of quality teaching resources and curriculum materials
are important factors that contribute to the success in the implementation of reformed
science curriculum by teachers (Fensham, 2006). Teacher who are able to make use of
educative materials for content knowledge and pedagogical practices have been reported
to have more success in implementing reformed curriculum (Schneider & Krajcik,
2002).
The availability of teaching resources for ICT teaching and learning is also a concern
for teachers (Bennett, 2003; Granger et al., 2002). Teachers face the issue of the lack of
suitable ICT teaching resources, such as multimedia CD-ROMs as well as shortage of
computers.
internet connection for ICT-infused lessons. In addition, insufficient time for planning
and the absence of technical support for setting up of equipment have prevented
teachers from successfully implementing technology-related curricula initiatives
(Penuel et al., 2007).
The provision of a supportive environment is certainly imperative for effective ICTinfused lessons to be carried out. A classroom that is conducive for collaborative
learning and ICT-infused lessons would be one with tables arranged to facilitate group
discussions, and equipment, such as portable computers and overhead projector,
installed for teachers and students to use. An example of such a classroom is provided
in Figure 3.2.
85
Figure 3.2
An ICT-enabled classroom.
However, not all schools are equipped with such classroom setup and with the necessary
resources. The absence of such infrastructure and resources may result in teachers not
being able to effectively conduct student-centred learning activities and to facilitate
ICT-infused lessons. Findings from the aforementioned empirical studies highlighted
the need to examine if teachers faced insufficient time to implement the intended
initiatives.
Hence, one of the main concerns in this study was to examine the
perspectives and practices of the participants regarding curriculum time and teaching
resources.
Teachers are encouraged to collaborate with each other in order to overcome the
aforementioned challenges when implementing educational initiatives.
Teachers
86
practice, examine evidence about the relationship between practice and student
outcomes, and make changes that improve teaching and learning. When teachers work
collaboratively with peers, they develop new understandings and new classroom
practices, thereby facilitating the implementation of curricula initiatives (Anderson,
2002).
complex issue. They believe that teachers do not have to collaborate on all matters; it is
more important for teachers to maintain their individuality yet pool their expertise to
affect a wider range of students (Nolan & Meister, 2000, p.216). In support, Liew
(2005, p.149) suggests that a more realistic model for teacher communities should
acknowledge the twin virtues of collective and individual action, where teachers
participate in dynamic arrangements of selective collaboration, sharing and combining
the results of independent and interdependent work.
87
experiences (and how) these new experiences influence the construction of reality
(Poole, cited in van den Berg, 2002, p.579).
educational initiatives are further translated into teachers classroom practices which in
turn shape the implementation process (Rigano & Ritchie, 2003). Rigano and Ritchie
(2003, p.301) further comment that if teachers are to be the key players in making the
reform process work, then researchers and reformists should try to understand how
teachers give meaning to proposed curricular changes and their implementation.
Three critical issues pertain to how teachers relate to educational initiatives. They are:
the perceived benefits of initiatives to teaching and learning; congruence between
initiatives and teachers professional orientation; and teachers sense of ownership
towards initiatives. These issues are discussed in the following sub-sections.
88
Singapore primary school teachers are reluctant to integrate the initiatives underpinning
the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision into classroom lessons as these
initiatives may threaten the academic achievement of the students.
This study
examined if such perspectives were found in the participants who, too, were required to
implement similar initiatives when teaching their science subjects under the 2006
revised junior college curriculum.
The correlation between the perceived significance of educational initiatives and the
intention to implement these initiatives can be attributed to the teachers commitments
towards students academic learning as well as students personal development which
transcend above all other aspects of school work (Nolan & Meister, 2000). Such strong
commitment may even affect the work-life balance of teachers. For example, teachers
are willing to spend long hours in schools and to prepare lesson materials over
weekends at homes for the benefit of students (Yu & Lau, 2006; Kennedy, 2005).
Teachers immediate concerns on how educational initiatives benefit students learning
are clearly presented in the following remarks by Owston (2007):
But unless teachers ultimately see students benefiting from an
innovation or other evident advantages of the innovation, the
likelihood is small of them being motivated to sustain it even with
extra funding, equipment, support from others inside or outside of the
school, or policy directives. (p.75)
The failure to improve the academic results of students despite implementing innovative
teaching practices may lead to teachers experiencing incoherence in the translation of
policies to practices (Hairon, 2003, pp.108109). This could further result in feelings
of scepticism, frustration and uncertainty in teachers when implementing educational
initiatives. Singapore primary school teachers were found to exhibit such feelings when
89
implementing initiatives such as Teach Less, Learn More and Innovation and
Enterprise (Hairon, 2003).
Teachers, as Fullan (2007) asserts, need support to understand and to believe in the
value of the educational initiatives they are asked to implement.
Teachers are
Table 3.4
Classroom Presses Teachers are Constantly Stressed with.
The Classroom Presses
The press for immediacy and concreteness: Teachers engage in an estimated 200,
000 interchanges a year, most of them spontaneous and requiring action.
The press for multidimensionality and simultaneity: Teachers must carry out a range
of operations simultaneously, providing materials, interacting with one pupil and
monitoring the others, assessing progress, attending to needs and behaviours.
The press for adapting to ever-changing conditions or unpredictability: Anything
can happen. Schools are reactive partly because they must deal with unstable input
classes have different personalities from year to year; a well-planned lesson may
fall flat; what works with one child is ineffective for another; what works one day
may not work the next.
The press for personal involvement with students: Teachers discover that they need
to develop and maintain personal relationships and that for most students
meaningful interaction is a precursor for academic learning.
Source: Huberman (cited in Fullan, 2007)
Thus, as the literature suggests, the fervour in implementing new initiatives rests on
how teachers see the benefits of these initiatives in enhancing teaching and learning.
90
The participants perspectives on how had the new educational initiatives underpinning
the 2006 revised junior college curriculum helped in enhancing the quality of science
education was therefore one of the main issues examined in this study.
educational initiatives are congruent with their professional orientations (van Veen &
Sleegers, 2006).
contrary to their educational philosophy, they may respond with various kinds of
resistance (Falk & Drayton, 2004, p.383).
teachers identities as teachers sense of self, knowledge and beliefs, dispositions and
orientation towards work and change. Enyedy, Goldberg and Welsh (2006) further
posit that teachers identities include relationships with students and school
administration, as well as with the discipline the teachers are teaching.
Teachers epistemological beliefs, which concern their views about nature and the
acquisition of knowledge, are likely to influence their pedagogical approaches towards
achieving their teaching goals (Kang & Wallace, 2005). These internally constructed
91
beliefs are so powerful that they are able to override the externally imposed aspects of
contexts in shaping pedagogical choices (Smith & Southerland, 2007, p.418). This is
because, as Pajares (cited in Smith & Southerland, 2007, p.399) explains, teachers
invest emotionally and intellectually in their beliefs, and therefore, teachers will hold
on to these beliefs unless they are sufficiently challenged.
Teachers epistemological beliefs further determine the roles they maintain in the
classrooms (Lloyd & Rezba, 2004). Examples of teachers teaching roles and their
corresponding classroom practices are provided in Table 3.5.
Table 3.5
Teaching Roles and Corresponding Classroom Practices.
Teaching Roles
Classroom Practices
Catalyst
Push students in class to use their minds and think and apply
what they are learning.
Interact with students on a one-to-one basis.
Guide
Pied Piper
Friend
Caterer
Mother
Therefore, the impact of educational change on their teaching roles will be a matter of
concern to the teachers. As Schmidt and Datnow (2005) observe, teachers show little
concern with regards to change at school level, but greater emotion is attached, both
92
positive and negative, when the teachers roles in the classrooms are affected by the
change in educational policies.
Roehrig, Kruse and Kern (2007) have classified teachers into the following three
categories: Traditional Teachers; Mechanistic Implementers; and Inquiry Teachers.
This classification is based on the teachers classroom practices and the extent of
implementing the intended educational initiatives by the teachers. Table 3.6 compares
the classroom practices and the extent of implementing educational initiatives of the
teachers in each category.
93
Table 3.6
Three Categories of Teachers.
Category
Traditional
Teachers
Mechanistic
Implementers
Inquiry
Teachers
Drawing upon such findings, this study investigated if the Singapore junior college
science teachers can be similarly grouped into the aforementioned categories with
regards to their classroom practices and the extent of implementing the initiatives
underpinning the revised junior college curriculum.
Sense of Ownership
New educational initiatives are often planned and decided by policy makers, which are
then channelled to schools for implementation. This top-down structure does not allow
teachers to develop a sense of ownership over the implementation of the curricula
initiatives.
curriculum changes (Evers & Arat, 2004; Vidovich & ODonoghue, 2003). Involving
teachers in the planning of educational reforms is more likely to generate
implementation success as teachers possess intimate knowledge regarding the local
contexts of implementation and the obdurate practicalities of classroom situations
(Kirk & MacDonald, 2001, p.564).
An absence of ownership often results in teachers not appreciating the intentions behind
educational change.
implementing the intended curricula initiatives (Evers & Arat, 2004). The presence of
negativity in the participants with regards to implementing the initiatives underpinning
the revised curriculum was examined in this study.
Teachers do not wish to be mere implementers of curriculum changes. They aspire for
autonomy in the design of curricula initiatives (Evers & Arat, 2004; Hairon, 2003).
According Evers and Arat (2004, p.216) teachers want a real voice from the initial
brainstorming phase all the way to the implementation stage.
involved in the decision making process with regards to curriculum revisions and
curriculum developments are likely to demonstrate a greater sense of ownership and
enthusiasm during the implementation phase (Coenders, Terlouw & Dijkstra, 2008;
Elizondo-Montemayor et al., 2008.). This study examined if the aspiration for more
autonomy in the design of the revised junior college curriculum can be found in the
study participants.
It is interesting to note that while teachers wish to have a greater sense of ownership in
developing curricula initiatives, they also appreciate the provision of guidelines and
instructions to help them develop the new curricula materials. Teachers feel uncertain
95
on what and how to teach, especially if there is no written curriculum for them to follow
(Nolan & Meister, 2000). This, in turn, leads to anxiety and frustration in teachers.
Providing teachers with a sense of ownership in educational change is, thus, a delicate
issue, as Pint (2005) remarks:
Give too much direction, and teachers lose any sense of ownership.
Give too little, and they feel that they do not know what to do. (p.2)
Nolan and Meister (2000), however, believe that the successful implementation of
educational initiatives does not necessary depend on the teachers commitment to the
initiatives per se. In this regard, they elaborate as follows:
Commitment to students and colleagues, not a sense of ownership or
commitment to the innovation, may be a more critical factor in teacher
willingness to implement an initiativeAdministrators may find
teachers more willing to implement change by honing their natural
commitment to students rather than by developing strategies for
building allegiance to the initiative itself. (p.213)
Drawing upon the aforementioned scholarly advice on the importance of teachers sense
of ownership towards successful implementation of educational initiatives, this study
examined if the participants regard themselves as owners of the initiatives
underpinning the revised junior college curriculum.
96
Deng and Gopinathan (2006) put forth a set of conditions that are crucial to teacher
learning. The set of conditions is as follows:
1. Teachers need to have opportunities to understand more clearly assumptions
underlying the reform initiatives and to figure out the implications for their practice
in order to forge an intellectual engagement with the reform rationales and ideas,
with the new resources and technology provided, and with the new instructional
approaches.
2. Teachers need opportunities, especially in a secure and non-threatening environment,
to re-examine their beliefs and teaching practices, only then will they be able to
undergo a set of epistemological shifts changing instructional resources and
technology, changing their beliefs, and reinventing their classroom practices.
3. Teachers need greater and more varied opportunities to interact with colleagues,
both in and out of the school.
4. Teachers need to be part of active, larger communities that can provide support and
ideas to improving teaching and learning in the classrooms, and these communities
include school principals and other stakeholders in education.
5. Teachers need opportunities to experience learning in ways consistent with the
reform initiatives.
6. Teachers need support and advice of a principal or a head of department who
understands the demands reform places on teaching and what it takes to change
teachers roles and practices.
7. Teachers need to learn to fashion a new culture of teaching that would encourage
reflection, experimentation, innovation, on-going learning and uncertainty, a culture
in which creativity and innovation are encouraged for everyone teachers, students,
principals and parents.
97
8. Teachers especially need time and mental space; while school-based workshops are
desirable, there is also a need to experience learning in new and different contexts,
and with teachers from outside ones own school.
Singapore teachers, according to Koh and Luke (2009), still lack the knowledge and
skills to incorporate holistic, developmental and formative assessments into their
classroom practices. Thus, in the context of Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, there
is an imperative need to develop assessment literacy in Singapore teachers. Brookhart,
Moss and Long (2010) believe that assessment literacy in teachers is the key towards
the successful integration of progressive pedagogies in high-stakes formative
assessment educational system. The Ministry of Education of Singapore has provided
various professional development programmes to prepare Singapore school teachers for
educational changes under the new educational framework of Thinking Schools,
Learning Nation (Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 03, October, 2005). The
efficacy of these programmes in helping the school teachers implement initiatives such
as Teach Less, Learn More as well as Innovation and Enterprise will be a matter of
concern to both teacher educators and policy makers in Singapore. The perspectives of
the participants with regards to the usefulness and practicality of these professional
development programmes were enquired upon in this study.
98
Characteristics of
Intended Initiatives
Need
Clarity
Complexity
Quality/Practicality
Local Roles
District
Community
Principal
Teacher
IMPLEMENTATION
External Influence
Government and other
agencies
Figure 3.3
of educational initiatives.
Source: Fullan (2007)
99
Teachers, according to Crossley and Guthrie (cited in Watson & Manning, 2008, p.706),
are not irrational opponents of change. Teachers will rationally weigh alternatives
according to the realities they perceive in response to a new curriculum or pedagogic
strategy (Watson & Manning, 2008, p.706). Fullan (2007, p.75) believes that many
teachers are willing to adopt change at the individual classroom level under the right
conditions such as: clear and practical policy directives; support from district
administration and school principals; opportunity to interact with other teachers;
advocacy from teachers union; and outside resource assistance.
Spektor-Levy, Eylon and Scherz (2008) further offer a set of perspectives on the
facilitation of teacher change. This set of perspectives is outlined in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7
Perspectives on Teacher Change.
Elements of Teacher Change
Change as training change is something that is done to teachers, that is, teachers
are changed.
Change as adaptation teachers change in response to something; they adapt their
practice to changed conditions.
Change as personal development teachers seek to change in an attempt to
improve their performance or develop additional skills or strategies.
Change as local reform teachers change something for reasons associating with
personal growth.
Change as systemic restructuring teachers enact the change policies of the
system.
Change as growth of learning teachers change inevitably through professional
activity; teachers are themselves learners who work in learning community.
Source: Spektor-Levy, Eylon & Scherz (2008)
100
101
6. When teachers experiences with a school change arouses their interest in taking a
responsible role in further school change of a similar nature, they are likely to
become more receptive to further changes in general.
Adding on to the above propositions, Zembylas and Barker (2007, p.252) assert that
change is not about forcing all teachers to subscribe enthusiastically to new ideas and
therefore, a reform process needs to allow teachers to carve out spaces for themselves
in order to work individually and collaboratively and find ways to reflect on their
practices.
In
102
Drake and Sherin (2006) further propose that every teacher has his or her own model
of curriculum use that involves the three chronological steps of: read; evaluate; and
adapt. They go on to explain as follows:
By read, we mean the process of looking at any curricular materials,
including the teachers guide and student workbook pages. Evaluate
involves judging the curricular materials according to criteria
determined by the teacher. This could include teachers making
decisions about the appropriateness of the lesson for the students or for
the teacher, the order of the activities, the materials to be used, or the
expected student responses. Adapt means making significant
curricular changes in a lesson. Again, these changes primarily involve
either the presentation of the conceptual material or the role of the
teacher and/or students in the lesson. (p.167)
Drake and Sherin (2006) also assert that teachers pattern of adaptation rests on the
following three premises: their early memories on learning the subjects which they are
currently teaching; their current perceptions of themselves as learners of the subjects
they are currently teaching; and their interaction with family members with regards to
the subjects they are currently teaching. Furthermore, teachers adapt in ways that are
consistent with their own moral values and concerns (Zembylas & Barker, 2007,
p.252). The adaptation of teaching practices and instructional materials can result in
improvements made to teaching and learning (Arat & Szemerszky, 2004; Churchill &
Williamson, 2004), thus contributing towards teachers professional development.
These empirical studies suggest that teachers implementing educational initiatives are
likely to be involved in some form of adaptation. One of the main concerns in this
study, therefore, was to understand the patterns of adaptation of Singapore junior
college science teachers in teaching their science subjects under the 2006 revised junior
college curriculum.
103
Luehman (cited in Barab & Luehman, 2003) describes teachers adaptation of curricula
innovations as a customisation process which consists of the following four
components: identifying local needs; critiquing the innovation in light of these needs;
visualising possible scenarios of implementation; and finally making plans or decisions
regarding the implementation.
Under this representation, the implementation experience, which in turn affects the
implementation process, is equal to the sum of teachers perceptions towards
educational initiatives, design of the educational initiatives and classroom culture.
Barab and Luehman (2003) believe that the variation in teachers implementation
experience is largely due to classroom culture. They further provide the following
explanation on the meaning of classroom culture:
when we use the phrase classroom culture we are acknowledging
available tools and resources (including computers, internet access,
supplemental texts), classroom norms (including division of labour,
rules,
expectations),
administrative
external
expectations,
classroom
standardised
pressures
testing,
(including
parental
104
Since teachers are likely to teach according to the culture of the classrooms, the
impact of this phenomenon on the classroom practices of the participants was examined
in this study. This study also offered opportunities to understand the issues of local
adaptation as well as curricular diffusion, as identified by Barab and Luehman (2003),
in the teaching and learning of science in Singapore junior colleges under the new
revisions.
105
Context
Country, Demographics, Age, Gender
Stages 1 & 2
Locus of control
Type of change
Initiator of change
Objective of change
Stage 3
Teachers involvement in the change
Stage 4
Alterations in the teachers work
Stage 5
Teachers affective response to alterations
Stage 6
Teachers disposition toward future change
Figure 3.4
106
heavily influence the teachers involvement (Stage 3) in the educational change process.
Teachers involvement becomes the primary determinant on the alterations in the
teachers work (Stage 4). The alterations in the teachers work, in turn, result in how
teachers feel about the change process (Stage 5). The teachers affective responses
further establish their disposition towards future educational change (Stage 6). The
research participants in this study were examined if they, too, underwent such similar
stages during the implementation process. Such comparison would be interesting and
informative as Singapore was not among the nine countries studied by Collet, Menlo
and Rosenblatt (2004).
It is proclaimed at the outset of this study that no theory on how Singapore junior
college science teachers deal with the implementation of educational initiatives
underpinning the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision existed prior to this study.
A number of non-empirical studies regarding the possibility of realising the vision in
Singapore schools have been reported by researchers such as Aaron Koh (Koh, 2004),
Ng Pak Tee (Ng, 2005), Charlene Tan (Tan, C, 2005a) as well as Jason Tan (Tan, J,
2005). These studies carry the following premises:
107
Efforts to promote the holistic development of Singapore students will simply fall
victim to the intense inter-school competition for academic banding, and the
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision is not likely to take root in a
fundamental manner in Singapore schools (Ng, 2005; Tan, C, 2005a; Tan, J, 2005).
CONCLUSION
This chapter has provided an extensive review of literature related to this study. The
review, based on the conceptual framework drawn up, was organised in three sections.
Collectively the three sections served to provide an understanding of the phenomena of
what teachers do and think with regards to implementing educational initiatives.
The first section examined the challenges teachers commonly face when implementing
educational initiatives. The challenges can be conceptualised into three inter-related
categories, namely, acquisition and construction of new professional knowledge,
engaging students, and working with insufficient time and limited resources. The ways
teachers deal with these challenges influence teaching and learning practices in
classrooms, which in turn shape the outcome of educational change.
108
The second section discussed the meanings teachers ascribe to the intended educational
initiatives. Teachers act according to what these initiatives mean to them. Three issues
are especially important to teachers in how they understand the intended educational
initiatives.
The third section reviewed the theoretical propositions that have been developed by
researchers to understand the phenomenon of what teachers do and think with regards
to implementing educational initiatives. The theoretical propositions discussed here
range from theoretical descriptions to elaborate models on the process of curriculum
implementation. As proclaimed at the outset of this study, no theoretical propositions
on how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the implementation of
initiatives underpinning the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision existed prior to
this study. The substantive theory developed in this study is, therefore, a significant
contribution to facilitating discussions among teachers, school leaders, researchers, and
policy makers concerning the fruition of the vision in Singapore junior colleges. The
next chapter discusses the research framework and methodology adopted in this study.
