The character of biology teaching practices: Pedagogical hiatuses and the implications for continued professional development

Ong Eng Tek

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	Q Science
Main Author :	Ong Eng Tek
Additional Authors :	Charanjit Kaur Swaran Singh Nurulhuda Abd Rahman Laili Farhana Md Ibharim
Title :	The character of biology teaching practices: Pedagogical hiatuses and the implications for continued professional development

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Pembangunan Manusia
Year of Publication :	2019
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

This study was conducted to characterise the Biology teaching practices in a teacher education institution so as to inform us the existing practices which could then be compared with the aspired practices, uncovering the pedagogical hiatuses. This study employed a form of implementation study using classroom observation. A total of three lessons drawn from a Biology course within the Bachelor of Education (Biology Major) by a lecturer in one Teacher Education Institution were observed over a one-semester period. A psychometrically-supported Observation Checklist comprising 50 items or indicators that spread across six principles was utilised in the observation whereby observers checked in terms of presence or absence of each indicator during the classroom observations. In terms of coverage of aspired teaching practices which met the quartile rule (i.e., practices which were observed more than one-fourth or 25% in the overall observations), the findings indicated that lecturers fully ensured constructive instructional alignment (100%), fostered intellectual excitement (66.7%), provided quality spaces, technology and resources (57.1%), nurtured good values, attitudes and behaviours (45.5%), nurtured a climate of inquiry and critical reflection (42.9%). Nevertheless, the characterised teaching practices indicated that the lecturer did not offer adequate diverse learning environment (20.0%). This study provides the characterisation of evidenced-based practices, uncovering the pedagogical hiatuses which could be subsequently addressed by various means such as the providence of continuous in-service courses. Empowering lecturers pedagogically will produce quality teachers which in turn, produce quality students.

References

1. Aubusson, P., Steele, F., Dinham, S. and Brady, L. (2007). Action learning in teacher learning community formation: Informative or transformative? Teacher Development, 11(2): 133–48.

2. Azian, T. S. A. (2015). Stem education: Policies and prospects towards achieving international standard and meeting national development needs. Keynote address given at international science, technology, engineering and mathematics high-level policy forum on evicenced-based science education in developing countries. Istana Hotel: Kuala Lumpur.

3. Babbie, E. (2002). The basics of social research. 2nd edn: Wadsworth: CA. Bogdan, R. C. and Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research in education. Allyn and Bacon: Needham Heights, MA.

4. Borich, G. D. (2008). Observation skills for effective teaching. Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.

5. Centre for Science Education (1992). Active teaching and learning approaches in SCIENCE. Collins Educational:London.

6. Curriculum Development Division (2016). The guide to the implementation of science, technology, engineering and mathematics stem in teaching and learning. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia: Putrajaya.

7. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice, Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 106(6): 1013-55.

8. Gay, L. R. and Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research. 6th edn: Merrill: New Jersey. 211.

9. Gebhard, J. G. and Oprandy, R. (1999). Language teaching awareness: A guide to exploring beliefs and practices. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

10. Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 3(3): 39-54.

11. Goh, P. S. C. and Wong, K. T. (2015). Exploring the challenges for teacher educators. Journal of Research, Policy and Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education, 5(1): 37-45.

12. Griffin, P., Care, E., Francis, M., Hutchinson, D., Arratia-Martinez, A. and McCabe, C. (2013). Assessment and learning partnerships: The influence of teaching practices on student achievement. University of Melbourne: Melbourne: Assessment Research Centre.

13. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning, A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge: Milton Park, UK.

14. Hollins, E. R. (2011). Teacher preparation for quality teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4): 395-407.

15. Jarzabkowski, P. and Bone, Z. (1998). A „how‐to‟ guide and checklist for peer appraisal of teaching. Innovations in Education and Training International, 35(2):177-82.

16. Jonson, K. F. (2008). Being an effective mentor: How to help beginning teachers succeed. Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, CA.

17. Kagan, S. (1989). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 47(4): 12-15.

18. Lasagabaster, D. and Sierra, J. M. (2011). Classroom observation: Desirable conditions established by teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education, 34(4): 449–63.