109
CHAPTER FOUR
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
This chapter is concerned with the theoretical foundations as well as the research design
and methodology associated with the study, which aimed at generating substantive
theory on how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of
science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum. There are seven sections to
this chapter. The first section describes and justifies the theoretical framework adopted
in this study as well as the rationale for using the qualitative approach. The second
section presents the central research question and guiding research questions, and
explains how these questions were generated based on the theoretical framework. The
third section explains the rationale for using the grounded theory research methodology
as well as the technical issues associated with the methodology such as research site,
theoretical sampling and selection of research participants. The fourth and fifth sections
examine the methods of data collection and data analysis respectively. The sixth section
delinates the strategies employed to establish trustworthiness of the study and the
seventh section outlines the parameters of the study.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Theoretical framework refers to a set of assumptions, concepts and specific social
theories that provides orientations or sweeping ways to see and think about the social
world (Neuman, 2006, p.74).
(ODonoghue, 2007). The theoretical framework of this study comprised two interrelated components, namely, the research paradigm and the specific theoretical position
110
assumptions, concepts, or propositions that orient thinking and research (Bogdan &
Biklen, 2003, p.22), while theoretical position refers to the specific social theory, within
the research paradigm, within which the study was conceptualised.
As mentioned earlier, the purpose of this study was to generate substantive theory on
how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under
the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
frameworks through which people make sense of the world and it is through these
frameworks that people construct their realities and define situations (Woods, 1983,
p.7). From their definitions, it can be seen that interpretivism and perspectives share
111
similar philosophical roots. Thus, the interpretivist research paradigm was especially
appropriate for this study.
112
particular, the process of teaching and learning of science under the new educational
framework in Singapore junior colleges. This process was to be understood in the
natural setting of a school and in the context of the education system in Singapore.
Secondly, the study sought to understand the participants perspectives and
interpretations, and how their perspectives and interpretations were translated into
actions. Thirdly, this study aimed to build substantive theory on how science teachers
deal with the teaching of a revised science curriculum. These three considerations
were addressed with the adopted theoretical framework a qualitative interpretive study
utilising the theoretical position of symbolic interactionism.
adopting this framework was a pragmatic one in view of the nature of the research
problem.
113
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The central research question in this study, formulated within the qualitative
interpretivist research paradigm and through the adoption of the specific theoretical
position of symbolic interactionism, was: how do Singapore junior college science
teachers deal with the teaching of their science subjects under the 2006 revised junior
college curriculum? The central research question was answered through addressing
five specific aims that were constructed based on the described theoretical framework,
with the help of guiding questions.
The specific aims and guiding questions were formulated based on the components that
constituted what is known as perspectives which, as mentioned earlier, were sensemaking frameworks. These components were: participants intentions and the reasons
given by the participants for having these intentions; participants strategies for realising
their intentions and the reasons given by the participants for using these strategies; the
significance which participants attached to their intentions and the strategies, and the
reasons given by the participants for such significance; and the outcomes expected by
the participants as a result of their actions and the reasons given by the participants for
expecting these outcomes (ODonoghue, 2007).
114
Specific Aim 2:
Specific Aim 3:
115
Specific Aim 4:
Specific Aim 5:
116
The guiding questions were developed in accord with the theoretical position adopted in
the study symbolic interactionism. The first four sets of guiding questions had similar
orientations to Blumers first two premises while the fifth set of guiding questions was
rooted in Blumers third premise. These guiding questions were not put forth to the
participants as phrased above, but rather reworded into conversational data collection
questions. As the data collection questions were employed for the purpose of collecting
data to help answer the research question (Punch, 2005), they were formulated to
examine the participants perspectives with regards to the teaching of their subjects
under the revised curriculum. The data collection questions were initially general in
scope and they were restructured when themes were discovered from the interviews.
The list of the initial data collection questions is shown in Appendix A.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Grounded Theory
Grounded theory was employed as the research methodology in this study. This study
adopted the grounded theory methodology that is advocated by Strauss and Corbin
(1998, 1990). According to these authors, grounded theory research methodology uses
a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived grounded theory about
a phenomenon. A grounded theory is more likely to resemble the reality as compared
to one that is derived by putting together a series of concepts based on experience or
solely through speculation (Strauss & Corbin, 1998, p.12).
The choice of using grounded theory as the research methodology rested on two factors.
Firstly, grounded theory shares similar theoretical foundations to that of symbolic
interactionism (ODonoghue, 2007; Neuman; 2006; Jackson, 2003).
According to
Strauss (1987, p.6), grounded theory has its roots in the philosophical and sociological
117
traditions which assume that change is a constant feature of social life, and which
place emphasis on the importance of understanding social interaction and social process.
Methodology refers to the general logic and theoretical perspective of a research
project (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003, p.31), and thus it is critical that the theoretical
perspective espoused within the methodology is compatible to the overall theoretical
framework of the study.
Secondly, the use of grounded theory research methodology best addressed the research
aim of building substantive theory concerning a phenomenon that tends to be oriented
towards action and process (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p.38), such as how Singapore
junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the revised
junior college curriculum.
approach and strategy to study the research problem that was congruent to the adopted
theoretical framework through a set of systematic procedures for inquiry and data
analysis (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
Research Site
This study was conducted in one government junior college in Singapore. This school
was chosen as it was the first public junior college to be presented the School
Distinction Award (Ministry of Education of Singapore, 2006c). This prestigious
award is given to schools that had demonstrated exemplary school processes and
practices.
A grounded theory study does not require multi-sites but rather events and incidents
that are indicative of the phenomenon that is being studied (Strauss and Corbin, 1990,
118
p.190). Grounded theory studies, in educational research, at a single research site have
been conducted by researchers such Bray (2004).
Access to the research site was granted from October 2007 to March 2008 by the
Ministry of Education of Singapore. Written consent was further obtained from the
principal of the junior college for the study to be conducted within the premises of the
college and within this period of time.
It was ascertained prior to the commencement of the study that the population of science
teachers in the junior college had sufficient variation in terms of gender, age, and years
of teaching experience to support a grounded theory study. At the commencement of
the study, there were 43 science teachers teaching in the junior college, of which 18
were physics teachers, 19 were chemistry teachers, and six were biology teachers. A
group of seven science teachers was selected to provide the first set of data. Maximum
variation sampling (Mertens, 1998), with variation in the teaching subject, gender and
119
years of teaching experience, was used to select these teachers. Among the seven
teachers, three were physics teachers, two were biology teachers and two were
chemistry teachers. Data collected from these seven teachers were analysed (details
regarding the methods of data collection and analysis are provided in the subsequent
sections of this chapter). Themes and propositions were generated from the analysis. A
second group of participants comprising five science teachers was next recruited to
provide a new set of data to be used to validate the generated themes and propositions,
as well as to check if there were new insights with regards to the process of teaching the
revised science curriculum. The demographics of the 12 teachers are shown in Figure
4.1.
First
Group of
Science
Teachers
Second
Group of
Science
Teachers
Figure 4.1
Name
(Pseudonym)
Age
Gender
Years of Teaching
Experience
Diane
Early 30s
Female
Margaret
Late 20s
Female
Michael
Late 50s
Male
25
Jane
Late 20s
Female
Nancy
Late 20s
Female
Martin
Late 20s
Male
Denise
Mid 20s
Female
Bert
Late 30s
Male
12
Cindy
Early 20s
Female
Sophie
Late 50s
Female
25
Marianne
Early 20s
Female
0.5
Melissa
Mid 20s
Female
Teaching
Subject
Physics
Biology
Chemistry
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
This structure of having two groups of teachers allowed theoretical sensitivity and
theoretical saturation to be established in the study which in turn ensured that the
developed theory was grounded in data, conceptually dense and well integrated (Strauss
120
& Corbin, 1990). Among the 12 participants, two were beginning teachers with less
than two years of teaching experience. Although these two beginning teachers did not
teach the former junior college curriculum, they were judged to be important informants
to this study as beginning teachers sometimes exhibit greater passion in organising
progressive pedagogies in their lessons (Davis & Smithey, 2009). This is critical to the
generation of a theory that sought to explain the teachers perspectives and practices of
implementing a curriculum that emphasised innovative classroom teaching.
Participation was entirely voluntary. Letters of invitation were sent to each participant
at the outset of the study. The aim of the study was stated in the letters and the
participants were told that they could withdraw from the study at any time. Anonymity
was also ensured to the participants. Letters of consent were received from all of the
participants.
The study commenced in October 2007. The research participants had taught the
revised science curriculum since its 2006 implementation. This did not contradict the
research design as the processes involved in symbolic interactionism still occur even in
long established situations (Blumer, 1969). Meanings are not static but are reinforced
or modified through interactions. Since the participants had had experience in teaching
the revised science curriculum, it was reasoned that through experience they would have
formed perspectives relevant to the research issue. As ODonoghue (2007, pp.3637)
argues, there is no point in designing a study about participants perspectives on
something unless we are convinced before we commence the study that it is something
about which they have fairly well formed views. Therefore, it was judged that the
research focus was a real issue for the participants and not something outside their
concerns (ODonoghue, 2007, p.36).
121
DATA COLLECTION
Qualitative data collection methods were used in the study as they provided the best
opportunity for the emergence of information that was rich and context-bound which
is necessary for theory generation (Creswell, 1994, p.7). The sources of data in this
study were semi-structured interviews, lesson observations, and documents comprising
teachers record books, official records and ministerial releases.
Semi-Structured Interviews
The first source of primary data was semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured
interviews are data gathering techniques designed to seek information about the views,
opinions, ideas and experiences from the participants (Arksey & Knight, 1999). In
semi-structured interviews, questions are normally specified but the researcher has the
freedom to seek clarification and elaboration on the responses of the interviewees
(May, 2001, p.123).
Through descriptive questioning, issues that were important to the participants and the
meanings that were attached to these issues were documented. Probing questions (Berg,
1998) were also used to obtain elaborated responses from the participants.
An interview guide which served as a framework for the main body of a semistructured interview (Arksey & Knight, 1999, p.97) was used to ensure that all the key
topics were covered in a particular order during the interviews (Bernard, 2000). The
interview guide, consisting of data collection questions, was developed from the guiding
questions and was revised as necessary as interviews were conducted. As themes
122
emerged from the study, redundant questions were discarded and new questions were
added. The interviews also became more structured as the study progressed.
Face to face interviews were conducted from October 2007 to March 2008. Each
interview lasted about 45 minutes. Permission to record the interviews was obtained
from each participant.
Two
teachers from the second group declined to be audio taped and in the course of their
interviews, data were collected through note-taking. Each participant was identified by
a numerical code on the transcript to ensure confidentiality of the data. As access to the
research site was granted only up to March 2008, interviewing via telephone and
electronic mails was used when there was a need for further questioning of participants.
Such interviewing techniques have been advocated by Hoyle, Harris and Judd (2002), as
well as Fontana and Frey (2000).
Lesson Observations
Lesson observations provided the opportunity to verify and substantiate the information
gathered through the interviews (Lichtman, 2006). They also served to check if there
were cases of disparity between the interview data and the behaviour of the participants
whereby the participants may not have followed up with regards to their intentions or
may not have acted as they claimed they would.
Permission was obtained to observe the lessons. Each lesson observation lasted about
45 minutes. Two observations were made for each participant. Observation notes were
made concerning how the participants conducted their lessons and how the participants
interacted with their students.
123
DATA ANALYSIS
Data analysis in grounded theory comprises three major types of coding, namely, open
coding, axial coding and selective coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
coding techniques were used to analyse the data collected in the study. While coding of
the collected data was generally done in stages from open to axial and then to selective,
there was interweaving between the three stages. Coding was done directly on the
interview transcripts and field notes. Provisions were made for the transcripts and field
notes to have wide margins for coding. Theoretical memos were generated for each
level of coding.
124
Open Coding
Open coding of the data is about generating conceptual labels and categories for the
purpose of forming a theory (Punch, 2005). The conceptual labels placed on the data
are called concepts (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Open coding in this study proceeded by
generating and placing concepts on the data collected. Conceptualisation of the data in
open coding was guided by comparison of data for similarities and differences, and
asking questions about the phenomena the data represented.
There are several ways of doing open coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The first way is
to do a line-by-line analysis of the data whereby phrases and words are examined;
second way is to do a sentence or paragraph coding; and third way is to code the entire
document.
The line-by-line analysis was adopted in the study as this was the most
generative. Two examples on how concepts were generated from interview transcripts
are provided in Figures 4.2a and 4.2b.
125
Transcript
Coding
teaching difficulty;
professional;
students background;
professional;
increased workload;
class makeup;
students learning; effective
teaching; teaching
difficulty; addressing
situation;
students background;
learning difficulty;
learning difficulty;
addressing students
concerns; teaching
effectiveness;
lesson effectiveness;
students learning;
teaching strategy;
Figure 4.2a
126
Transcript
Coding
all a very good plan and I hope that they support this
initiative to stimulate the different way of teaching and
learning. But at the ground level, they have to seriously
reconsider whether this is feasible given the number of
topics that has to be forced down to students throats in a
short span of one and a half years. So if they want to
maintain this directive of creative and out of box thinking,
where the world is the classroom and this sort of directions,
then they should seriously consider reducing the number of
topics to teach. Only by reducing the demands can we
explore other avenues of a more conducive way of
studying.
positive approach;
diversity in teaching and
learning;
practicality;
difficulty in coping;
constraints;
meeting learning outcomes;
progressive teaching;
streamlining curriculum;
creating opportunities;
professionalism,
commitment; giving the
best; effective teaching and
learning; meeting students
needs;
Figure 4.2b
no information; resource
deficient;
preparing students; teaching
and learning effectiveness;
commitment;
professionalism;
127
The generated concepts were then grouped around an identified phenomenon. This
process is called categorising (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). A category is more abstract
than the concepts it denotes. Categories were developed in terms of their properties and
dimensions. Properties refer to the attributes or characteristics relating to a category
while dimensions refer to the locations of properties along a continuum (Strauss &
Corbin, 1990, p.61). Examples on categorising of concepts are shown in Figures 4.3a
and 4.3b. Theoretical memos which represented abstract thinking (Strauss & Corbin,
1990, p.198) about the categories were written for each category generated.
Ref: C2_OC1
(5/10/2007)
Teachers concerns are mainly centred around helping students learn better.
Theoretical memo
While teachers concerns can be described as narrow in scope, in that the concerns are mainly
centred around helping students, there seems to be more than one layer of concerns. One layer
is helping students learn the content and apply what they have learnt during examinations.
Another layer is helping students acquire a set of analytical skills as life skills. The latter seems
to be more important to the teacher.
The teacher teaches analytical skills in the form of how to analyse and answer exam questions.
She acknowledges that students priorities are still exams results. Hence the students may see
that the teacher is helping them to prepare for exams. The teachers hidden intention may be
different from her delivered intention. The delivered intention could be used to address
students priority which is doing well in examinations. Addressing students needs is a subcategory of this category of Teachers Concerns.
The teacher is also concerned about students understanding the concepts taught. She recognises
that her current students are not that strong. The reduction in tutorial time also resulted in lesser
time for students to master the content knowledge. Thus she make changes to the ways lessons
are conducted (refer to Improving Teaching and Learning).
Figure 4.3a
128
Ref: B1_OC1
(10/10/2007)
Demanding
Appropriateness
Content heavy
Questioning objective
Curriculum/school constraint
School/environment constraint
Curriculum non-integration
Essence of learning
Relook into curriculum structure
Purpose of learning science
Differentiation
Not well defined
Differentiated learning
The revised curriculum (for this subject) contains too many topics and many of which are too
demanding especially for H1 students. This largely impacts the way teacher deals with teaching
the revised curriculum.
Theoretical Memo
The teacher feels that there are too many topics within the revised curriculum. The teacher has
no time to cover each topic adequately. As a result the teacher has to conduct remedial lessons
outside curriculum time. Some of the topics are also quite abstract for the students to
understand. This is especially so for the H1 curriculum. The understanding of concepts is made
more difficult due to the lack of integration between theory and practical. The teacher also
questions the appropriateness of the depth of the revised curriculum as the students are not
exhibiting the required level of mental maturity.
The structure of the curriculum is not aligned to the teachers perspective of how science should
be taught, especially in the aspect of practical lessons. Practical lessons are necessary in order to
provide students a better understanding of the concepts. The teacher feels that practical lessons
will help students understand the theoretical aspects of the revised curriculum better and will
also help them in preparing for the A level examinations.
The curriculum structure does not promote student-centred learning activities due to constraints.
Teacher and students are pressed for time to complete the syllabus. Hence the dominant mode of
lesson delivery in classrooms will serve to facilitate content subject mastery in the shortest time
possible.
Figure 4.3b
129
Axial Coding
The categories generated from open coding were further analysed using the method of
axial coding. Strauss and Corbin (1990) define axial coding as the process of putting
data back together in new ways by making connections between a category and its
subcategories. The categories were connected through a coding paradigm that involved
subcategories which were categories themselves. The subcategories were related to the
categories by some form of relationship that denoted casual conditions, phenomenon,
context, intervening conditions, action/interactional strategies, and consequences
(Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
categories and evidence was sought from the data to support these relationships. The
function of axial coding was to establish an understanding of the central phenomenon in
the data in terms of the conditions that gave rise to it, the context in which it was
embedded, the action/interaction strategies by which it was handled, managed or carried
out, and the consequences of these strategies. Diagramming and theoretical memos, as
shown in Figure 4.4a and Figure 4.4b respectively, were used to aid the axial coding
process.
130
Diagramming Memo
Cause of
(Major)
Teachers Concerns
Curriculum Structure
Adopts/Decides
(Personalised;
Highly important)
Teaching Methods
Cause of
(Major)
Results in
(primarily)
(Personalised;
Ongoing;
Highly important;
Reflective)
Strategies by
Customisation of
Teaching
Address/
(Personalised;
Fulfill
Highly important)
Students Learning
Needs/Experience
(Highly important
for all students)
Outcomes/
Goals
Examination
Purpose
Figure 4.4a
(Personalised to
the teacher)
Improve On/
Gather
Educational Purpose
131
Figure 4.4b
132
Selective Coding
The third stage of the data analysis involved selective coding. Strauss and Corbin (1990,
p.116) define selective coding as the process of selecting the core category,
systematically relating it to other categories, validating those relationships, and filling in
categories that need further refinement. They further describe the core category as the
central phenomenon around which all the other categories are integrated (Strauss &
Corbin, 1990, p.116). The core category represented the central theme (Punch, 2005,
p.211) with regards to how the research participants dealt with the teaching of the
revised junior college curriculum.
The relating of categories to the core category was done through a paradigm model
conditions, context, strategies and consequences. The grounding of the theory was
completed when it was validated against the data collected. A story was formulated
to provide a conceptualised description of the core category (Strauss & Corbin, 1990,
p.119).
Figures 4.5a and 4.5b respectively show the diagramming memo and the theoretical
memo generated during selective coding process for a research participant.
The
diagramming memo depicts how the core category of Improving Teaching and Learning
was related to the other categories while the theoretical memo provides a qualitative
description of the story.
133
Ref: C2_SC1
(15/9/2008)
Selective coding of C2_OC1 & C2_AC1
Diagramming Memo
Basis
Individualised/
Personalised
Results in
Basis
Figure 4.5a
Outcome
Educational Purpose
Ref: C2_SC1
(15/9/2008)
Theoretical Memo (The Story)
The process of teaching the revised curriculum is about enhancing teaching and learning in a
way that addresses the students learning needs. The teacher regards the learning needs as
twofold, namely, examination needs and educational needs. She addresses examination
needs by strategising the ways which lessons are delivered (e.g. highlighting main points, be
more concise and focused). She addresses educational needs by imparting analytical skills
through answering tutorial questions. The intentions and actions of the teacher are personally
motivated.
It does not mean that there is no motivation to enhance teaching and learning prior to the
implementation of the revised curriculum. The implementation has brought about specific
challenges and concerns regarding teaching and learning which the teacher intends to
address through enhancing the process of teaching and learning by adopting appropriate
teaching methods and strategies that are individualised/personalised to herself (i.e. her
personal and profession orientation with regards to teaching and learning) and her own
students (i.e. to the learning needs of the students; quality and background of students).
Figure 4.5b
Credibility
Credibility means the accuracy with which the phenomenon under investigation was
described (Jackson, 2003). Credibility in this study was assessed through checking for
a correspondence between the way the respondents actually perceive social constructs
and the way the researcher portrays their viewpoints (Mertens, 1998, p.181). This was
done through triangulation of data sources (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Lincoln & Guba,
1999). Sources of data used in this study included interviews, lesson observations and
teachers record books. Furthermore, the research participants were invited to examine
and comment on the theory generated in the study.
Transferability
Transferability refers to the generalisation of the study findings to other settings,
populations, and contexts (Jackson, 2003, p.183). A thick description on the time,
place, research background, participants, methodology, interpreted results and emerging
theory of the study was provided to allow transferability to be established in the study
(Brown et. al., 2002; Mertens, 1998). The provision of such details allowed readers to
judge the appropriateness of the research findings to other settings.
Dependability
The issue of dependability is a reflection of the reality that situations constantly change
and peoples realities differ (Jackson, 2003, p.183). This study employed the method
135
Confirmability
Confirmability refers to the objectivity of the data (Jackson, 2003), the determination
that the data and their interpretations are not based on researcher bias, assumptions and
imagination. The method used to ensure confirmability in this study involved verifying
that the data gathered in this study were traceable to the sources and that the analysis
processes were explicitly described. A confirmability audit (Mertens, 1998, p.184)
was used to indicate that the data were traceable to original sources. The confirmability
audit was used together with the dependability audit.
The following set of criteria (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) was further used to ensure the
empirical grounding of the data:
1. Are concepts generated?
2. Are the concepts systematically related?
3. Are there many conceptual linkages and are the categories well developed? Do they
have conceptual density?
4. Is there much variation built in the theory?
5. Are the broader conditions that affect the phenomenon under study built into its
explanation?
6. Has process been taken into account?
7. Do the theoretical findings seem significant and to what extent?
136
Programme are given the privilege to sit for the General Certificate of Examinations at
Advanced Level without first passing the General Certificate of Examinations at
Ordinary Level (Kang, 2005). That is to say, this group of students is admitted into
junior colleges without having to first complete the usual four-year secondary school
education. The teachers working in junior colleges offering the Integrated Programme
thus have a different teaching portfolio as compared to the other junior college teachers.
Access to the research site was permitted only for a period of six months by the
Ministry of Education of Singapore. It was judged that data collection in the form of
interviews and lesson observations within this period of six months would be difficult
for a large number of participants. Thus, only a small group of 12 participants was
recruited for the study. Furthermore, the majority of the study participants recruited
were female teachers, so, in terms of gender, the participants were not equally
represented. This is a constraint the researcher had to work with because female
teachers constitute about 65 per cent of junior college teachers in Singapore (Ministry of
Education of Singapore, 2007a).
keeping with the assertion by LeCompte and Goetz (1982, p.48) that qualitative
137
CONCLUSION
This chapter provided an account of the research design and methodology used for the
study.
outlined.
The theoretical findings of the study are provided in the next three chapters of this thesis.
Chapter Five presents vignettes of five study participants, explaining how these five
science teachers dealt with the teaching of their science subjects with regards to
changes made to the junior college science curriculum. Using these vignettes as a
precursor, Chapter Six unfolds to readers the substantive theory developed to explain
how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under
the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
the theory in illuminating how Singapore junior college science teachers deliver the
138
revised science curriculum were also asserted in this study, and these propositions are
furnished in Chapter Seven.
139
CHAPTER FIVE
VIGNETTES OF FIVE SCIENCE TEACHERS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents vignettes of five teachers, who were participants in this study,
showing how they dealt with the teaching of their science subjects under the 2006
revised junior college curriculum. These vignettes are included as context for the
theory to be presented in Chapter Six. They reveal common elements of experience and
practice that were important to theory development. They are also provided to give the
reader insights into the individual situations of the study participants.
With the
intention of showing variation across the sample, these five teachers were chosen based
on the following considerations: the particular science subject that the teachers were
teaching; the years of teaching experience; and the gender of the teachers. Following
the vignettes, a storyline reflecting the typical experience of teaching science under the
revised junior college curriculum is constructed.
recapitulation of the key features of the 2006 revised junior college curriculum and the
implications for science teachers teaching in junior colleges.
The recapitulation
140
Secondly, to allow junior college students more choice in the subjects they wish to
study as well as in the level of mastery they desire to pursue in that particular subject,
each major subject in the junior college curriculum has been expanded from one level to
three levels of study under the new revision. This means that the three science subjects,
namely, physics, chemistry and biology, are now reclassified into three levels of study
and each level of study has its own scope and syllabus. The key differences between
each level of study are outlined in Table 5.1.
141
Table 5.1
The Three Levels of Study for Each Science Subject.
Higher One (H1)
Science Subjects
Equivalent to half of
H2 subjects in breadth
but similar to H2
subjects in terms of
depth.
of the academic
subjects in the former
junior college
curriculum.
Can be taken by
science major students
as well as arts major
students (as a
contrasting subject).
Thirdly, there is a change in content for all the academic subjects offered in junior
colleges so as to meet the objectives of the revised curriculum. Fourthly, the revised
curriculum adopts a new examination format that is directed towards the assessment of
students analytical and critical thinking skills, marking a shift away from assessment of
the ability to regurgitate facts and formulae.
Underpinning the 2006 revised junior college curriculum are the initiatives of Teach
Less, Learn More, Innovation and Enterprise, IT Masterplan, and Ability-Driven
Education.
Together with the revised junior college curriculum, these new initiatives are intended
to develop students holistically, through new educational practices, into innovative and
creative thinkers, life-long learners, and leaders of change.
No explicit written
guidelines are provided by the Ministry on what kind of educational practices would be
142
considered as showcasing the spirit of Teach Less, Learn More or Innovation and
Enterprise.
initiatives, and teachers are encouraged to experiment on new pedagogical practices and
innovative educational activities that would develop students holistically.
Following the implementation of the revised curriculum and the introduction of the new
educational initiatives such as Teach Less, Lean More, science teachers in junior
colleges now has additional commitments with regards to teaching their subjects.
Firstly, they have to teach new content pertaining to their subjects. The areas in science
that are considered obsolete are removed from the syllabi, while new science topics,
covering knowledge on recent developments as well as niche areas in science research,
are added. Secondly, the science teachers are expected to teach their subjects at three
different levels of study. Thirdly, they have to prepare their students for a new set of
assessment criteria in the national examinations. Fourthly, they are required to teach
their science subjects to arts major students, and fifthly, they are expected to showcase
innovative pedagogical practices and educational activities in their lessons. These new
commitments are in addition to their usual responsibilities of delivering quality
academic results in the national examinations in the subjects they taught.
VIGNETTES OF TEACHERS
This section focuses on the experiences of five science teachers with regards to how
they dealt with the teaching of their science subjects under the 206 revised junior
college curriculum. To provide readers with a better understanding on the school
environment within with the participants were working, the institutional setting is
described prior to the presentation of the individual vignettes.
143
Each teacher was given at least three tutorial classes of students and each class consisted
of about 25 students. The teachers were responsible for the academic results of their
tutorial classes in the subjects they were teaching. Tutorial questions for each particular
topic in each science subject were prepared by the teachers. The tutorials comprised
mainly questions from the past years national examinations on that particular topic. In
addition, the teachers were assigned lecture topics. Lectures were conducted to the
entire cohort of students studying that particular science subject.
All the science teachers were issued with their respective departmental work documents.
An extract of the Science Department Workplan that charted the teaching and learning
goals under the new revisions is shown in Figure 5.1. The inclusion of qualitative
questions and synoptic questions as reflected in the Planned Programme/Activity
column were examples of new additions to the department workplan.
144
Key Performance
Indicators
Targets
Planned Programme/Activity
S1.1
Effective
instructional
programme
JC1 Promotional
exam results, JC2
Prelim exam
results,
PRISM, GCE A
level results
Differentiated Programme
S1.1.1
Customised
academic
programme
that caters to
students of
different
learning
abilities
No. of
topic/sections
selected for selfstudy module
Figure 5.1
Self-study Module
Teachers to provide lecture notes/ reference materials/ electures for students study the topic/section on their own
145
145
Resources, such as textbooks, were purchased by the department and were shared
among the teachers. An important teaching resource used by all the science teachers in
the department were questions compiled from the past national examinations by
commercial publishers. The titles for these publications for the three science subjects
were as follows:
Additional ICT tools such as the Interactive Whiteboard was also purchased to
support the IT Masterplan initiatives and the science teachers were expected to utilise
these equipment in their lessons.
The science teachers were also given the autonomy to consult other educational
resources such as the examiners report on past national examinations so as to aid them
in teaching their subjects. To prepare the science teachers for the new assessment
format, they were each given a copy of a specimen examination question paper on the
subject they were teaching. An extract of the specimen examination question paper for
physics is shown in Figure 5.2.
146
Figure 5.2
More space in the school timetable had to be created to accommodate the expansion
from one level to three levels of study for each major subject under the new revisions.
147
This was done by reducing the number of tutorial hours for each major subject. Thus,
the tutorial hours for each H2 science subject were reduced from three hours to two
hours per week following the implementation of the revised junior college science
curriculum. Two hours of timetabled time were allocated for tutorials for the H1
science subjects while another four hours were allocated for the H3 science subjects
per week. The H1 and H3 subjects are new additions while the H2 subjects are
revamped from the former science curriculum.
The science teachers were professionally expected to deliver the following targets in the
General Certificate of Education Advanced Level Examination:
For H2 science subjects 100% of the students scoring at least grade E with
75% of the students scoring at least grade B;
For H1 science subjects 100% of the students scoring at least grade E with
50% of the students scoring at least grade B.
No targets were set for the H3 science subjects, as the examination results of these
subjects would not affect the academic banding of the junior colleges.
Furthermore, the science teachers were required to track the academic performance of
students under their charge using a quantitative indicator called value-addedness. This
indicator, in terms of a numerical value, reflects the difference between a students
expected academic performance and his or her actual performance in the assessments.
A positive value in the students value-addedness would mean that this student is
performing up to the expectation set by the Ministry of Education of Singapore.
148
Being a new teacher, Jane had a mentor who was also a biology teacher and who had
been teaching this subject for four years in the same junior college. Both Jane and her
mentor were teaching the Year Two students during the time which this study was
conducted. These Year Two students were the first batch of students to study under
the revised junior college science curriculum.
One of Janes biggest concerns was the tutorial time allocated to teach the entire biology
content. She felt that the weekly two hour tutorial sessions were insufficient to finish
teaching the prescribed syllabus. The teaching of biology, according to her, needed
much more time, which she explained as follows:
Science subjects are just very, very content heavy. Biology is one of
themIts chunk and chunk of concepts. You need to ensure that the
students master this concept before teaching the next one. For example,
take Evolutionyou cannot teach one concept without making
relations to the others and this takes up a lot of time...We are really
struggling with time to teach them [the students] what the whole
syllabus requires (sic).
149
Another concern for Jane was her students progress in their learning. She felt that the
new topics added to the curriculum, such as Diversity and Evolution, were beyond the
academic abilities of the junior college students. According to her, these newly added
topics were designed for university courses, and junior college students generally lacked
the academic ability as well as intellectual maturity to handle the rigour and demands of
such topics, which she elaborated below:
I feel that the topics are a bit too heavy content, apart from that it is
also very abstract (sic). You must have the intellectual maturity to
understand the topic such as Diversity and Evolution. The students
must be open-minded and accept ambiguities and possibilities.
However, at their age, they are always trying to fit things into a
particular mould, and they still do not have the maturity to challenge
assumptions.
Even though she observed that her students were having difficulties understanding the
concepts taught, the lack of curriculum time prevented her from conducting extra
lessons to help her students during the school term. In this regard, she described her
experience as follows:
All I can say is that I cannot do anything different or out of the normal
box during the academic term. if there is any way I can help them
[her students] understand the content heavy subject like biology, it will
be during holidays I have to request them to come back to conduct
lessons (sic).
Thus, it was a common practice for Jane to organise remedial classes during the
school holidays to help her students master the content knowledge.
To answer to the call for teachers to teach less, so that students would learn more,
Jane was especially keen to organise student-centred learning activities for her students.
150
She felt that such learning activities would enthuse and engage the students in their
learning. She conducted her tutorial lessons using the collaborative learning approach
for one academic term (equivalent to 10 weeks). During such lessons, she would group
her students according to their academic aptitudes and within each group there would be
at least one student who had good content knowledge in biology. Below is an account
of Janes experience in using collaborative learning in her lessons:
At the end of that term, the students gave me a feedback in the form of
written letter, complaining that I did not do my job as a teacher. So
evidently from that letter, it shows that not only the teachers are
stressed; teachers are not only worried about the time they have to
complete the syllabus, the students are also left feeling very
insecurethat feeling of lack of confidence has apparently set in.
Her students did not respond as favourably to the use of student-centred modes of
learning as she had anticipated. She reflected upon this issue and decided to use
collaborative learning in her lessons occasionally, which she reasoned as follows:
They are ok, say if you dont do it all the timethey feel teachers did
not give them enough supportthey are not sure whether what they
are doing is right or not (sic).
Thus, after one academic term of adopting student-centred pedagogical practices, she
reverted back to the traditional teacher-centred approach to teach her subject content.
She judged that student-centred learning methods were not feasible in junior colleges
especially under the revised curriculum due to the shortage of lesson time and heavy
demands from the new content.
As a result of such experiences, and with the concurrence of her mentor, Jane adopted
the following approach in teaching biology:
151
We drill them with questionsWe just drill and ask the students to
memorise the answersThis is the way, we are teaching them exam
strategywhat we are attempting to do here is just attempting to
expose them to the multitudes of question that can possibly come out
(sic).
Jane faced another new challenge in adopting the drilling approach in the teaching and
learning of her subject. This challenge was the availability of questions to be used as
practice questions especially on the topics newly added to the biology syllabus. She
was not able to find these practice questions from the past examination question papers
due to the change in the curriculum content. She regarded past examination question
papers as important teaching resources to support her teaching method of drilling her
students for the national examinations.
To address this challenge, she purchased, with her own funds, university-based
textbooks on biology. She then modified the selected questions from these textbooks
for her teaching needs. An example of a modified question for teaching the topic on
Genetics is shown in Figure 5.3 below.
152
Figure (a) shows the 50-kb segment of the human T-cell receptor locus while Figure (b)
shows 50-kb segment from the genome of E. coli K12.
With reference to the figures above, state three differences between the eukaryotic and
prokaryotic 50-kb segment.
Figure 5.3
However, she was uncertain if the modified questions were of the right standard to help
her students master the subject content. In this regard, she voiced her concern as
follows:
having to actually form questions is also an uncertain area for me
(sic). Because first of all I am not a very experienced teacherso in
that light, I am also not very skillful.
She did not seek help from her mentor as well as from her colleagues because she
thought no one was able to help her as she was the only teacher who taught the new
topics in the revised curriculum. Furthermore, she felt that the other teachers also had
their own areas of concerns to deal with which she explained as follows:
everybody has their own scheme of work to follow, everybody has
their own topics to teach. So nobody has the time to help you with your
topic, especially when the topic is new.
She intended to improve on the standard of her designed practice questions on her own,
pending the academic results of her students in the national examinations.
153
Jane felt that the approaches she adopted had addressed her concerns especially on the
issue of preparing her students well for the national examinations. She would further
refine these approaches according to the situation during the course of instruction.
Although her main intention in whatever she did was to aid her students in their content
mastery for examinations purpose, she did not formulate any structured plans or
strategies, which she reasoned as follows:
There are so many things that can happen along the week. Different
class has different dynamics... it has to go in accordance to how the
students feel comfortable.
She would review her methods of lesson delivery and the approaches she adopted to
address her concerns with regards to teaching her subject based on the quality of her
students results in the national examinations.
Michael was concerned about the reduction in tutorial time. Based on his experience in
teaching physics before the implementation of the revised curriculum, he recognised a
need to optimise teaching time during tutorials in order to finish teaching the newly
prescribed syllabus. Furthermore, he was aware that under the new revisions, students
were required to study an additional contrasting subject which added to students
154
academic responsibilities. Thus, he judged that his students were not able to focus on
their learning due to their heavy workload which was a result of the implementation of
the revised curriculum. He further believed that his students were unlikely to learn on
their own outside the classrooms unless they were highly motivated and had a passion
for the subject. As such, he saw a need to motivate and arouse his students interests in
learning physics so as to optimise teaching time in his lessons.
In view of the new assessment format which examined students critical thinking ability
and analytical skills, Michael recognised a need to employ a teaching approach that
could impart thinking and analytical skills to his students. He felt the drilling of past
examination questions would not be beneficial to his students in their content mastery in
view of the way the questions were phrased under the new assessment format. In
addition, based on the specimen examination paper on the new assessment format which
was issued to all teachers prior the implementation, he recognised that the phrasing of
the examinations questions had been shifted from quantitative to an open-ended
qualitative style. He saw a need to prepare his students on this change.
While Michael recognised the new challenges in teaching his subject under the new
revisions such as reduction in tutorial time and new assessment format, he wanted his
lessons to be interesting and enjoyable for himself as well as for his students. Having
enjoyed the lessons, he judged that his students would develop a passion in the learning
of physics which would in turn encourage them to learn on their own outside the
classrooms. Such independent mode of learning in students, according to him, would
solve the problem of insufficient teaching time as well as prepare the students for their
future studies in universities.
155
On his own initiative, Michael developed a new teaching strategy that comprised fun
activities, group discussions on thinking questions, and live demonstrations on
physics experiments.
A marathon runner runs at a steady 15 km/hr. When the runner is 7.5 km from the
finish line, a bird begins flying from the runner to the finish at 30 km/hr. When
the bird reaches the finish line, it turns around and flies back to the runner, and
then turns around again, repeating the back-and-forth trips until the runner
reaches the finish line. How many kilometers does the bird travel?
A. 10 km
B. 15 km
C. 20 km
D. 30 km
Figure 5.4
His intention for adopting such a teaching strategy is further provided below:
...when I am doing this new strategy of introducing activities, live
demonstrations or thinking questions, or guide them along without
telling the answers straightaway, I hope that I can arouse their [the
students] interest. And also in a way raise their thinking level (sic).
He regarded that his new teaching strategy would address the issues of imparting
thinking skills to his students during lessons as well as arousing their interests in the
learning of physics, so that they would engage in independent learning outside the
curriculum time. He formulated this strategy based on his personal belief and past
teaching experience which he reasoned as follows:
156
However, Michael noted that he was not able to apply his new teaching strategy for all
the physics topics in the curriculum due to time constraints. He made refinements by
applying his new teaching strategy only for topics which his students had difficulties in
understanding. He sought feedback from his students, during the course of instruction,
to determine their foundational knowledge on the physics concepts he was teaching. He
used the students feedback to determine which teaching method to use. In this regard,
he explained as follows:
When I start a new topic I will get the feedback from the
studentsthose concepts they find difficult to understand I try to
introduce some thinking questions or activities, hoping that they will
understand (sic).
For topics which Michael judged that his students were able to understand, such as
Measurements and Physical Quantities, he proceeded to teach directly without the
use of fun activities or thinking questions so as to optimise teaching time. Michael
also noted that while his students responded positively to his new approach of teaching,
they still wanted him to guide and advise them the best way to answer examination
questions. He thus made the following judgment:
When you introduce a new topic, you can always try this method of
injecting fun activities and conducting live demo. Only later on when
you come to revisions, then you can focus more on the drilling part or
how to answer exam questions (sic).
Michael felt that his new teaching strategy had worked well for him in achieving his
intentions of delivering interesting and informative lessons. Based on his classroom
157
interaction with his students, he found that his students had enjoyed and had benefitted
from his lessons. He noted that his students were engaged in analytical thinking when
he probed them with his thinking questions. In this way, he regarded that his students
learned physics better as compared to the direct teaching approach without the use of
probing questions or thinking questions which he had used while teaching the former
curriculum. He also acknowledged that he used such a teaching strategy as he was
teaching the Year One students. He would adopt a more teacher-centred approach if
he was teaching the Year Two students. He commented that he would continue to
develop and refine his new teaching strategy based on his students feedback and
examination results. He had discussed his new teaching strategy with a few colleagues
and he did not think that his teaching strategy would be suitable to all teachers as each
teacher would have a particular situation of teaching and learning to deal with.
Furthermore, he judged that new or beginning teachers would have problems in
designing suitable thinking questions.
158
On comparison with the former curriculum, she felt that the removal of certain physics
topics in the revised physics syllabus resulted in an incoherence in the delivery of the
new curriculum content. Her description on this incoherency is provided below:
Given that they have taken out certain aspect of the curriculum, certain
things doesnt seem to flow as well anymoreespecially for the
Thermal part, the Ideal Gasthat may not be required of in their
syllabus but that is what they may need to understand the thing (sic).