19. Li, Y. L. (2009). The perspectives and experiences of Hong Kong preschool teacher mentors: Implications for mentoring. Teacher Development, 13(2): 147–58.

20. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Foy, P. and Stanco, G. M. (2012). The timss 2011 international results in scienc. Boston College: Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.

21. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Goy, P. and Hooper, M. (2016). Timss 2015 international results in science. The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement IEA: Boston.

22. Mazlini, A., Azwani, M., Nor;ain, M. T. and Nurulhuda, A. R. (2015). An exploratory factor analysis on generating teaching and learning guiding principles from Malaysian teacher educators‟ perspectives. Creative Education, 6(12): 1245-55.

23. Ministry of Education (2012). Malaysia education blueprint 2013-2025, Preschool to post-secondary education. Ministry of Education Malaysia: Putrajaya.

24. Montgomery, D. (2002). Helping teachers develop through classroom observation. 2nd edn: David Fulton: London.

25. Morris, C. (2003). Teaching and learning through active observation. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252762848

26. Noraini, I. (2014). Teaching and learning guiding principles, Informing the design of a malaysia teacher education model for preparing quality teachers for the future. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris: Tanjung Malim.

27. O‟Leary, M. (2014). Classroom observation, A guide to the effective observation of teaching and learning. Routledge: London.

28. O‟Leary, M. (2015). Classroom observation, A guide to the effective observation of teaching and learning. Routledge: London.

29. Ong, E. T. (2004). The character of „smart science teaching‟ in Malaysian schools and its effects on student attitudes, process skills, and achievement, (University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.).

30. Ong, E. T. and Ruthven, K. (2010). The distinctiveness and effectiveness of science teaching in the Malaysian „smart school. Research in Science and Technological Education, 28(1): 25-41.

31. Ong, E. T., Wong, Y. T., Sopia, M. Y., Sadiah, B. and Asmayati, Y. (2013). Acquisition of basic and integrated science process skills amongst form 2 students in sarawak: Interaction effects of gender, ethnicity, and school location. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Pertanika JSSH, 21(3): 981-98.

32. Paronjodi, G. K., Jusoh, A. J. and Abdullah, M. H. (2017). A comparative study of beginning teacher induction in Malaysia and victoria Australia, A review of the literature. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education, 7(1): 36-48.

33. Pouezevara, S., Pflepsen, A., Nordstrum, L., King, S. and Gove, A. (2016). Paper commissioned for the global education monitoring report 2016, education for people and planet: Creating sustainable futures for all. Abuja, Usaid.

34. Richards, J. C. and Farrel, T. S. C. (2011). Practice teaching: A reflective approach. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

35. Roberts-Hull, K., Jensen, B. and Cooper, S. (2015). A new approach: Teacher education reform. Australia: Learning First: Melbourne.

36. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2): 4-14.

37. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1): 1-22.

38. Sonmark, L., Révai, N., Gottschalk, G., Deligiannidi, K. and Burns, T. (2017). Understanding teachers' pedagogical knowledge: Report on an international pilot study. Oecd education working papers, no. 159. Paris, Oecd publishing.

39. Surbhi, S. (2015). Differences between developed countries and developing countries. https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-developed-countries-and-developing-countries.html

40. Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group TEMAG (2014). Action now, Classroom ready teachers. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/action_now_classroom_ready_teachers_accessible.pdf

41. Thanheiser, E., Browning, C., Edson, A. J., Lo, J.-J., Whitacre, I., Olanoff, D. and Morton, C. (2014). Prospective elementary mathematics teacher content knowledge, What do we know, what do we not know, And where do we go? The Mathematics Enthusiast, 11(2): 433.

42. Wajnryb, R. (1992). Classroom observation tasks, A resource book for language teachers and trainers. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

43. Washer, P. (2006). Designing a system for observation of teaching. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(3): 243-50.

44. Zeichner, K. (2006). Reflections of a university-based teacher educator on the future of college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3): 326-40

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page