She saw a need to teach her students those topics that were no longer part of the
syllabus due to the changes made to the curriculum content, but were essential in
helping her students master the content knowledge.
Another major concern for her was the uncertainty on the breadth and depth of
instruction on the revised curriculum. The following is an account of her doubts in
regards to this issue:
How much do we actually need to teach? The syllabus can be quite
open as in you wouldnt know how much you are supposed to
teachsometimes when you teach at very surface level, the students
would tend to question, but to answer their questions, it can be very
difficult without further going in-depth into it (sic).
Margaret also noted that her students were fixated on the rote-learning style, and that
they were unable to handle abstract information and questions that demanded analysis
and critical thinking. She judged that her students would have difficulties mastering the
content knowledge on the newly added topics as well as answering the examination
questions with such learning habits due to the changes in the format and questioning
style of the examinations.
questions which Margaret had used to teach the topic on D.C. Circuits is shown in
Figure 5.5 below.
Figure 5.5
To expose her students to a greater variety of assessment questions and to bridge the
gap in the perceived incoherence in delivering the new curriculum, Margaret inserted
additional tutorial questions for discussions in the classrooms.
These additional
questions were prepared by her through consultation with reference books and internet
resources.
application and improve their analytical abilities through the discussion of her designed
questions. This method of teaching physics was Margarets new initiative and it was a
necessary strategy to prepare her students for the national examinations.
Margaret was mindful about the reduction in the curriculum time. She knew that she
could not dwell too much time in discussing with her students on the additional
questions, as compared to teaching under the former curriculum, as this would pose a
problem in completing teaching the prescribed syllabus. To optimise teaching time, she
varied her style of teaching. She looked at the background of the students and the
progress of their learning before she decided on the particular pedagogy to deliver her
160
Her
To further help her students in their content mastery on the newly added topics which
she judged that her students would have difficulties understanding, such as Laser,
Margaret spent time reading up textbooks as well as seeking information over the
internet to look for ideas and strategies to teach these topics in a clear and concise
manner. She also adopted the use of ICT teaching tools, such as computer animation
and software, during the course of her instruction of these topics. Her main intention
for utilising such teaching tools was to make these new topics, which she regarded as
abstract and difficult, appreciable to her students for their content mastery which she
explained as follows:
Most of the time when come to these kind of abstract topics is mainly
words, so it actually help if you can find things that simply the entire
topic for the studentsmake it easier for them to visualise (sic).
161
Figure 5.6
Her decision for adopting such an approach was based on her personal beliefs and
teaching experiences. For example, ICT tools had helped her to visualise physics
when she was a student. She thus believed ICT tools would also help her students in
their learning of physics especially on the new topics.
During the course of teaching the H3 physics curriculum, Margaret judged that she
lacked sufficient content knowledge to engage her students intellectually. She also
observed that her students were having difficulties in learning the H3 physics topics.
As mentioned earlier in this chapter and in Chapter Two, the H3 courses were
intended for in-depth study for the academically strong students. To improve her
content knowledge, she attended in-service courses which were conducted during the
academic term. To follow up on what she had learnt from the in-service courses and to
further acquire teaching materials, she made references to university textbooks on the
physics topics she was teaching. She also consulted the more experienced teachers for
162
She adopted a fluid approach in teaching physics and adapted her teaching practices to
the changes brought about by the implementation of the revised curriculum so as to
prepare her students well for the national examinations. She believed that the measures
she had adopted had helped to address her concerns. This judgment was based on her
interaction with her students. She observed that her students were able to visualise the
abstract concepts she was teaching through the use of ICT tools as compared to a mere
verbal discourse. With the use of such instructional tools, she noted that she was able to
engage students in their learning.
Margaret was not sure if other physics teachers had used similar approaches in their
teaching of the revised curriculum. She had no plans to inform her colleagues about her
way of teaching the revised curriculum. She felt that the teaching of the revised
curriculum especially for the H3 physics course had been a situation of experimenting
and learning. She would continue her fluid approach of teaching, and would also
continue to refine and improve on her content knowledge and pedagogical skills.
163
Two science major students. He had three classes of H2 chemistry students. He also
taught a component of the H3 chemistry course to another class of Year Two
students. In contrast to the experiences of Jane and Margaret with regards to changes in
curriculum content, Martin did not notice significant changes in terms of the chemistry
content between the new and the former curriculum. The significant changes made
under the new revisions, according to him, were: the removal of some topics; different
allocation of marks; and different style of questioning in the examination papers.
However, Martin was cautious in adopting a facilitating style of teaching as he was not
sure if his students were ready to be taught using student-centred learning approaches.
He wanted his students, particularly his classes of H2 chemistry students, to benefit
from the learning process. He adopted a traditional teaching approach at the start of
the academic year and he opted for a more student-centred mode of learning as time
progressed. Martins explanation on why he made changes to his teaching approaches
is provided below:
at the start of the year I would still trying to do some summary
before I move on to the topic itself (sic). But as time goes by, I noticed
that my students, they are quite motivated, so I decide to cut off that
part (sic).
164
fter he had judged that his students were able to handle the learning on their own, he
proceeded to facilitate learning rather than directly presenting facts to his students. The
facilitation process which he adopted in his tutorials consisted of three components.
First, he gave his students a hint sheet which served as guiding answers to the tutorial
questions. With the hint sheet he expected his students to be able to complete the
tutorial questions on their own. As such, he only discussed selected tutorial questions
during his lessons. When he was teaching the former curriculum, he would discuss all
the tutorial questions. However, in teaching the new curriculum, he decided to discuss
only selected questions due to reduction in tutorial time. The questions he chose for
discussion were the more difficult ones. An example of a hint sheet used by Martin to
teach Electrochemistry is provided in Figure 5.7.
salt bridge
1.0 M
I2(aq), I
M
(iii)
Pt
H2 @ 298K
and 1 atm
salt bridge
1.0 M H+
Pt
Figure 5.7
Second, he made compulsory for his students to complete an on-line test before his
lessons with them.
understanding of basic concepts. Initially, his students resisted doing the on-line test
as they felt it was a waste of their time. Martin convinced them that the on-line test
was beneficial towards the learning of concepts. As an incentive, he limited the number
of questions in the on-line test to 10. Limiting the number of questions in the on-line
test was a refinement made by him after receiving feedback from his students.
Although his students had good academic background, he recognised that they had
additional responsibilities as they had to study the additional contrasting subject.
Third, he asked his students to formulate their own marking schemes after he had
provided the answers for the tutorial questions. In this way, he hoped to inculcate in his
students an understanding of the ways which marks were allocated by the examiners.
This facilitation process which Martin adopted was his personal initiative and the three
components of facilitation were developed from his past teaching experiences. While
Marin had adopted such modes of learning when teaching the former curriculum, he
made adaptations to the process when teaching the new curriculum. For example, he
only discussed selected tutorial questions and reduced the number of questions in the
on-line test.
166
use of past examination questions in teaching his students to interpret and answer
examination questions skillfully. In this way, he hoped his students would do well in
the national examinations.
Martin felt that his methods and approaches of teaching his subject under the revised
curriculum had worked well for him, based on the students feedback and their
academic grades in the schools summative assessments.
Martin believed that his students in the H2 chemistry course had benefitted from his
manner which he delivered his lessons. Though Martin would adopt similar methods
and approaches to teach his subject for future cohorts of students, he would modify and
refine these methods and approaches according to the situation of teaching and learning
that he would encounter. He had shared with a few of his colleagues on his approach of
teaching chemistry under the new revisions, but he did not think his approach would
benefit all teachers and students due to different dynamics in the classrooms.
167
to a class of Year One arts major students. Denises observations with regards to the
new curriculum were the same as Martins in that the significant changes made to the
chemistry curriculum were the allocation of marks as well as the style of questioning in
the new examination format.
Denise felt that the reduction in teaching time due to the implementation of the revised
curriculum affected students in their learning. She observed that her current students
studying the revised curriculum displayed greater difficulties in understanding the
concepts taught. She recounted her experiences in teaching the former curriculum as
follows:
Teaching the last batch that did not take this curriculum was a
breezeit is easier to teach them mainly because we have more
tutorial time so they can clarify their doubts (sic).
According to Denise, the shortened curriculum time reduced the opportunities for
students to ask questions and clarify their doubts in the classrooms which resulted in
students not having sufficient time to understand the concepts taught. This hindered the
students progress of learning.
To optimise teaching time and to help her students cope with the reduction in tutorial
time, Denise structured her lessons in a concise manner. She highlighted the key
concepts that the students were required to know for solving the assigned tutorial
questions.
She kept emphasising and highlighting the key learning points during
lessons, a strategy which she regarded as effective in helping her students learn the
chemistry concepts. She did not use this method of teaching when she was teaching the
former curriculum. She learnt and refined this method of teaching through observations
of other chemistry teachers.
168
Denise also wished to teach her students analytical and thinking skills which she judged
that her students were lacking in. These analytical and thinking skills were important
examinations skills in accordance to the new assessment format as well as essential lifelong skills for the students.
knowledge for examinations purposes was the main concern of her lessons, she felt that
it was equally important to impart life-long skills during lessons for the holistic
development of her students.
emphasis of the 2006 revised junior college curriculum and this was an area which
Denise wished to support as she believed that teaching should not just focus on
examination results.
The manner which Denise taught thinking and analytical skills was through the
discussion of thinking questions which she inserted in her tutorial lessons. This was a
new initiative thought of by Denise and the thinking questions were designed by her.
She observed that her students learned chemistry mainly through rote-learning and
through solving tutorial problems. Thus, she felt that her way of teaching thinking and
analytical skills through the discussion of thinking questions resonated well with her
students learning style and priorities, as her way of teaching analytical skills did not
deviate too steeply from her students main epistemological approach. An example of
the thinking questions Denise used to teach Thermodynamics is shown in Figure 5.8.
169
Chemical processes move in directions in which the products have lower Gibbs free
energy than the reactants. It is possible to establish the relationship between the free
energy change of the chemical reactions with the relative contributions of the
enthalpy change and entropy changes accompanying the reaction.
Comment on the following in the light of the above statement.
(i)
(ii)
Figure 5.8
Denise adopted a differentiated approach in her teaching. For those students who were
studying chemistry at the H1 level, she made refinements to her usual way of
instruction by going at a slower pace so as to bridge the gap between the students
academic background and the rigorous demands of the curriculum. She reasoned that
since her H1 chemistry students were arts major students, they might not have the
science background to handle the rigour and demand of the subject. She felt that her
H1 students needed more time to master the chemistry content, and to help these
students, she paced her lessons according their academic abilities. Teaching chemistry
to the arts major students was a new experience for her.
With the
170
While Denise recognised the merits of using hands-on or fun activities to engage
students in their learning, she felt that it was difficult to incorporate these activities in
her lessons due to the content nature of the chemistry curriculum despite the revamp to
promote self-directedness in students. She would continue to explore opportunities to
provide hands-on or fun activities in support of the new initiative of student-centred
learning but she would continue to employ teacher-centred pedagogical practices in her
lessons which she regarded as more beneficial to her students in their content mastery
and in their preparation for the national examinations.
Denise dealt with the situation of teaching her science subject under the revised junior
college curriculum by delivering structured and concise lessons with an emphasis of
highlighting the key concepts. This was a new initiative designed by her with the main
intention of helping her students in their content mastery and in their preparation for the
national examinations. Rooted in the teacher-centred manner of teaching, she made
further adjustments to her lesson delivery according to the actual classroom situation.
On her own initiative, she studied the methods used by her colleagues in the teaching of
chemistry and refined these methods for her teaching needs. Based on her classroom
interaction with her students, she believed the measures adopted had helped the students
in their learning of chemistry and, in particular, towards preparing the students for the
national examinations.
171
theory on how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of
science under 2006 revised junior college curriculum in the next chapter.
The
storyline is an abstraction of what has been constructed through careful and grounded
analysis of the data (Birks et al., 2009, p.408). The storyline is constructed with the
intent of making the developed theory visible to readers (Birks et al., 2009, p.407).
This technique of providing a storyline before presenting the developed theory to
readers was also adopted by Reilly (2007).
The science teachers depicted in the vignettes dealt with the teaching of their science
subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum in three stages. The first
stage was the individual recognition of hindrances by the science teachers towards
achieving the aims of teaching the revised science curriculum. The revised science
curriculum was viewed as flawed by all the science teachers, principally because the
curriculum was perceived to be more challenging, as compared to the former science
curriculum, towards achieving the desired academic results in the national examinations.
Specific hindrances with regards to teaching their science subjects were identified and
prioritised as issues to be dealt with according to personal and professional
understandings of the participants.
insufficient time to finish teaching the prescribed syllabus, a lack of relevant teaching
materials, uncertainty concerning the appropriate scope of instruction for assessment
purposes, the need to prepare students for the new assessment criteria, and the limited
ability of students to cope with the intellectual demands of the new curriculum. There
was also the perception that the addition of new content in the curriculum challenged
the adequacy of professional knowledge to deliver the revised curriculum.
172
The second stage of teaching science under the revised junior college curriculum was
adopting measures to improve the situation of teaching and learning the science subjects.
The study participants individually came up with measures that they perceived would be
useful in overcoming the hindrances that they had identified.
These measures
The third stage of teaching science under the revised junior college curriculum was
refining of measures adopted to improve the situation of teaching and learning.
Refinement of measures was deemed necessary by the participants due to changing
classroom contexts. The participants individually assess the efficacy of the measures
173
they had adopted and individually made refinements to these measures to tailor to the
learning needs of the students.
In essence, the course of action taken by the science teachers depicted in the vignettes
with regards to teaching their science subjects under the revised junior college
curriculum was to make the situation of teaching and learning conducive towards
achieving their aim of achieving quality academic results in the national examinations.
Each participant took measures that they perceived to be useful in teaching their subject
content so as to adequately prepare their students for the national examinations. The
individual personal and professional inclination of the participants played a significant
role in the way they dealt with the teaching of their science subjects under the revised
junior college curriculum.
CONCLUSION
This chapter presented vignettes of five science teachers. These five teachers were
selected and presented based on the particular science subject they were teaching, their
years of teaching experience and their gender. Each vignette highlighted the respective
situation of teaching the revised science curriculum from the teachers perspectives, and
the approach which each teacher dealt with that situation in light of his or her
perspectives.
174
It can be noted in the vignettes that while each teacher had individual concerns
regarding the situation of teaching and learning their science subjects under the revised
junior college curriculum and each teacher had responded individually to the situation,
there was a common pattern in the teachers intentions and approaches towards the
teaching of their science subjects. This common pattern formed the core theory on how
Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the
2006 revised junior college curriculum. The next chapter presents this core theory.
175
CHAPTER SIX
THE CORE THEORY:
A THREE-STAGED INDIVIDUALISED AMELIORATION OF THE
SITUATION OF TEACHING AND LEARNING THE SCIENCE
SUBJECTS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the core theory that explains how Singapore junior college science
teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior college
curriculum. The theory was developed from the analysis of data pertaining to the
perspectives and approaches of all the study participants in teaching their science
subjects under the revised junior college curriculum, including those identified in the
vignettes. With the provision of relevant details and justifications drawn from the study
findings, this chapter unfolds the theory to readers.
This chapter consists of two main sections. The first section presents an overview of the
core theory to acquaint readers with the big picture of the theory.
A further
delineation of the theory is provided in the second section together with a synthesis of
study findings to support the theory construction.
situation of teaching and learning their science subjects due to perceived challenges in
achieving their aims of teaching their science subjects. These challenges are issues
relating to the science teachers professional knowledge, teaching time, teaching
resources, and students progress in learning. The second stage of the theory involves
Singapore junior college science teachers individually adopting measures to address the
perceived challenges. This claim stems from the finding that all the participants in this
study individually adopted measures to address the challenges they encountered. To
further tailor the adopted measures to the classroom needs, Singapore junior college
science teachers individually refine the measures adopted to ameliorate the situation of
teaching and learning their science subjects.
ameliorate the situation of teaching and learning their science subjects constitutes the
third stage of the theory. In respect to this claim, the study revealed that all the
participants made refinements to the measures they had adopted to ameliorate the
situation of teaching and learning their science subjects under the 2006 revised junior
college curriculum.
individualised amelioration of the situation of teaching and learning the science subjects
is shown in Figure 6.1.
177
First Stage
Recognising a need to
ameliorate the situation
of teaching and learning
the science subjects
Based on perceived challenges
pertaining to the teaching and
learning of the science subjects
Second Stage
Adopting measures to
ameliorate the situation of
teaching and learning the
science subjects
Based on perceived effectiveness of
the measures adopted to address the
challenges pertaining to the teaching
and learning of the science subjects
Third Stage
Figure 6.1
The next section presents a detailed explanation of the theory, together with evidence
drawn from the study to support the construction of the proposed theory.
challenges induce the science teachers in recognising a need to ameliorate the situation
of teaching and learning their science subjects. In the second sub-section, it is argued
that on the basis of assessments that are both personally and professionally determined,
Singapore junior college science teachers individually adopt measures to address the
perceived challenges. A conceptualisation of the measures the science teachers adopt is
proposed in this second sub-section. The third sub-section explicates the theoretical
understanding of the third stage of the theory, when refinements are individually made
by Singapore junior college science teachers to the measures they have put into practice.
A conceptualisation of the refinements to adopted measures the science teachers employ
is also proposed in this third sub-section.
The theory further asserts that the perceived challenges are rooted in a triangle of issues
which comprises: issues regarding the revised science curriculum structure; issues
179
regarding students learning and development; and issues regarding the ability to teach
the revised science curriculum. This triangle of issues is depicted in Figure 6.2.
Issues
regarding the
revised science
curriculum
structure
Perceived challenges
in teaching the
revised
science
Issues
curriculum
Issues
regarding the
regarding students
ability to teach the
learning and
revised science
development
curriculum
Figure 6.2
are rooted.
There is inter-dependency among these issues. For example, issues pertaining to the
structure of the curriculum (issues regarding the revised science curriculum structure)
give rise to specific issues pertaining to how students learn the subject (issues regarding
students learning and development) as well as certain teaching practices (issues
regarding the ability to teach the revised science curriculum). It is hypothesised that
each issue is further surrounded by a triangle of concerns pertaining to the teaching and
learning of the revised science curriculum. A conceptualisation of all possible issues
Singapore junior college science teachers perceive as challenges towards the teaching
and learning of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum, as derived
from the study findings, is proposed in Figure 6.3.
180
New
assessment
format
Uncertainty
in the scope
of instruction
Perceived challenges in
teaching and learning the
revised science curriculum
Issues regarding
the ability to teach
the revised
science
Knowledge
Availability
curriculum
base of
of teaching
teachers
resources
181
Figure 6.3
Develop an
appreciation
of the
subject
Foundation
knowledge of
students
Issues regarding
students
learning and
development
Content
mastery
Conceptualisation of all possible issues Singapore junior college science teachers perceive as challenges towards
181
the teaching and learning of their science subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
The next part of this sub-section provides justification to these theoretical claims
through an analysis on how each issue and concern (as shown in Figure 6.3) was
recognised by the study participants as a challenge to be addressed.
As mentioned in the previous chapter, all the participants were given a copy of a
sample examination question paper which reflected the changes made to the
examination format under the new revisions, and all the participants based their
understanding of the new examination format on this sample examination question
paper. Examples of typical concerns of the participants regarding the new assessment
format are as follows:
182
now more questions are asked not from just one topic but
across different topics, and the questions are synoptic and
very case study based (sic). (Nancy, biology teacher)
For the new assessment criteria, the questions are now being
asked in a more open-ended way, more thinkingbasedsometimes you do not know what is the correct
answer (sic). (Diane, physics teacher)
The synoptic questions troubled the participants because they had to prepare their
students a new set of skills to answer such questions which demanded the ability to
synthesise concepts across topics rather than just mere application of facts and
formulae. An example of a qualitative synoptic question provided by a participant is
given in Figure 6.4.
The participants were strongly of the view that because of their educational histories,
experience and practice, the students would have difficulties in answering these
synoptic questions. The students as perceived by the participants were still much
183
All the participants felt professionally obligated to train their students to answer such
questions in the examinations.
184
Terms like poor sequencing of topics, vague guidelines, unclear outcomes, and not
well thought through were applied in descriptions of the revised curriculum structure.
The sense of having to rush the syllabus also meant that participants felt they could not
afford (more) time to practice student-centred learning.
185
The lack of foundational concepts caused interruption to the flow of lesson delivery,
as explained by the following participant:
I assume that they know certain concepts butwhen I
actually proceed, say, halfway through the lesson and then
they tell me that Oh actually, teacher, we have not learn
this (sic). So I actually have to go back and start all over
again. (Diane, physics teacher)
The lack of foundation knowledge was observed in the science major students as well as
the arts major students who were studying the science subjects as contrasting subjects.
A common concern among the study participants who taught science to the arts major
students under the revised curriculum is provided below:
186
The participants were thus challenged to bridge the gap between their students
existing knowledge in science and the academic rigour demanded under the new
revisions.
Content Mastery
As mentioned in the previous chapter as well as in Chapter Two, new topics which
informed on recent activity in science research and development were included in the
revised science curriculum. While most of the participants recognised the advantages of
informing students on the latest trends in the field of science research, they felt that
these new topics were beyond the intellectual ability and mental maturity of their
students as these new science topics, such as Diversity and Evolution and Quantum
Physics, were meant for university students and should not be included for study at
junior colleges. The participants generally felt their students were not able to appreciate
such topics, that the topics were too tough for their students, and that from the
students viewpoint, the topics were just something very difficult which they have to
memorise.
In response, all the participants saw a need to adapt their teaching methods to help
their students in the learning of the advanced topics which were to be assessed in the
national examinations.
187
The
development of appreciation in the science subject the students were studying was a
secondary aim among the participants.
participants do not regard this concern as highly important towards preparing students
for the national examinations. For example, Sophie, a participant who had taught
chemistry for more than 20 years, remarked I had students who did not like nor
appreciate chemistry, but they still went on to score distinctions in the exams.
Nonetheless, the participants still hoped that their students would find the subject
relevant in their lives and be able to explain the scientific phenomena around them.
188
With regards to the new format of the exam paper, there are far fewer
Paper 3 questions and this Paper 3 is called Application Paper.
And in this Application Paper, there are 3 structured questions and 1
essay question. And this Application Paper is totally new topics
which happened to be university level topics. And nobody knows what
sort of questions can possibly be asked. (Jane, biology teacher)
The affected participants felt a need to clear their uncertainties on the scope of
instruction in order to teach their subjects well to their students and sufficiently prepare
them for the national examinations. They wanted to be sure that they had taught
everything that will be examined.
These
questions were used specifically for routine tests and for tutorial discussions. The
participants recognised that this important resource of past examination questions would
not be available until well after the first round of examinations under the new revisions
had been conducted. The participants thus faced the challenge of finding relevant
questions in preparing tests and tutorials, an especially difficult task in relation to new
topics. A commonly expressed concern among the participants was that without past
189
years examination papers questions, they could not help their students see patterns in
the examination questions.
The following remark by a veteran teacher who participated in this study is presented to
illustrate that participants with many years of teaching experience also felt inadequate
academically to teach the H3 science subjects:
For H3, it has been tough in the preparation of lessons due to lack of
content knowledge. There is a need to improve knowledge base so as
to better deliver the lessons. (Sophie, chemistry teacher)
The participants were thus challenged on their content knowledge to effectively teach
these subjects to their students and to engage the students intellectually.
The measures Singapore junior college science teachers adopt to address the perceived
problems with the revised curriculum are discussed in the next sub-section.
190
Table 6.1
Key Assertions Maintained with regards to the Three Facets of Measures.
Facet of Measures
Knowledge
Expansion
191
Table 6.1
(Continued)
Resource
Consolidation
Pedagogical
Adaptation
The next part of this sub-section provides evidence drawn from the study findings to
justify the theoretical assertions listed in Table 6.1.
192
Table 6.2
Examples of Books Referred to by the Study Participants.
Science
Subject
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
193
Figure 6.5
194
(Diane, physics
teacher)
195
service course.
These in-service courses, which were jointly taught by the Ministry personnel and
Singapore universities academic staff, provided participants the foundational content
knowledge to discharge their teaching duties. All the participants in this study attended
these courses during the first year of implementation of the revised junior college
curriculum.
Resource Consolidation
Active Referral and Utilisation of Materials from University-Based Textbooks and
Internet Portals for Teaching Content and Planning Instructional Activities
Unable to find ready-made resources to teach their subjects due to curriculum changes,
the participants resorted to consolidate their own teaching materials. The following
196
suggests the typical resources consolidated by the participants with regards to teaching
their science subjects under the revised junior college curriculum:
I will find pictures and diagrams from books and even applets
from the internet to help the students understand the abstract concepts I
am teaching. These diagrams and applets help the students to
visualise the concepts. (Margaret, physics teacher)
Figure 6.7a
participant.
197
Figure 6.7b
One participant even went to the extent of purchasing with her own funds universitybased textbooks to consolidate the necessary resources for teaching her science subject.
198
Figure 6.8
199
Q14
(a)
(b)
(i)
(ii)
State one precaution you should observe when carrying out an experiment
such as this one in order to gain accurate results.
(iii)
(iv)
(c)(i)
Use the bond energies given in the Data Booklet to calculate another value
for the standard enthalpy change of combustion of butane.
[Use a value of 805 kJ mol1 for the bond energy of C=O in CO2.]
(ii)
Suggest a reason for the discrepancy between this value and that quoted in
(b)(iv).
Figure 6.9
on Chemical Energetics.
200
examination questions for teachers use. The function of this team was to develop
teaching and learning resources through compiling the schools past years examination
question papers and solutions, other schools examination question papers and solutions,
as well as the national examination papers and the examiners reports. Three of the
study participants were members of this team.
201
Topic: Superposition
Re-Fitting and Re-Assembling of
Content Sequence by a Study
Participant
Content Sequence as
Recommended
by the Ministry of Education
Stationary waves
Diffraction
Interference
Two-source interference patterns
Diffraction grating
Figure 6.10
Stationary waves
Determination of frequency &
wavelength
Interference
Two-source interference patterns
Diffraction
Diffraction grating
While the participants had individual ways of re-fitting and re-assembling the
syllabus topics, the main goal was to teach the topics in a sequence that made more
sense to the students. In addition, all the participants made sure that they had covered
all topics stipulated in the curriculum objectives.
Pedagogical Adaptation
All the participants teaching the revised science curriculum employed pedagogical
adaptation, with innovations varying across the participant group. Table 6.3 below
provides examples of pedagogical adaptation adopted by participants in teaching their
science subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
202
Table 6.3
Examples of Pedagogical Adaptation by Study Participants.
Participant
Jane
Michael
Margaret
Martin
Facilitative teaching
Denise
Diane
Nancy
Collaborative learning
Marianne
Teacher-led discussion
Melissa
Use of Mind-maps
Sophie
Teacher-led discussion
Cindy
Socratic questioning
Bert
Demonstration of concepts
The selection of teaching methods and adapted practices were based on participants
personal and professional orientations as well as on their judgment of the levels and
adequacy of background educational knowledge of their students. The adapted teaching
practices of the study participants can be further conceptualised into four pedagogical
domains, namely, Teacher-directed; Student-directed; Knowledge-Transmitter; and
Knowledge-Sythesiser. The attributes and examples of each of these four domains, as
demonstrated by the participants, are shown in Table 6.4.
203
Table 6.4
Attributes and Examples in Each of the Four Domains of Pedagogical Practice.
Pedagogical
Attributes
Examples
Teacher-
Participant played a
directed
lessons.
Student-
directed
Knowledge-
Participant integrated
Synthesiser
different platforms of
building content
Domain
knowledge.
Knowledge-
Transmitter
interested in transferring
content knowledge to
students.
Extrapolating from the study, these four domains, in turn, can be viewed as established
four quadrants of pedagogical practices, as shown in Figure 6.11.
204
KnowledgeTransmitter
Teacherdirected
Studentdirected
KnowledgeSynthesiser
Figure 6.11
The teaching practices of all the participants were found to be distributed within these
four quadrants. For example, there was a participant who personally demonstrated an
experiment to his students and simultaneously posed thinking questions to them before
explaining the underlying concepts.
practices
located
in
the
Knowledge-Synthesiser-Teacher-directed
quadrant.
evidence drawn from the study that sustains these theoretical claims.
206
TOPIC: PHOTONICS
INTRODUCTION
Even though it is an area of rapid technological advance, this section can be explained
almost exclusively using classical physics. The key to getting to grips with this material is
being able to understand what happens to light when it encounters the boundary between
two media; light can be reflected, absorbed, transmitted or polarised. First of all, if
transmission of light involves a change of speed, it will be refracted.
REFRACTION
Refraction describes the change in direction of waves as they change speed, which has
implications for subjects like seismology as well as accounting for everyday observations.
For example, pools of water appear shallower than they really are while fish and other
objects look as if they are closer to the surface. Mirages are also caused by refraction.
People sometimes believe they are seeing small distant pools of water on a hot tarmac
road. The air just above a road heated by the sun is hot and less dense. Sunlight is refracted
away from the normal so that the blue light from the sky looks to an observer as if it is
coming out of the road. We interpret this as blue sky reflected by puddles in the road. See
figure below.
Figure 6.12
While attending in-service courses was a measure adopted by all the participants to
ameliorate the situation of teaching and learning the science subjects, they felt that the
teaching materials as well as the knowledge acquired were not sufficient or good
enough to teach effectively to their students. They had to fill up the necessary gaps to
the deficient knowledge areas and resources. The participants filled up these gaps,
again, by consulting and making reference to textbooks and internet portals.
207
Thus, as the study participants referred to textbooks used in university courses for
teaching the content of their subjects, they also had to carefully select the information
they required, and to translate that information to the level of comprehension suitable
for their students and to the examinations needs.
208
The participants re-adapted their classroom teaching by moving towards or away from a
particular domain of practice, either within a quadrant or across quadrants of
pedagogical practices (the four quadrants shown in Figure 6.11). Figure 6.13 provides a
schematic diagram on the process of pedagogical re-adaptation by moving within or
across pedagogical practices as demonstrated by the study participants.
KnowledgeTransmitter
Teacherdirected
Pedagogical
Re-adaptation
Studentdirected
KnowledgeSynthesiser
Figure 6.13
209
There were also participants who re-adapted their classroom teaching within the same
quadrant of pedagogical practice. An example of such a participant was Denise, a
Chemistry teacher. She described her initial teaching method as follows:
I just go through the answers. Then, if possible develop the concepts
using other questionsI just teach them the concepts to apply to
answer the questions (sic). (Denise, chemistry teacher)
Her initial teaching methods were located in the Knowledge-Transmitter-Teacherdirected quadrant of pedagogical practice. She noticed that her students were still
having difficulties in remembering the concepts taught.
In the example above, the re-adapted teaching method was still located in the same
quadrant of pedagogical practice of Knowledge-Transmitter-Teacher-directed. In
essence, the approach towards pedagogical re-adaptations was determined by individual
teaching experience and understanding of the classroom situation.
CONCLUSION
This chapter presented the core theory that explains how Singapore junior college
science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior
college curriculum. Singapore junior college science teachers do so through a threestaged individualised amelioration of the situation of teaching and learning the science
subjects under the revised junior college curriculum. The three stages in the theory are:
recognising a need to ameliorate the situation of teaching and learning the science
210
subjects; adopting measures to ameliorate the situation of teaching and learning the
science subjects; and refining the measures adopted to ameliorate the situation of
teaching and learning the science subjects. The recognition of the need to ameliorate
teaching and learning is a result of perceived challenges by the science teachers when
teaching their science subjects under the new revisions. The challenges are rooted in a
triangle of issues, and each issue is surrounded by a triangle of concerns pertaining to
teaching and learning. In order to achieve the aims of teaching their science subjects,
the science teachers take measures to address these perceived challenges.
The measures the science teachers adopt can be conceptualised into the following three
facets: knowledge expansion; resource consolidation; and pedagogical adaptation. The
science teachers further refine these adopted measures to meet their classroom needs. It
is also hypothesised that refinements to adopted measures are accomplished in the
following three ways: filling up gaps in the knowledge and materials obtained from
the course of knowledge expansion; modifying and filtering teaching materials obtained
through resource consolidation; and pedagogical re-adaptation. The science teachers
individual teaching experience and understanding of the classroom situation greatly
influence the way they deal with the teaching of science under the revised junior
college curriculum.
concerning all the three stages in the amelioration of the situation of teaching and
learning the science subjects, the concerns and actions of the science teachers can be
conceptualised, thus illuminating the idiosyncrasies of Singapore junior college science
teachers.
211
CHAPTER SEVEN
SUBSIDIARY PROPOSITIONS TO THE CORE THEORY
INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter provided the core theory that explains how Singapore junior
college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised
junior college curriculum.
subsidiary to the core theory. These propositions are termed subsidiary as their
purpose is to flesh out in the theory the finer details concerning the teaching of science.
While the core theory elucidates the overarching abstract process on the teaching of
science, the subsidiary propositions explicate how the science teachers deal with
specific issues that are intricately connected with delivering their science subjects under
the revised junior college curriculum.
propositions are grounded in data.
212
Provides an overarching
abstract theory on the
teaching of science under
the 2006 revised junior
college curriculum
Theory of a three-staged
individualised amelioration
of the situation of teaching
and learning the science
subjects
Subsidiary Propositions
First stage
Second stage
Third stage
213
Figure 7.1
Recognising a need to
ameliorate the
situation of teaching
and learning the
science subjects
Adopting measures to
ameliorate the
situation of teaching
and learning the
science subjects
Subsidiary
Proposition One
Subsidiary
Proposition Two
Subsidiary
Proposition Five
Subsidiary
Proposition Three
Subsidiary
Proposition Four
213
Five subsidiary propositions are presented in this chapter. The subsidiary propositions
are numerically labelled for the purpose of providing a structured order of discussion
and presentation.
science teachers main intention with regards to teaching their science subjects under
the new revisions. Subsidiary Proposition Two identifies the pedagogical practices of
the science teachers while Subsidiary Proposition Three postulates how the science
teachers handle the issue of professional knowledge. The reflective processes of the
science teachers are asserted in Subsidiary Proposition Four. Subsidiary Proposition
Five posits a particular educational paradigm within which teaching and learning of
science under the revised junior college curriculum transpire.
214
continue to orient the teaching and learning of science to performance in tests and
examinations.
As illustrated in Figure 7.2, eight of the nine issues the science teachers highlight in the
first stage of individualised amelioration of the situation of teaching and learning the
science subjects under the revised junior college curriculum involve preparing students
sufficiently for the national examinations.
Uncertainty
in the scope
of instruction
Coherency of
the revised
curriculum
structure
Sufficient
preparation of
students for
national
examinations
Knowledge
base of
teachers
Availability
of teaching
resources
New
assessment
format
Reduction in
curriculum
time
Content
mastery
Foundation
knowledge of
students
Figure 7.2
The science teachers common perspective is that the main goal of a junior college
education is to gain admission into universities. This perspective mirrors the realities of
students educational priorities, as the most popular educational aspiration of Singapore
students is to finish university (Tan, C, 2005a, p.448). As explained in Chapter Two,
junior colleges offer the most direct path towards university education. The science
teachers, thus, feel personally and professionally obliged to concentrate their efforts on
helping their students qualify for universities. The admission requirements to the three
local universities in Singapore, namely, National University of Singapore, Nanyang
Technological University, and Singapore Management University, are largely based on
examination grades.
Another likely reason for the science teachers emphasis on teaching for examinations
has to do with the societal notion of success. Examination results are still being used as
216
the main yardstick by Singapore society to measure success in students, teachers as well
as schools. Furthermore, messages on the importance of examinations are still being
sent out to teachers.
Brilliant youths are those who score lots of As and distinctions in the national
examinations (Ng, 2005, p.46). A study by local researcher Ng Pak Tee (Ng, 2004) on
students perception of change in the Singapore education system reveals that the
students are also obsessed with achieving good examination results. Thus, the science
teachers are likely to be influenced by the cultural environment, students educational
priorities and government pronouncements on the importance of examinations. These
factor undermine the science teachers efforts to teach less in order for the students to
learn more.
Furthermore, the banding system under which Singapore schools operate imposes
pressure to achieve high examination results. This system, known as the School
Achievement Tables groups schools based on the average aggregate of their students
academic performance in the national examinations.
Singapore junior college science teachers are therefore under a lot of pressure to deliver
quality examinations results. As mentioned in Chapter Five, each teacher participant in
this study was given an academic target in respect of examination grades, and each
217
teacher was expected to achieve value-addedness in the subjects that they were
teaching. Working in such a climate of academic competitiveness, the science teachers
are likely to focus on teaching for the purpose of excelling in examinations. The most
reliable method of teaching for examinations is by way of repetitive practice of model
examination questions that the teachers compile. Students who have excelled in the
national examinations have been reported to have undergone repetitive rounds of mock
examinations prepared by teachers (Tan, C, 2006a; Tan, J, 2005). Therefore, it is
unlikely that the Singapore junior college science teachers will discontinue this proven
method of drilling students. On the contrary, in dealing with the teaching of their
science subjects under the revised junior college curriculum, the science teachers are
likely to organise more rounds of tests and mock examinations to train and familiarise
students for the changes in the subject content and examination format.
Pedagogical
218
operate in an environment whereby the teachers hold the authority on what to learn and
how to learn.
219
KnowledgeTransmitter
Teacherdirected
Studentdirected
KnowledgeSynthesiser
Figure 7.3
instructional approach.
219
220
Table 7.1
The Expert-Formal Authoritative Instructional Approach and Singapore Junior
College Science Teachers Classroom Practices.
Expert-Formal Authoritative
Teaching Approach
Emphasises on comprehension of
concepts.
to assigned tasks.
organise various platforms of classroom activities to meet the learning needs of their
students.
These learning activities which include the use of ICT, mind-maps and
Roehrig, Kruse and Kern (2007) have classified teachers as Traditional and Inquiry.
Singapore junior college science teachers can also be similarly classified. There are
science teachers who prefer an inquiring way of teaching such as using mind-maps,
games and computer applets in lessons. Nonetheless, on the basis of the evidence
provided by the theory developed in this study and taking into account the pressure to
teach to tests and examinations that has been described earlier in this chapter, it is
reasonable to suggest that these Inquiry science teachers are likely to anchor their
teaching in training students on the correct way to answer examination questions
through routine tests and practice of past examination questions. Regardless of their
intrinsic epistemological orientation, it is highly probable that the Singapore junior
college science teachers will typically consolidate the teaching of their science subjects
by reference to past examination questions and the examiners reports on these
examination papers. Personal epistemological beliefs, according to researchers such as
Roehrig, Kruse and Kern (2007) as well as Smith and Southerland (2007), exert a great
influence on teachers pedagogical choices. These internally constructed beliefs are so
222
powerful that they are able to override the externally imposed aspects of contexts in
shaping pedagogical choices (Smith & Southerland, 2007, p.418). The converse of the
aforementioned statement by Smith and Southerland (2007) holds in the case of
Singapore junior college science teachers: the science teachers adapt their practices
according to contextual situations, and these contextual situations can override the
science teachers preferred choice of pedagogical practice.
Four specific situations are responsible for the use of the Expert-Formal Authoritative
instructional approach in the teaching of science in Singapore junior colleges. These
situations are identified in Figure 7.4.
Time
constraints in
delivering the
prescribed
content
Perceived
students
learning style
ExpertFormal
Authoritative
instructional
approach
High-stakes
unilateral
national
examinations
Demanding
curriculum
Figure 7.4
223
Facing a time constraint to finish delivering the prescribed syllabus, Singapore junior
college science teachers are unlikely to adopt student-centred learning activities which
take up a substantial amount of classroom time (Borich, 2007; Bolhuis & Voeten, 2004).
Furthermore, student-centred practices may not be as effective as teacher-centred
practices in helping students understand the difficult topics introduced to the curriculum.
The Expert-Formal Authoritative instructional approach allows teachers to synthesise
difficult topics into easily digested capsules (Glasgow, 1997, p.32), thus promoting the
development of foundation knowledge in students (Grasha, 2002). As reported in this
study, the students were perceived by the study participants to have difficulties in
understanding the advanced topics added to the revised science curriculum. The
responsibility to help students excel in examinations, which represent the sole gateway
to a university education places, pressure on the science teachers to maintain a teachercontrolled learning environment for lesson delivery. As pointed out by local researcher
Kevin Tan (2006), innovations in teaching and learning have to be accompanied by
appropriate assessment tools. Clearly, Singapore junior college science teachers are not
comfortable with students acquiring knowledge on their own. Another local researcher,
Ng Pak Tee (2007), highlights that it is paradoxical to expect teachers to truly embrace
the spirit of Innovation and Enterprise (one of the new educational initiatives
underpinning the 2006 revised junior college curriculum) when the teachers are
pressured to deliver quality examination results. Other researchers such as Au (2007),
as well as Valli and Buese (2007) have similarly reported teachers using an ExpertFormal Authoritative instructional approach when dealing with the aforementioned
teaching situations.
224
science subjects under the revised curriculum. For example, Socratic questioning
techniques have been used by teachers in their lesson delivery (Contact The Teachers
Digest Issue 02, July 2006). These are cases of teachers operating in the Knowledge
Synthesiser-Student-directed quadrant. However, these practices are likely to be
gravitated towards helping students achieve quality results in the examinations.
Furthermore, the teaching and learning activities that associate with these practices are
likely to reside in the Expert-Formal Authoritative instructional environment.
supported by other researchers, such as Watson and Manning (2008) as well as Childs
and McNicholl (2007).
225
The craft knowledge Singapore junior college science teachers regard as essential to
delivering their science subjects under the revised junior college curriculum, as
represented in Figure 7.5, comprises two bodies of knowledge, namely, the subject
matter content knowledge and the examination matter content knowledge.
The
former refers to the conceptual knowledge of the science subjects the teachers are
teaching, while the latter is concerned with the format and types of questions that are
likely to be asked in the national examinations as well as the way to answer these
questions to examiners expectations.
Figure 7.5
While subject matter content knowledge has an explicit definition residing in the
literature of educational research (Salloum & BouJaoude, 2008), the term examination
matter content knowledge is hardly used by scholars of education, although this body
of knowledge has been identified as a concern for teachers in some studies. For
example, Pringle and Martin (2005, p.353) report that because the teachers are
unaware of the test format, they expressed feelings of helplessness in preparing their
students for the unknown task, and many teachers expressed frustration with not
226
knowing the levels and the areas of science content knowledge on the test. Such
concerns relate to the teachers examination matter content knowledge.
A good
Teachers
To develop
Content knowledge
Students
Figure 7.6
Recitational content
knowledge
Teachers have been reported to resist change (Day, Flores & Viana, 2007; Flores; 2005;
Booyse & Swanepoel, 2004). Singapore junior college science teachers, however, take
an active role to acquire the aforementioned craft knowledge to teach their science
subjects under the new revisions. Knowledge Expansion (in the second stage of
individualised amelioration of the situation of teaching and learning the science subjects)
is the specific measure the science teachers employ to develop and acquire their subject
matter content knowledge and examination matter content knowledge. Such attitude
is perhaps a response to the imperative need to achieve good academic results in their
students. Scholars of education, too, maintain the importance of teachers possessing
strong subject content knowledge. However, the scholars basis for teachers having this
body of knowledge differs from that of the Singapore junior college science teachers, as
they (the scholars) maintain that teachers with deep subject content knowledge are then
likely to orchestrate student-centred learning activities for meaningful learning in
classrooms (Glasgow & Hicks, 2003).
228
Researchers, such as Peers, Diezmann and Watters (2003) as well as Schneider and
Krajcik (2002) have identified content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and
pedagogical content knowledge as the essential components of teachers craft
knowledge. The science teachers in Singapore junior colleges, however, are not likely
to place emphasis in developing their pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content
knowledge despite the call to adopt progressive pedagogies in the classrooms. This
deviation in perspectives between the science teachers and the educational researchers
can perhaps be attributed to different teaching environments.
While the science teachers generally acquire the new subject matter content
knowledge through in-service courses as well as by learning from departmental
colleagues, they attain examination matter content knowledge through an analysis of
the sample examination question paper, past examination questions papers and
examiners report.
Even though the science teachers have not seen the actual
examination question paper based on the new format, they still have to teach to the
examination. The reason for this has already been provided in Subsidiary Proposition
One. The science teachers teach to the examinations according to their understanding
of the new assessment requirements and they base this understanding primarily on the
sample examination question paper they received from the Ministry of Education of
Singapore. It is most likely that the science teachers will use the actual examination
question papers on the revised curriculum and the examiners report (both of which they
will receive after the first round of examinations) to enhance their examination matter
content knowledge and strengthen their practice in teaching for examination.
229
The
Table 7.2
Similarities Between the Theoretical Propositions Developed by Other Researchers and
the Way of Delivering their Science Subjects by Singapore Junior College Science
Teachers.
Theoretical Propositions Developed
by Other Researchers
occurs in stages.
subject in stages.
230
Table 7.2
(Continued)
Theoretical Propositions Developed
by Other Researchers
amalgamation of teachers
situations.
The interaction mentioned in Table 7.2 transpires in the form of a individual assessment
of teaching effectiveness based on the measures the individual science teachers adopt to
overcome the hindrances to preparing students adequately for the national
examinations. Teaching effectiveness is evaluated in terms of a triangle of components
as depicted in Figure 7.7.
231
Craft
knowledge
Self-evaluation on
teaching effectiveness
based on measures
teachers adopt
Teaching
Resources
Figure 7.7
Teaching
Methods
The three concerns shown in Figure 7.7 synchronise to the measures the science
teachers adopt in the second stage of individualised amelioration of teaching and
learning with Craft Knowledge relating to Knowledge Expansion; Teaching
Resources to Resource Consolidation, and Teaching Methods to Pedagogical
Adaptation. Furthermore, as illustrated in Figure 7.8, these concerns correspond to the
conceptualised challenges teachers face when implementing new educational initiatives
as established in the literature reviewed in Chapter Three.
232
Craft
Knowledge
Acquisition and
construction of
new knowledge
Teaching
Methods
Engaging
students
Teaching
Resources
Figure 7.8
As highlighted by Danielson (cited in Liew, 2005), teachers are always making and
remaking decisions to facilitate teaching and learning in the classrooms in response to
changing situations. Thus, it is highly unlikely that the science teachers would adopt
specific measures (in Stage Two of the theory) and use these measures without any
refinements during the two-year instruction of a cohort of students.
In order to
A schematic diagram, shown in Figure 7.9, is provided to illuminate the purpose and
outcome of the process of self-evaluation within the three stages of the theory.
233
Stage One of
the theory
Recognition of hindrances
to preparing students
adequately for national
examinations
Stage Two of
the theory
considering
Refinement of measures to
ameliorate the situation of
teaching and learning
Self-evaluation on teaching
effectiveness based on these
measures
through
Stage Three of
the theory
through
concerning
Knowledge
Expansion
Resource
Consolidation
Pedagogical
Adaptation
Pedagogical
re-adaptation
Teaching
Methods
Modifying and
filtering teaching
materials
obtained through
resource
consolidation
Filling up gaps
in the knowledge
and materials
obtained from
the course of
knowledge
expansion
Teaching
Resources
Craft
Knowledge
233
Figure 7.9
The purpose and outcome of the process of self-evaluation within the three stages of the theory.
234
reasonable to posit that teaching and learning of the revised science curriculum transpire
mainly in the Realist paradigm of education. The characteristics of such a paradigm
are provided in Table 7.3.
235
Table 7.3
Characteristics of a Realist Paradigm of Education.
Realist Paradigm of Education
Emphasis on developing students reasoning powers and
cognitive abilities at the expense of other aspects of students
development.
Lesson materials are presented in an orderly and organised
manner, and content is based on facts, reason and practical use.
Clearly defined criteria in subject matter are taught to students,
and students are formally assessed in standardised achievement
tests.
The teacher is an expert in the subject; he or she is skilful in
explaining the contents to the students and in assessing the
students understanding.
Routine tests are used to assess students progress in learning.
Source: Tan, C (2006b, 2006c)
Table 7.1 (presented in Section 7.2.2) has already identified that the Singapore junior
college science teachers adopt the Expert-Formal Authoritative instructional approach
when teaching their science subjects under the revised junior college curriculum.
Figure 7.10 below further amalgamates Tables.7.2 and 7.1, and extrapolates the ExpertFormal Authoritative instructional approach to the Realist educational paradigm.
236
The Expert-Formal
Authoritative
Instructional Approach
Teacher is the
undisputed dispenser of
knowledge which the
students assimilate
Teacher possesses
knowledge and
expertise students need
Emphasises on developing
students content
knowledge in accordance to
examination requirements
Emphasises on
comprehension of
concepts
236
Figure 7.10
paradigm.
Maintains a
standardised way of
completing assigned
tasks
Realist Educational
Paradigm
Emphasis on developing
students reasoning powers
and cognitive abilities at the
expense of other aspects of
students development
Lesson materials are presented
in an orderly and organised
manner, and content is based
on facts, reason and practical
use
Clearly defined criteria in
subject matter are taught to
students, and students are
formally assessed in
standardised achievement tests
The teacher is an expert in the
subject; he or she is skilful in
explaining the contents to the
students and in assessing the
d manner, and content is based
students understanding
on facts, reason and practical
use
Routine tests are used to assess
students progress in learning
Extrapolation from the Expert-Formal Authoritative instructional approach to the Realist educational
237
Thus, as clearly shown in Figure 7.10, the individualised amelioration of the situation of
teaching and learning the science subjects involves the use of the Expert-Formal
Authoritative instructional approach, and this approach follows the Realist paradigm
of education.
238
KnowledgeTransmitter
Teacherdirected
Studentdirected
KnowledgeSynthesiser
Figure 7.11
238
curriculum.
Pyramidal structure of educational paradigm, approach and practice in the implementation of the 2006 revised junior college
239
Recognition of
hindrances to preparing
students adequately for
national examinations
Stage One
of the theory
Subsidiary
Proposition One
Emphasis on teaching
for examinations
Subsidiary
Proposition Two
Stage Two
of the theory
Take measures to
overcome the
hindrances
Subsidiary
Proposition Three
Subsidiary
Proposition Four
Self-evaluation on
teaching effectiveness
based on these measures
Stage Three
of the theory
Refinement of measures
to ameliorate teaching
and learning
239
Figure 7.12
Adopting a Expert-Formal
Authoritative instructional
approach in response to
contextual situations
Building craft knowledge which is
made up of subject matter content
knowledge and examination
matter content knowledge
Subsidiary
Proposition Five
Transpiration of Realist
educational paradigm
punctuated with pockets of
Progressivism pedagogies
Integral diagram of the three stages of the core theory and the five subsidiary propositions in explaining how Singapore junior
240
college science teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
CONCLUSION
This chapter has presented five subsidiary propositions. These propositions flesh out in
the core theory the detailed process on how Singapore junior college science teachers
deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
241
A summary of the five subsidiary propositions presented in this chapter as well as their
association with the respective stages of the core theory is provided in Figure 7.13.
While the core theory presents a macroscopic abstract picture on how Singapore junior
college science teachers deliver their science subjects under the revised junior college
curriculum, the subsidiary propositions furnish a microscopic analysis on the science
teachers perspectives and actions with regards to specific educational issues concerning
the teaching and learning of the science subjects.
242
Subsidiary Propositions
Contrary to the emphasis on holistic development of students by the
initiatives underpinning the 2006 revised junior college curriculum, the
science teachers, when delivering their science subjects, focus primarily on
teaching students for examinations and developing students content
knowledge as well as recitational content knowledge.
Core Theory
Theory of a three-staged
individualised
amelioration of the
situation of teaching and
learning the science
subjects
Second stage:
Adopting measures to
ameliorate the situation of
teaching and learning the
science subjects
Third stage:
Refining the measures
adopted to ameliorate the
situation of teaching and
learning the science subjects
242
Figure 7.13
The core theory, the three stages of the core theory, and the associating subsidiary propositions.
243
CHAPTER EIGHT
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
INTRODUCTION
This concluding chapter is organised in six sections. The first section restates the
purpose of the study as well as outlines the research framework and methodology
employed to achieve this purpose. The second section reiterates the key premises of the
theory generated in the study. Important issues relating to the teaching and learning of
science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum, as identified by the theory,
are also highlighted in this section. Before presenting the theorys contribution for
improving knowledge and practice in education, it is important to communicate clearly
to readers regarding the matter of generalisability of the theory developed. This is done
in the third section of the chapter. The importance of the theory is discussed in terms of
its implications for: bringing about the successful realisation of the Thinking Schools,
Learning Nation vision; improving teaching practice in Singapore junior colleges; and
deepening our understanding of educational change. These implications are examined
in the fourth, fifth and sixth sections respectively.
244
To support the realisation of the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision, a revised
curriculum was implemented in all Singapore junior colleges with effect from January
2006. There is a general sentiment that junior college students are not being adequately
prepared for the knowledge-intensive economy. The 2006 revised junior college
curriculum, therefore, hopes to inculcate creativity, independent learning and analytical
thinking in the students through the use of progressive pedagogies in the classrooms
(Ministry of Education of Singapore, 2005a).
This study focused on the teaching and learning of science under the new educational
framework in Singapore junior colleges as science education has always been regarded
by Singapore government leaders as instrumental to the economic development of the
nation (Lui, 2006). Science education will continue to play an important role in the next
two decades as Singapore aspires to be an international hub for the research and
development of Biomedical Engineering and Biomedical Sciences, Environmental
and Water Technologies, and Interactive and Digital Media (Masagos, 2007).
Following the revisions, Singapore junior college science teachers are expected to put in
practice initiatives such as Teach Less, Learn More as well as Innovation and
Enterprise. These initiatives favour the use of progressive pedagogical approaches
over the traditional ways of teaching and learning science.
The realisation of the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision in junior colleges, in
essence, entails a re-culturing from an examination-oriented education to one driven
245
The central research question that guided theory development was: how do Singapore
junior college science teachers deal with the teaching and learning of their science
subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum? This study, commenced in
October 2007, utilised the research paradigm of interpretivism. The social theory of
symbolic interactionism was further anchored as the theoretical position of the study.
Grounded theory research methods were employed to answer the central research
question.
observations, and documents comprising teachers record books, official records as well
as ministerial releases. The aforementioned research design and strategy was adopted
as this framework best addressed the research aim.
246
Five subsidiary
propositions were also developed to explain within the theory the finer details
concerning how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching and
learning of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum.
The theory explains that Singapore junior college science teachers are likely to follow
three sequential stages when teaching their science subjects under the new revisions.
The first stage is that Singapore junior science teachers individually recognise a need to
ameliorate the situation of teaching and learning their science subjects due to perceived
challenges in achieving the aims of the science teachers. The theory further identifies
these challenges as:
247
unavailability of relevant curriculum resources for teaching the new science content
and familiarising students on the new examination format; and
insufficient content knowledge by the science teachers to teach the revised science
curriculum effectively.
Singapore junior college science teachers are likely to regard these challenges as
hindrances towards achieving their primary aim of preparing students sufficiently for
the national examinations. The theory, therefore, identifies a deviation in intentions and
priorities between the policy makers and the junior college science teachers. The
following subsidiary proposition was asserted to illuminate this deviation: Contrary to
the emphasis on holistic development of students by the initiatives underpinning the
2006 revised junior college curriculum, the science teachers, when delivering their
science subjects, focus primarily on teaching students for examinations and developing
students content knowledge as well as recitational content knowledge. The following
reasons were provided to explain why achieving excellent examination results remains
the top priority of Singapore junior college science teachers. First, the science teachers
believe that all junior college students hope to further their studies in universities and
good examination results are essential in realising this goal.
248
individually adopting measures to ameliorate the situation of teaching and learning the
science subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum constitutes the
second stage of the theory. The theory further identifies the measures Singapore junior
college science teachers put in practice as: Knowledge Expansion; Resource
Consolidation; and Pedagogical Adaptation.
The science teachers expand their knowledge mainly through: consulting reference
books; learning from fellow colleagues; and attending in-service courses. Most of the
reference books the science teachers refer to are university-based textbooks.
The
science teachers consolidate teaching and learning resources through the following three
ways: active referral and utilisation of materials from university-based textbooks and
internet portals for teaching content and planning instructional activities; compilation of
practice questions from past examination papers and examiners reports for routine
tests and tutorials; and re-fitting and re-assembling of the syllabus topics into a
coherent set of curriculum content.
249
Singapore junior college science teachers in the teaching and learning of the revised
science curriculum.
The theory also identifies that, notwithstanding the variation in classroom activities
during the teaching and learning of the revised science curriculum, Singapore junior
college science teachers are likely to anchor their pedagogical practices on a specific
instructional approach. The following subsidiary proposition was developed to further
explain this assertion: The pedagogical practices of Singapore junior college science
teachers in teaching their science subjects are rooted in the Expert-Formal
Authoritative instructional approach, and this approach is externally imposed rather
than intrinsically motivated. A number of reasons were further provided to explain why
the science teachers establish their teaching on the Expert-Formal Authoritative
approach. First, this approach is less time consuming and hence facilitates the delivery
of a demanding curriculum within a tight teaching schedule. Second, this approach is
perceived by the science teachers to be more effective, as compared to inquiry-based
learning, in helping the students master the content knowledge required for
assessments. Although the Expert-Formal Authoritative instructional approach may
not be the preferred pedagogical choice of Singapore junior college science teachers, it
is likely to be the common approach the science teachers would use as it offers the most
practical way to teach the science subjects under the revised junior college curriculum
based on the reasons provided above.
highlights the complications the junior college science teachers experience when
teaching the revised science curriculum.
250
The theory also identifies Singapore junior college science teachers perceived need to
acquire a new set of craft knowledge to teach the revised science curriculum due to
changes in the curriculum content and examination format. The following subsidiary
proposition was generated to further elucidate this issue: Singapore junior college
science teachers take measures to build their craft knowledge to teach the revised
science curriculum effectively, and this knowledge is made up of two other bodies of
knowledge, namely subject matter content knowledge and examination matter content
knowledge. Subject matter content knowledge refers to the conceptual knowledge of
the science subjects the science teachers are teaching, while examination matter content
knowledge concerns the type of questions that are likely to be asked in the national
examinations as well as the skills to answer these questions to examiners expectations.
The science teachers regard these two bodies of knowledge as essential to develop their
students content knowledge and recitational content knowledge. Furthermore, the
science teachers are likely to acquire the subject matter content knowledge by
attending in-service courses as well as conferring with departmental colleagues.
Examination matter content knowledge is mainly developed through an analysis of the
sample examination question paper, past examination question papers as well as
examiners report.
The third stage of the theory involves Singapore junior college science teachers
individually refining the measures they have adopted to ameliorate the situation of
teaching and learning the science subjects under the 2006 revised junior college
curriculum. The theory further identifies that refining of measures is accomplished
through: filling up gaps in the knowledge and materials obtained from the course of
knowledge expansion; modifying and filtering teaching materials obtained through
resource consolidation; and pedagogical re-adaptation within the four quadrants of
251
The theory also identifies a partial implementation of the initiatives that underpin the
revised science curriculum by Singapore junior college science teachers. The following
subsidiary proposition was developed to elucidate this phenomenon: Teaching and
learning of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum transpire in the
Realist paradigm of education punctuated with pockets of Progressivism
pedagogies. As mentioned earlier, Singapore junior college science teachers teach their
science subjects under the new revisions mainly through the Expert-Formal
Authoritative approach.
252
paradigm. However, there are also instances of the science teachers orchestrating
innovative instructional activities that follow the ethos of Teach Less, Learn More and
Innovation and Enterprise. Progressivism elements of teaching, such as mind-maps
and computer applets, are likely to be used only sporadically by the science teachers to
supplement the didactical delivery of the science lessons.
In essence, the theory developed in this study highlights the strong emphasis on
achieving quality examination results by the science teachers when teaching their
science subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum. The theory further
asserts that this emphasis is due to the importance of quality examination results to both
the junior college science teachers and students.
curriculum time and demanding curriculum content impede the science teachers efforts
to promote an inquiry-oriented approach of teaching. The theory also explains that the
science teachers do find opportunities to infuse student-centred learning in classrooms
and this practice eventuates in a partial implementation of the initiatives underpinning
the revised science curriculum.
253
Thus, it is possible that the various component elements of the theory generated can be
of application and relevance to primary and secondary schools in Singapore.
The vision of Thinking Schools, Learning Nation affects Singapore teachers at all
levels, and educational initiatives were also introduced in primary and secondary
schools. One such initiative was the introduction of Advanced Elective Modules in
selected secondary schools in 2006 (Ministry of Education of Singapore, 2009b). The
theory generated in this study, therefore, has the potential to explain how Singapore
primary school and secondary school teachers deal with the implementation of these
educational initiatives intended to support the vision of Thinking Schools, Learning
Nation.
conceptually dense and heavily interlaced with evidence from study findings. Strauss
and Corbin (1990) also cite theoretical density as an essential criterion to judge the
adequacy of a substantive theory inductively developed from empirical data.
254
255
the reasons for this imperative need. Thus, as highlighted by the theory developed in
this study, initiatives such as Teach Less, Learn More and Innovation and Enterprise
which underpin the new educational framework in Singapore junior colleges are
difficult to be realised if examination grades continue to serve as the sole determinant of
both the teachers and students capabilities. As Ng (2004, p.89) contends, regardless
what the rhetoric may be about creativity (and innovation), to the teachers and
students, mugging for examinations will still bear more material fruits than
spending time on exploratory work, since at the end of the day, it is the examination
that counts.
The theory developed in this study reinforces local educators (for example, Tan & Ng,
2005) call for more efforts and attention to be channelled towards broadening the
definition of success in education. Non-academic talents, as Charlene Tan (2005a,
2005b) argues, should be respected and valued. Therefore, a recommendation for
Singapore policy makers would be to expand local universities admission criteria to also
include junior college students non-academic achievements.
Assessment Method
Currently, students in Singapore junior colleges are formally assess by a unilateral
written examination system. In addition, the examination is episodic, which means
that the examination is performed on a single occasion and in a controlled
environment (Tan, K, 2006, p.118). As explained in the theory developed in this study,
such traditional examination system induces Singapore junior college science teachers
to orient their teaching by training students, through routine tests, for the examinations.
Rennie, Goodrum and Hackling (2001, p.493) also posit that traditional assessment
leads teacher to teach traditionally.
256
Local
researcher Kelvin Tan (2006) have proposed the use of extended assessment, that is,
assessing students over an extended period of time.
An example of an extended
Curriculum Content
The theory developed in this study also identifies that heavy and demanding curriculum
content discourages Singapore junior college science teachers from adopting inquiryoriented instructional approaches. Under the new revisions, the science teachers need to
teach three sets of syllabus, as compared to one under the former curriculum.
Furthermore, as explained by the theory, the infusion of advanced topics to the junior
college science curriculum is not likely to enhance the quality of interaction between
teachers and students. Teachers and students feel comfortable to engage in inquiryoriented instructional activities only when the topics that are being learnt can be easily
digested by the students. The practice of focusing on developing students content
knowledge and recitational content knowledge by the science teachers in teaching the
revised science curriculum, as highlighted in the theory, exemplifies what McCain
257
(2005, p.14) means by: teachers have little choice but to focus on content delivery
when dealing with a massive curriculum.
258
259
Date of
Test
Figure 8.1
Topics Tested
Target
Grade Set
for the Test
Actual Grade
Achieved in
the Test
Valueaddedness
Proposed academic goal setting and monitoring form to augment students involvement in their learning.
259
260
Since both the junior college science teachers and students have similar priorities in
education, the setting of academic goals and monitoring of performance will augur well
for the teaching and learning of science under the revised junior college curriculum. As
identified in this study, Singapore junior college science teachers are likely to use
assessments regularly to develop students content knowledge and recitational content
knowledge.
261
Table 8.1
Benefits of Error Analysis and How Singapore Junior College Science Teachers
Can Leverage on these Benefits.
Benefits of Error Analysis
Thus, while it may not be possible for Singapore junior college science teachers to
jettison the use of routine tests when delivering the revised science curriculum, they
can certainly develop students self-directedness in an assessment-driven educational
system through the practice of goal-setting and academic performance monitoring.
262
teachers can consider adopting other evaluation models to assess their effectiveness in
helping students in their learning.
263
Strong Agree
Agree
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Figure 8.2
This survey on students learning effectiveness, when used together with the
information provided in the students self-assessment on their academic performances
as presented earlier, constitutes a set of strong evaluation tools for Singapore junior
college science teachers to utilise in assessing their teaching effectiveness.
264
Steps
Intentions
Focus Set
Objective
Tells the students what they will learn (stating the objective),
shows the purpose of the learning, and indicates the
relevance of learning.
Instructional
objective
Modelling
Check for
understanding
Monitor
Guided practice
Independent practice
Figure 8.3
265
As illustrated in Figure 8.4, the pedagogical framework of the Hunter Model, namely
the Modelling, Check for Understanding Monitor, Guided practice, and
Independent Practice elements fit with the four quadrants of pedagogical practices.
The four quadrants of pedagogical practices, a model provided by the theory developed
in this study, maps the classroom practices of Singapore junior college science teachers
(presented in Chapter Six).
KnowledgeTransmitter
Modelling
Check for
Understanding
Monitor
Teacherdirected
Studentdirected
Guided
Practice
Independent
Practice
KnowledgeSynthesiser
Figure 8.4
Thus, the use of a structure for planning and delivery that synchronises with their
teaching practices, such as the Hunter Model, may greatly enhance the organisation of
the science teachers lessons, therefore improving the quality of instruction.
266
Implications for the Literature on How Teachers Deal With Curriculum Change
In Chapter Three of this thesis, it was established that there are three bodies of empirical
literature that pertain to how teachers deal with the curriculum change. These bodies
of literature are described as: the challenges the teachers face when implementing
curriculum changes; the meanings the teachers ascribe towards the curriculum changes;
and the theoretical propositions and models that explain how teachers implement
curriculum changes. The theorys implications for all these three areas of literature are
presented below.
Curriculum change often demands teachers to acquire new knowledge in content and
pedagogy (Chen, 2008; Niess, 2005; Windschitl, 2002). The theory developed in this
267
study indentifies that Singapore junior college science teachers recognise the
importance of acquiring new craft knowledge for effective teaching. However, the
junior college science teachers emphasise only on acquiring the subject matter content
knowledge as well as the examination matter content knowledge. These two bodies
of knowledge constitute the craft knowledge Singapore junior college science teachers
need to teach the revised science curriculum.
268
Singapore junior college science teachers pedagogical choices seem to support the
position adopted by Wu and Huang (2007) that teachers should vary their instructional
approaches to meet classroom needs. The theory developed in this study points out that
the junior college science teachers are likely to adapt their classroom practices in
response to different teaching contexts. In addition, the science teachers instructional
choices can be described within four quadrants of pedagogical practices. However,
these practices are likely to be anchored on an Expert-Formal Authoritative teaching
approach.
Insufficient time and lack of resources are commonly cited by researchers as the major
obstacles towards implementing curriculum changes (Bennett, 2003; Peers, Diezmann
& Watters, 2003; Kesidou & Roseman, 2002). Liew (2005) calls for more research on
how teachers deal with these challenges.
therefore an important contribution to this area of study. The theory identifies that
Singapore junior college science teachers are similarly challenged with insufficient
curriculum time for teaching and with inadequacy of resources for delivery of lessons.
The science teachers deal with these challenges through Pedagogical Adaptation and
Resource Consolidation respectively.
students, the science teachers are likely to re-adapt their pedagogical practices as well
as modify and filter the resources they consolidate.
Studies by Rigano and Ritchie (2003) as well as van den Berg (2002) highlight that the
outcomes of educational change depend on how teachers relate to the meanings of the
educational initiatives. The phenomenon that teachers implement curricula initiatives
according to how they perceive the initiatives benefitting students learning as asserted
269
The works of Smith and Southerland (2007) as well as van Veen and Sleegers (2006)
identify that teachers implement curricula changes according to their professional
orientations and personal epistemologies which in turn determine classroom practices.
Roehrig, Kruse and Kern (2007) further classify teachers as Traditional, Mechanistic,
or Inquiry in accordance to the teachers classroom practices. The theory developed in
this study indicates that Singapore junior college science teachers, too, can be classified
as Traditional or Inquiry. However, both the Traditional and Inquiry junior
college science teachers are likely to adopt an Expert-Formal Authoritative
instructional approach to deliver the revised science curriculum regardless of their
personal epistemological beliefs and preferred pedagogies. In this aspect, the theory
does not support the assertion by Smith and Southerland (2007, p.418) that teachers
internally constructed beliefs can override teaching contexts. The Singapore junior
college science teachers preferred classroom practices are likely to be overridden by
the exigency to prepare students for national examinations through the traditional way
of drill and practice of mock examinations.
The literature, in particular the works of Evers and Arat (2004) as well as Vidovich
and ODonoghue (2003) highlights the importance of teachers sense of ownership
towards curricula initiatives for successful implementation. The theory generated in
this study indicates that Singapore junior college science teachers maintain a sense of
270
ownership over their students progress in learning. The science teachers, however, are
not likely to see themselves as owners but rather, implementers of the initiatives that
underpin the revised science curriculum.
assertion by Nolan and Meister (2000, p.213) that it is the commitment to students and
not the commitment to innovation that determines teacher willingness to implement
an initiative.
The literature, particularly the works of Collet, Menlo and Rosenblatt (2004) as well as
Barab and Luehman (2003), acknowledges the strong impact of classroom and societal
norms on how teachers implement educational initiatives.
This phenomenon is
supported by the theory developed in this study. The educational culture and societal
expectation on Singapore junior college science teachers to deliver quality examination
results undermine their efforts to put in practice initiatives such as Teach Less, Learn
More and Innovation and Enterprise.
The theory generated in this study highlights the individualisation of teachers practices
in the implementation of educational initiatives. This phenomenon is also observed in
271
the studies conducted by Drake and Sherin (2006), and Nolan and Meister (2000). The
model of curriculum use developed by Drake and Sherin (2006) describes teachers
individualised pattern in reading, evaluating and adapting curriculum materials. Nolan
and Meister (2000, p.210) believe that because of teachers individual responsibility to
their subject areas, teachers implement curricula objectives differently.
Chapter Three has identified Charlene Tan (2006a, 2006c), Ng Pak Tee (2005a, 2004),
Jason Tan (2005), and Hairon (2003) as the main contributors in examining how
teachers in Singapore schools implement important educational initiatives such as
Teach Less, Learn More and Innovation and Enterprise.
this study corroborates with some of the works of these local researchers. For example,
the theory supports Jason Tans (2005) belief that the initiatives supporting the vision of
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation are being implemented in a piecemeal fashion.
As identified in the theory, Singapore junior college science teachers sporadically adopt
progressive pedagogies that underpins the 2006 revised junior college curriculum
when teaching their science subjects under the new revisions. The theory also agrees
with Charlene Tans (2006c, p.145) contention that education in Singapore is likely to
remain Realist in its overarching goal to harness the students talents and abilities for
272
the good of the society. In addition, the theory reinforces Ngs (2004) argument that
excessive competition for quality examination grades in Singapore education system
results in the practice of teaching for examinations in Singapore schools.
The theory also has the potential to stimulate further thoughts with regards to some of
the suggestions provided by local researchers. In his analysis on the success of the
Innovation and Enterprise initiative, Ng (2005a, p.49) provides examples of how
Singapore primary school teachers can conduct simple innovative lessons that
develops intellectual curiosity in students. However, as identified in the theory,
Singapore junior college science teachers are not likely to teach with the main intention
of inculcating intellectual curiosity in students. The junior college science teachers
may orchestrate simple innovative instructional activities in lessons (for example,
mind-maps and computer applets), but these activities largely serve to develop content
knowledge and recitational content knowledge for examinations purpose rather than
inculcating a spirit of inquiry and innovation in the students.
In his study on how schools implement initiatives that support the Thinking Schools,
Learning Nation vision, Hairon (2003) recommends that teachers invest time to nurture
a collaborative culture through activities such as peer teaching and group marking.
The theory of a three-staged individualised amelioration of teaching and learning,
however, highlights the individualised culture in Singapore junior college science
teachers. Thus, Hairons call for teachers to break the individualisation culture by
sharing accountabilities and responsibilities may not be easily achieved. As explained
in the theory, teachers may have their individual set of priorities due to different
classroom contexts.
273
CONCLUSION
This chapter, in concluding the thesis, has restated the purpose of this study as well as
outlined the research framework and methodology to achieve this purpose. The key
premises of the core theory and subsidiary propositions that were developed to explain
how Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching of their science
subjects under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum are also reiterated. The
contribution of the theory towards improving knowledge and professional practice in
education is also illuminated in this chapter.
makers on how to strengthen Singapore junior college science teachers efforts to realise
the Thinking Schools, Learning Nation vision are provided.
The teachers
The theory developed in this study has explained that Singapore junior college science
teachers deal with the teaching of science under the 2006 revised junior college
curriculum in three sequential stages.
274
teachers intentions, and identified their practices in light of their priorities, concerns as
well as dilemmas in teaching their science subjects under the new revisions. In addition,
impediments to the transformation of Singapore schools into thinking institutions and
the country into a learning nation are illuminated by the theory. Slavin (2001) asks if
research does really provide the knowledge to guide educational policy and practice.
The theory that Singapore junior college science teachers deal with the teaching and
learning of science under the 2006 revised junior college curriculum through a threestaged individualised amelioration of the situation of teaching and learning the science
subjects certainly has the potential to do so.
275
References
Anderson, R. D., and Helms, J. V. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of
schools: Needed research, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 316.
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry,
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 112.
Arksey, H., and Knight, P. (1999). Interviewing for Social Scientists: An Introductory
Resource with Examples. London: Sage.
Ayres, P., Sawyer, W., and Dinham, S. (2004). Effective teaching in the context of a
Grade 12 high-stakes external examination in New South Wales, Australia, British
Educational Research Journal, 30(1), 141165.
Balfanz, R., Legters, N., West, T. C., and Weber, L. M. (2007). Are NCLBs measures,
incentives, and improvement strategies the right ones for the nations lowperforming high schools?, American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 559
593.
Barnett, J., and Hodson, D. (2001). Pedagogical context knowledge: Toward a fuller
understanding of what good science teachers know, Science Education, 85, 426
453.
Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon
one's conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study, Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563581.
Bell, T., Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., & Ploetzner, R. (2010). Collaborative inquiry
learning: Models, tools, and challenges, International Journal of Science
Education, 32(3), 349377.
Bennett, J. (2003). Teaching and Learning Science: A Guide to Recent Research and Its
Applications. London: Continuum.
Berg, B. L. (1998). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (3rd ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Birks, M., Mills, J., Francis, K., and Chapman, Y. (2009). A thousand words paint a
picture: The use of storyline in grounded theory research, Journal of Research in
Nursing, 14(5), 405417.
277
Boote, D. N., and Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the
dissertation literature review in research preparation, Educational Researcher,
34(6), 315.
Booyse, J., and Swanepoel, C. (2004). The impact of educational change on teachers of
the Rainbow Nation. In P. Poppleton and J. Williamson (Eds.), New Realities of
Secondary Teachers Work Lives, (pp.173203). Oxford: Symposium Books.
Bramble, J. (2005). Reshaping their view: Science as liberal arts, New Directions for
Teaching and Learning, 103, 5160.
278
Brookhart, S. M., Moss, C. M., and Long, B. A. (2010). Teacher inquiry into formative
assessment practices in remedial reading classrooms, Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(1), 4158.
Brown, B. A., Reveles, J. M., and Kelly, G. J. (2005). Scientific literacy and discursive
identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning, Science
Education, 89, 779802.
Brown, G. T. L., Kennedy, K. J., Fok, P. K., Chan, J. K. S., and Yu, W. M. (2009).
Assessment for student improvement: Understanding Hong Kong teachers
conceptions and practices of assessment, Assessment in Education: Principles,
Policy & Practice, 16(3), 347363.
Brown, S. C., Stevens Jr, R. A., Troiano, P. F., and Schneider, M. K. (2002). Exploring
complex phenomena: Grounded theory in students affairs research, Journal of
College Student Development, 43(2), 173183.
Bybee, R. W. and Fuchs, B. (2006). Preparing the 21st century workforce: A new reform
in science and technology education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
43(4), 349352.
Campbell, J., Smith, D., Boulton-Lewis, G., Brownlee, J., Burnett, P. C., Carringtion, S.,
and Purdie, N. (2001). Students perceptions of teaching and learning: The
influence of students learning approaches to learning and teachers approaches to
teaching, Teacher and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 7(2), 173187.
279
Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., and Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student
learning: Testing the linkages, Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 132.
Carnoy, M., and Rhoten, D. (2002). What does globalisation mean for educational
change? A comparative approach, Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 19.
Chan, D., and Ng, P. T. (2008). Similar agendas, diverse strategies: The quest for a
regional hub of higher education in Hong Kong and Singapore, Higher Education
Policy, 21, 487503.
Chan, J. K. S. (2010). Teachers responses to curriculum policy implementation:
Colonial constraints for curriculum reform, Educational Research for Policy and
Practice, 9(2), 93106.
Chang, C. Y., and Tsai, C. C. (2005). The interplay between different forms of CAI and
students preferences of learning environment in the secondary science class,
Science Education, 89, 707724.
Cheah, Y. M. (1998). The examination culture and its impact on literacy innovations:
The case of Singapore, Language and Education, 12(3), 192209.
280
Childs, A., and McNicholl, J. (2007). Investigating the relationship between subject
content knowledge and pedagogical practice through the analysis of classroom
discourse, International Journal of Science Education, 29(13), 16291653.
Churchill, R., and Williamson, J. (2004). Teachers work lives in an environment of
continual educational change: Australian perspectives. In P. Poppleton and J.
Williamson (Eds.), New Realities of Secondary Teachers Work Lives: An
International Comparative Study of the Impact of Educational Change on the
Work Lives of Secondary School Teachers in Nine Countries, (pp.2955). Oxford:
Symposium Books.
Coenders, F., Terlouw, C., and Dijkstra, S. (2008). Assessing teachers beliefs to
facilitate the transition to a new chemistry curriculum: What do the teachers
want?, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(4), 317335.
Collet, L., Menlo, A., and Rosenblatt, Z. (2004). How educational change affects
secondary school teachers. In P. Poppleton and J. Williamson (Eds.), New
Realities of Secondary Teachers Work Lives: An International Comparative Study
of the Impact of Educational Change on the Work Lives of Secondary School
Teachers in Nine Countries, (pp.245290). Oxford: Symposium Books.
Colucci-Gray, L., Camino, E., Barbiero, G., and Gray, D. (2006). From scientific
literacy to sustainability literacy: An ecological framework for education, Science
Education, 90, 227252.
Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 03. (October 2005). TLLM in Perspective:
Transforming Learning, from Quantity to Quality. Singapore: Author.
Contact The Teachers Digest Issue 02. (July 2006). Towards Greater Flexibility and
Diversity in Schools. Singapore: Author.
281
Datnow, A., Hubbard, L., and Mehan, H. (2002). Extending Educational Reform: From
One School to Many. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Davis, E. A., and Smithey, J. (2009). Beginning teachers moving toward effective
elementary science teaching, Science Education, 93, 745770.
Davis, K. S. (2003). Change is hard: What science teachers are telling us about reform
and teacher learning of innovative practices, Science Education, 87, 330.
Dawson, V., and Venville, G. J. (2008). High-school students informal reasoning and
argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy?,
International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 14211445.
Day, C., Flores, M. A., and Viana, I. (2007). Effects of national policies on teachers'
sense of professionalism: Findings from an empirical study in Portugal and in
England, European Journal of Teacher Education, 30(3), 249265.
282
Delors, J., Mufti, I. A., Amagi, I., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., Geremek, B., Gorham, W.,
Kornhauser, A., Manley, M., Quero, M. P., Savan, M., Singh, K., Stavenhagen,
R., Myong, W. S., and Zhou, N. (1996). Report to UNESCO of the International
Commission on Education for the Twenty-First Century Learning: The Treasure
Within. Paris: UNESCO.
Deng, Z., and Gopinathan, S. (2005). The information technology masterplan. In J. Tan
and P. T. Ng (Eds.), Shaping Singapores Future: Thinking Schools, Learning
Nation, (pp.2240). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Denzin, N., and Lincoln, Y. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative
research. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research,
(pp.119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Department of Education of the United States (2004, July 1). Overview: Four Pillars Of
NCLB. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/4pillars.html
Department of Education of the United States (2007, June 1). Building On Results: A
Blueprint For Strengthening The No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved January 3,
2008 from http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/nclb/buildingonresults.html
Dewey, J. (1956). The child and the curriculum. In J. Dewey (Ed.), The Child and the
Curriculum, The School and Society, (pp.331). Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Donnelly, J. (2001). Contested terrain or unified project? The nature of science in the
national curriculum for England and Wales, International Journal of Science
Education, 23(2) 181195.
283
Drake, C., and Sherin, M. G. (2006). Practicing change: Curriculum adaptation and
teacher narrative in the context of mathematics education reform, Curriculum
Inquiry, 36(2), 153187.
Drake, C., Spillane, J. P., and Hufferd-Ackles, K. (2001). Storied identities: Teacher
learning and subject-matter context, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33, 123.
Driver, R., Newton, P., and Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific
argumentation in classrooms, Science Education, 84, 287312.
(4).
Retrieved
December
2008
from
http://www.e-
c.edu.hk/eng/reform/Progress%20Report%20(Eng)%202006.pdf
Edwards, R., and Usher, R. (2008). Globalisation and Pedagogy: Space, Place and
Identity (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Enyedy, N., Goldberg, J., and Welsh, K. M. (2006). Complex dilemmas of identity and
practice, Science Education, 90, 6893.
Essex, N. L. (2006). What Every Teacher Should Know About No Child Left Behind.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Evers, T., and Arat, N. (2004). What has change got to do with it. Teachers Work
Lives: U.S. perspectives. In P. Poppleton and J. Williamson (Eds.), New Realities
of Secondary Teachers Work Lives, (pp.205220). Oxford: Symposium Books.
Fairbrother, R. (2000). Strategies for learning. In M. Monk and J. Osborne (Eds.), Good
Practice in Science Teaching: What Research has to Say, (pp.724). Buckingham:
Open University Press.
284
Falk, J., and Drayton, B. (2004). State testing and inquiry-based science: Are they
complementary or competing reforms?, Journal of Educational Change, 5(4),
345387.
Felder, R. M., and Spurlin, J. (2005). Applications, reliability and validity of the Index
of Learning Styles, International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103
112.
Fensham, P. J. (2006). Science for all: A reflective essay. In J. Gilbert (Ed.), Science
Education: Major Themes in Education Vol. II, (pp.934). London: Routledge.
Fink, D., and Stoll, L. (2005). Educational change: Easier said than done. In A.
Hargreaves (Ed.), International Handbook of Educational Change Extending
Educational Change, (pp.1741). Dordrecht: Springer.
Fishman, B. J., and Krajcik, J. (2003). What does it mean to create sustainable science
curriculum innovations? A commentary, Science Education, 87, 564573.
Flores, M. A. (2005). Teachers views on recent curriculum changes: Tensions and
challenges, The Curriculum Journal, 16(3), 401413.
Fontana, A., and Frey, J. H. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to
negotiated texts. In N. K. Denzin, and L. S. Yvonna (Eds.), Handbook of
Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp.645672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fullan, M. (2007). The New Meaning of Educational Change (4th ed.). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Glasgow, N. A., and Hicks, C. D. (2003). What Successful Teachers Do: ResearchBased Classroom Strategies for New and Veteran Teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Goe, L., Bell, C., and Olivia, L. (2008). Approaches to Evaluating Teacher
Effectiveness: A Research Synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive
Centre
for
Teacher
Quality.
Retrieved
March
1,
2009
from
http://tqcenter.learningpt.org/whatworks/WWC08buildingCapacity/resources/
Research_Synthesis.pdf
Goh, C. T. (1997). Speech by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong at the opening of the 7th
International Conference on Thinking on Monday, 2 June 1997, at 9.00am at the
Suntec City Convention Centre Ballroom. Retrieved March 5, 2007 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/speeches/1997/020697.htm
Goh, C. T. (2001). Speech by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong at the Teachers Day
Rally, at the Singapore Expo on Friday, 31 August 2001 at 7.30pm. Retrieved
December 17 2007 from http://www.moe.gov.sg/speeches/2001/sp31082001.htm
286
Grber, W., Nentwig, P., Becker, H., Sumfleth, E., Pitton, A., and Wollwebber, K.
(2001). Scientific literacy: From theory to practice. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke,
R. Duit, W. Grber, M. Komorek, A. Kross and P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in
Science Education Past, Present, and Future, (pp.6170). Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Press.
Granger, C. A., Morbey, M. L., Lotherington, H., Owston, R. D., and Wideman, H. H.
(2002). Factors contributing to teachers successful implementation of IT, Journal
of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 480488.
Green, A (1999). Education and globalisation in Europe and East Asia: Convergent and
divergent trends, Journal of Education Policy, 14(1), 5571.
Green, A (2000). Converging paths or ships passing in the night? An English critique
of Japanese school reform, Comparative Education, 36(4), 417435.
Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., Dehaan, R., Gentile,
J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tilghman, S.M., and Wood, W.B. (2004). Scientific
teaching, Science, 304, 521522.
Hargreaves, A., Lieberman, A., Fullan, M., and Hopkins, D. (2005). International
handbook of educational change introduction. In A. Lieberman (Ed.),
International Handbook of Educational Change The Roots of Educational
Change, (pp.viixi). Dordrecht: Springer.
288
Henn, M., Weinstein, M., and Foard, N. (2006). A Short Introduction to Social
Research. London: Sage.
Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., and Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating
ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change, Journal
of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155192.
Henze, I., Van Driel, J., and Verloop, N. (2007). The change of science teachers
personal knowledge about teaching models and modelling in the context of science
education reform, International Journal of Science Education, 29(15), 18191846.
Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future,
International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645670.
Hoyle, R. H., Harris, M. J., and Judd, C. M. (2002). Research Methods in Social
Relations (7th ed.). Victoria: Thomson Learning.
Hung, D., Ng, P. T., Koh, T. S., and Lim, S. H. (2009). The social practice of learning:
A craft for the 21st century, Asia Pacific Education Review, 10(2), 205214.
Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of neoliberal education
policies, American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493518.
Jackson, W. (2003). Methods: Doing Social Research (3rd ed.). Toronto: Prentice
Hall.
289
Johnston, J., and Ahtee, M. (2006). Comparing primary student teachers attitudes,
subject knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge needs in a physics activity,
Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(4), 503512.
Kahle, J. B., and Boone, W. (2000). Strategies to improve student science learning:
Implications for science teacher education, Journal of Science Teacher Education,
11(2), 93107.
Kang, N., and Wallace, C. S. (2005). Secondary science teachers use of laboratory
activities: Linking epistemological beliefs, goals, and practices, Science
Education, 89, 140165.
Kang, T. (2005). Diversification of Singapores upper secondary landscape: Introduction
of the integrated programmes, specialised independent schools and privatelyfunded schools. In J. Tan and P. T. Ng (Eds.), Shaping Singapores Future:
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation (pp.5267). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Kember, D. (2001). Beliefs about knowledge and the process of teaching and learning as
a factor in adjusting to study in higher education, Studies in Higher Education,
26(2), 205221.
Kennedy, K. J., Fok, P. K., and Chan, K. S. J. (2006). Reforming the curriculum in a
post-colonial society: The case of Hong Kong, Planning & Changing, 37(1 & 2),
111130.
Kesidou, S., and Roseman, J. E. (2002). How well do middle school science programs
measure up? Findings from Project 2061s curriculum review, Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 39(6), 522549.
Keys, P. M. (2005). Are teachers walking the walk or just talking the talk in science
education?, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(5), 499516.
Kirk, D., and MacDonald, D. (2001). Teacher voice and ownership of curriculum
change, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(5), 551567.
Klein, M. (2001). Constructivist practice, pre-service teacher education and change: The
limitations of appealing to hearts and minds, Teacher and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, 7(3), 257269.
Koh, K., and Luke, A. (2009). Authentic and conventional assessment in Singapore
schools: An empirical study of teacher assignments and student work, Assessment
in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(3), 291318.
Lang, H. G., Stinson, M. S., Kavanagh, F., Liu, Y., and Basile, M. L. (1999). Learning
styles of deaf college students and instructors teaching emphases, Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education, 4(1), 1627.
291
Lee, Y. J., and Yeoh, O. C. (2001). School science and the nature of science. In J. Tan,
S. Gopinathan and W. K. Ho (Eds.), Challenges Facing the Singapore Education
System Today, (pp.8394). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Lee, Y. P. (2005). Forces shaping the future of teaching and learning of mathematics,
Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 4(23), 169179.
Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative Research in Education: A Users Guide. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Liew, W. M. (2005). Teachers professional lives in an age of educational reform. In J.
Tan and P. T. Ng (Eds.), Shaping Singapores Future: Thinking Schools, Learning
Nation, (pp.137166). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverley Hills: Sage.
Linnenbrink, E. A., and Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student
engagement and learning in the classroom, Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19,
119137.
Liston, D. P., and Zeichner, K. (2006). Teacher education and the social context of
schooling: Issues for curriculum development. In D. Hartley and M. Whitehead
(Eds.), Teacher Education: Major Themes in Education Volume III Curriculum
and Change, (pp.403428). London: Routledge.
Liu, X., Zhang, B., Liang, L. L., Fulmer, G., Kim, B., and Yuan, H. (2009). Alignment
between the physics content standard and the standardised test: A comparison
among the United States-New York state, Singapore, and China-Jiangsu, Science
Education, 93, 777797.
Lloyd, J. M., and Rezba, R. J. (2004). Roles and teaching principles of secondary
science teachers, School Science Review, 85(313), 6370.
292
Lui, T. Y. (2006). Opening address by Radm (NS) Lui Tuck Yew, Minister of State,
Ministry of Education, at the Singapore Mathematical Society annual prize
presentation ceremony at the NUS High School of Mathematics and Science on
Saturday, 2 September, at 10am. Retrieved December 17, 2007 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/speeches/2006/sp20060902.htm
Luke, A., Freebody, P., Lau, S., and Gopinathan, S. (2005). Towards research-based
innovation and reform: Singapore schooling in transition, Asia Pacific Journal of
Education, 25(1), 528.
May, T. (2001). Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process (3rd ed.). Buckingham:
Open University Press.
293
McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., and Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the
nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The Nature of
Science in Science Education: Rationale and Strategies, (pp.339). Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Millar, R., and Osborne, J. (2006). Designing a new science curriculum. In J. Gilbert
(Ed.), Science Education: Major Themes in Education Volume I, (pp.412427).
London: Routledge.
Ministry of Education of Singapore (2005a, May 5). Report of the Junior College/Upper
Secondary Education Review Committee. Retrieved January 24, 2006 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/jcreview/JC_Upp_Sec_Review_Report.pdf
294
Ministry of Education of Singapore (2005b, May 16). Breadth and Flexibility: The New
A
Level
Curriculum
2006.
Retrieved
January
23,
2006
from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/cpdd/alevel2006/pdf/brochure.pdf
Ministry of Education of Singapore (2006a, February 15). A Level Subjects at H1, H2,
and H3 Levels for 2006 Curriculum. Retrieved March 10, 2006 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/corporate/preu_02_print.htm
Ministry of Education of Singapore (2007b, June 29). Singapore Mission and Vision
Statement. Retrieved December 15, 2007 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/corporate/mission_statement_print.htm
Monk, M., and Dillon, J. (2000). The nature of scientific knowledge. In M. Monk and J.
Osborne (Eds.), Good Practice in Science Teaching: What Research has to Say,
(pp.7287). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Monkman, K., and Baird, M. (2002). Educational change in the context of globalisation,
Comparative Education Review, 46(4), 497508.
Moss, D. M., Abrams, E. D., and Robb, J. (2001). Examining student conceptions of the
nature of science, International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 771790.
National Centre for Education Statistics. (2004, December 14). Highlights from the
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study: TIMSS 2003. Retrieved
December 15, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005005.pdf
296
Nolan Jr., J., and Meister, D .G. (2000). Teachers and Educational Change: The Lived
Experience of Secondary School Restructuring. New York: State University of
New York Press.
ODonoghue, T. (2007). Planning Your Qualitative Research Project: An Introduction
to Interpretivist Research in Education. London: Routledge.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., and Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation
in school science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(10), 9941020.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., and Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of
the literature and its implications, International Journal of Science Education,
25(9), 10491079.
297
Ostermeier, C., Prenzel, M., and Duit, R. (2010). Improving science and mathematics
instruction: The SINUS project as an example for reform as teacher professional
development, International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 303327.
Owston, R. (2007). Contextual factors that sustain innovative pedagogical practice using
technology: An international study, Journal of Educational Change, 8(1), 6177.
Parker, J., and Heywood, D. (2000). Exploring the relationship between subject
knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge in primary teachers learning about
forces, International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 89111.
Pederson, J. E., Bonnstetter, R. J., Rioseco, M., Brien-Valero, J. M., Garcia, H., and
OCallaghan, J. (2000). International partnerships as a means of reforming science
teacher education. In S. K. Abell (Ed.), Science Teacher Education: An
International Perspective, (pp.171192). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Peers, C. E., Diezmann, C. M., and Watters, J. J. (2003). Supports and concerns for
teacher professional growth during the implementation of a science curriculum
innovation, Research in Science Education, 33(1), 89110.
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., and Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes
professional
development
effective?
Strategies
that
foster
curriculum
298
Powell, W. W., and Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy, Annual Review of
Sociology, 30, 199220.
Pringle, R. M., and Martin, S. C. (2005). The potential impacts of upcoming high- stakes
testing on the teaching of science in elementary classrooms, Research in Science
Education, 35(23), 347361.
Reilly, L. (2007). Progressive Modification: How Parents Deal With Home Schooling
Their Children with Intellectual Disabilities. Unpublished PhD Thesis, The
University of Western Australia.
Rennie, L. J., Goodrum, D., and Hackling, M. (2001). Science teaching and learning in
Australian schools: Results of a national study, Research in Science Education,
31(4), 455498.
Rigano, D. L., and Ritchie, S. M. (2003). Implementing change within a school science
department: Progressive and dissonant voices, Research in Science Education,
33(3), 299317.
Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., and Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics
and their influence on curriculum implementation, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 44(7), 883907.
299
Roth, W., and Dsautels, M. J. (2004). Educating for citizenship: Reappraising the role
of science education, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology
Education, 4(2), 149168. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from
http://www.educ.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/PREPRINTS/Citizenship.pdf
Salloum, S. L., and BouJaoude, S. (2008). Careful! It is H2O? Teachers conceptions of
chemicals, International Journal of Science Education, 30(1), 3364.
Schneider, R. M., and Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role
of educative curriculum materials, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3),
221245.
300
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform, Harvard
Educational Review, 57(1), 122.
Siew, A. (2006, June 21, 2006). Multi-billion dollar IT plan unveiled. The Straits Times,
p.1.
Simon, S. (2000). Students attitudes towards science. In M. Monk and J. Osborne
(Eds.), Good Practice in Science Teaching: What Research has to Say, (pp.104
119). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (2006, March 27). GCE A Level
Examination Exam Syllabus for School Candidates. Retrieved March 27, 2006
from http://www.seab.gov.sg/SEAB/aLevel/syllabus/school/2007_GCE_A_H.html
Singapore Teachers Union (2004). Education in Singapore: Reform and Changes.
Singapore: Author.
301
Slavin, R. E. (2001). Does rigorous research knowledge provide a better base for
improving student achievement than teachers craft knowledge?, Journal of
Education Change, 2(4), 347348.
Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies
of engagement: Classroom-based practices, Journal of Engineering Education,
94(1), 87101.
Sorsby, B. (2000). The irresistible rise of the nature of science in the science curricula.
In J. Sears and P. Sorensen (Eds.), Issues in Science Teaching, (pp.2330).
London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Spektor-Levy, O., Eylon, B-S., and Scherz, Z. (2008). Teaching communication skills in
science: Tracing teacher change, Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 462
477.
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., and Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and
cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research, Review of
Educational Research, 72(3), 387431.
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory
Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
302
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Taitelbaum, D., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Carmeli, M., and Hofstein, A. (2008). Evidence
for teachers change while participating in a continuous professional development
programme and implementing the inquiry approach in the chemistry laboratory,
International Journal of Science Education, 30(5), 593617.
Takayama, K. (2008). The politics of international league tables: PISA in Japans
achievement crisis debate, Comparative Education, 44(4), 387407.
Tan, C. (2005a). The potential of Singapores ability driven education to prepare
students for a knowledge economy, International Education Journal, 6(4), 446
453.
303
Tan, J. (2005). The marketisation of education in Singapore: What does this mean for
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation?. In J. Tan and P. T. Ng (Eds.), Shaping
Singapores Future: Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, (pp.95111). Singapore:
Prentice Hall.
Tan, J., and Ho, B. T. (2001). A levels or a polytechnic diploma? Malay students
choices of post-secondary options. In J. Tan, S. Gopinathan and W. K. Ho (Eds.),
Challenges Facing the Singapore Education System Today, (pp.207223).
Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Tan, J. & Ng, P. T. (Eds) (2005). Shaping Singapores Future: Thinking Schools,
Learning Nation. Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Tan, O. S., Parsons, R. D., Hinson, S. L., and Sardo-Brown, D. (2003). Educational
Psychology: A PractitionerResearcher Approach (An Asian Edition). Singapore:
Thomson.
Teo, C. H. (1999). Speech by RAdm (NS) Teo Chee Hean, Singapores Minister for
Education at the 1999 East Asia Economic Summit Plenary Session, World
Economic Forum on 19 Oct 99 at 10.15am at Suntec City. Retrieved August 31,
2007 from http://www.moe.gov.sg/speeches/1999/sp191099.htm
Teo, C. H. (2000). Opening speech by Radm Teo Chee Hean, Minister for Education
and Second Minister for Defence at the opening of the Exploratory Laboratories
and the launch of the Photonics and Life Sciences Research Programmes at
Raffles Institution on Saturday 22 April 2000 at 9 am. Retrieved December 17,
2007 from http://www.moe.gov.sg/speeches/2000/sp22042000.htm
304
Teo, C. H. (2002). Opening speech by Radm Teo Chee Hean, Minister for Education
and Second Minister for Defence on the JC/Upper secondary review committee
recommendations at parliament on 25 Nov 2002. Retrieved January 24, 2006
from http://www.moe.gov.sg/speeches/2002/sp27112002.htm
Tham, Y.C. (2006, June 21, 2006). The digital future. The Straits Times, p.H6.
The Straits Times (2 September, 2006). How grads can succeed after graduation, p.S12.
Toh, K. A., and Tsoi, M. F. (2008). The master science teacher, Physics Education,
43(6), 620626.
Udo, M. K., Ramsey, G. P., and Mallow, J. V. (2004). Science anxiety and gender in
students taking general education science courses, Journal of Science Education
and Technology, 13(4), 435486.
305
Valli, L., and Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes
accountability, American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 519558.
van den Berg, R. (2002). Teachers meanings regarding educational practice, Review of
Educational Research, 72(4), 577625.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., and de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers
pedagogical content knowledge, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6),
673695.
van Veen, K., and Sleegers, P. (2006). How does it feel? Teachers emotions in a
context of change, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 85111.
Verjovsky, J., and Waldegg, G. (2005). Analysing beliefs and practices of a Mexican
high school biology teacher, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 465
491.
Vidovich, L., and ODonoghue, T. (2003). Globallocal dynamics of curriculum policy
development: A case-study from Singapore, The Curriculum Journal, 14(3), 351
370.
Wallace, J., and Lounden, W. (1998). Curriculum change in science: Riding the waves
in reform. In B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of
Science Education, (pp.471485). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wallace, R. A., and Wolf, A. (1999). Contemporary Sociological Theory: Expanding the
Classical Tradition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Watson, R., and Manning, A. (2008). Factors influencing the transformation of new
teaching approaches from a programme of professional development to the
classroom, International Journal of Science Education, 30(5), 689709.
student-centred
technology-enhanced
learning
environments,
Science
Yip, J. S. K., Eng, S. P., and Yap, J. Y. C. (1997). 25 years of educational reform. In J.
Tan, S. Gopinathan and W. K. Ho (Eds.), Education in Singapore: A Book of
Readings, (pp.332). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Yu, W. M., and Lau, C. K. (2006). Understanding education reform: Insights from
stories of the changing school context, Planning and Changing, 37(3 & 4), 219
233.
Zembylas, M., and Barker, H. B. (2007). Teachers spaces for coping with change in the
context of a reform effort, Journal of Educational Change, 8(3), 235256.
307
Appendix A
1.
What are your experiences with regards to teaching your subject, eg,
i.
Pitching the level of teaching according to the background of students;
ii.
Teaching new content that has been added to the revised curriculum;
iii.
Adopting a more student-centred teaching approach as well as integrating
ICT into teaching;
iv.
Preparing students for new assessment criteria.
2.
What are your views with regards to teaching your subject, eg,
i.
Pitching the level of teaching according to the background of students;
ii.
Teaching new content that has been added to the revised curriculum;
iii.
Adopting a more student-centred teaching approach as well as integrating
ICT into teaching;
iv.
Preparing students for new assessment criteria.
3.
4.
5.
What obstacles did you encounter or do you foresee from carrying these
methods/ways of teaching? Why?
6.
Which aspect of the revised curriculum has the greatest impact on you? Why?
7.
What other aspects (positive or negative) of the revised curriculum do you feel
strongly about?
8.
With regards to the methods/ways of teaching you have mentioned earlier, what
are the steps/procedures you will adopt to ensure that your methods/ways of
teaching can be executed smoothly?
9.
10.
308
11.
12.
13.
14.
What will you do in order that you can carry out your methods/ways &
steps/procedures?
15.
What sort of structure or pattern will you adopt when you are carrying out your
plans and strategies?
16.
Do you intend to share with your colleagues about your plans and strategies?
Why?
17.
18.
Based on your methods/ways & steps/procedures, what are the outcomes you will
expect to achieve? (Outcomes in terms of student learning, professional
development of teachers, etc)
19.
In what ways are these outcomes aligned to your personal, department, school
goals?
20.
21.
22.
309