Transcript Tvt, opettajien odotuksia

Basic Teaching Methods in
Physics and Social Science
Classroom
Reality and upper secondary school students’
expectations
Jari Lavonen1, Carl Angel2, Reijo Byman1,
Ellen Henriksen2 and Ismo Koponen1
1University of Helsinki, Finland,
2University of Oslo, Norway
18.8.2003.
1
What might affect on
motivation to study science?
Typically, answers are searched by investigating
pupils’ interests or attitudes to
1 science (or domains of science)
generally,
2 to school science subjects,
3 to studying science subjects
or teaching methods used
(Woolnough, 1994, Hoffman, 2002)
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
2
E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan:
According to Motivaation theory …
• Students will learn if they are interested to learn
(topic and teaching method)
• continuum:
external motivation – intrinsic m. (≈ interest)
• It is possible to have an influence on students’
motivation for example by:
- wake up students curiosity (topic and method)
- support students’ feeling of autonomy
• There are several attributes that have an influence
on students motivation: genre, workload, easiness, …
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
3
Research questions
The purpose of the study was to determine
1. What is the students’ (physics as their specialisation
subject) opinion about how often different teaching
methods (categorised by the nature of social interaction)
are used and should be used in physics classroom?
2. What kind of background variables (gender, nationality,
student orientation to physics or social sciences and
subject easiness, interestingness, …) explain how the
students wish to study the subject they have selected as
their specialisation subject?
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
4
Method and sample
• In Norway a paper questionnaires and in Finland
a web based questionnaire were used.
• A letter was send to headmasters of all upper
secondary schools and they were asked to
organise a survey at the second year of upper
secondary school for 10 students in beginning of
alphabetical list.
• Altogether 1349 response in Finland and 1487 in
Norway were received
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
5
Teaching method
“Teaching method” (Joyce and Weil 1996: 7)
• is a ‘synonym’ to learning or instructional method,
model, strategy or classroom practice,
• help students to acquire new concepts, ways of
thinking, behaving, … and skills.
• include goal orientation and
emphasise social interaction
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
6
Teaching methods …
• can be classified from the point of view of
social interaction: teacher leading – small
group – individual working
• are discussed during teacher education from
several point of view :
goals and teaching methods
motivation and teaching methods
-> why to use versatile
teaching methods?
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
7
How often teaching methods
are used now in physics
Norway, now
Finland, now
Teacher presents new material
on the blackboard
Teacher presents problems
2= 52.5***
Work on problems/tasks individually
2= 17.2**
Teacher leads discussion
Teacher uses students' ideas
Work on problems in small groups
2= 14.4**
Project work in small groups
Discuss problems in small groups
0%
(nFIN = 398, nNOR = 173)
18.8.2003
never
20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
rarely
sometimes
E S E R A 2003
often
daily
8
How often teaching methods
should be used in physics (FIN)
Finland, wish
Finland, now
Teacher presents new material
on the blackboard
Teacher presents problems
Z = -3.8**
Z = -2.9**
Work on problems/tasks individually
Teacher leads discussion
Z = 9.2*’*
Teacher uses students' ideas
Z = 9.9*’*
Work on problems in small groups
Z = 9.7*’*
Project work in small groups
Z = 5.8*’*
Discuss problems in small groups
0%
(nFIN = 398)
18.8.2003
never
Z = 11.9*’*
20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
rarely
sometimes
E S E R A 2003
often
daily
9
How often teaching methods
should be used in physics (N)
Norway, now
Norway, wish
Teacher presents new material
on the blackboard
Teacher presents problems
Z = -3.5**
Work on problems/tasks individually
Z = -3.1**
Teacher leads discussion
Z = 6.7*’*
Teacher uses students' ideas
Z = 8.7*’*
Work on problems in small groups
Z = 7.8*’*
Project work in small groups
Z = 7.5**’*
Discuss problems in small groups
0%
(nNOR = 173)
18.8.2003
never
Z = 9.5*’*
20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
rarely
sometimes
E S E R A 2003
often
daily
10
Teaching methods in Social
Science (N & FIN)
How it is
How it is inWish
Phys(social sci)
Teacher presents new material
on the blackboard
Teacher presents examples/problems
Work on problems/tasks individually
Teacher leads discussion
Teacher uses students' ideas
Work on tasks in small groups
Project work in small groups
Discuss tasks in small groups
0%
(nSos.Sci = 629)
18.8.2003
never
20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
rarely
sometimes
E S E R A 2003
often
daily
11
Groupping teaching
methods by factor analysis
Component loadings
1
2
3
4
F1: Studying in small groups
F1I1:
Work
problems/tasks
small factor
groups
.774 for Maximum
Promax
withwith
Kaiser
Normalization in
-Rotated
loading matrix
F1I2:
Discuss
about difficult
small group
.198
Likelihood
Factoring
calculatedconcepts
for items in
measuring
students'.624
(n = 1216) opinions
F1I3:
project
in small
aboutHave
how they
wishwork
to study
duringgroups
their lessons in Physics .614
or Social sciences. -.105
F2: Teacher presentation
F2I1: A teacher present/solve problems
.668
F2I2: A teacher present new material
-.107 .362 .144
F3: Teacher leading discussion
F3I1: A teacher leads discussion about concepts
.677
F4: Individual studying
F4I1: Work with problems/tasks individually
.513
% of total variance
21.9 9.2 6.1 2.7
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
12
Background variables
Physics
Social science
Subject workload (1=small)
Quality of instruction (1=poor)
Subject interestingness (1=uninteresting)
Subject easiness (1=very easy)
0%
(nPhys = 570, nSos.Sci = 629)
18.8.2003
20 %
1
40 %
2
3
E S E R A 2003
60 %
4
80 %
100 %
5
13
Variables explaining how
students wish to study
Studying in
small groups
Teacher
presentation
Teacher
Individual
leading
studying
discussion
1)
1)
1)
1)
b
b
b
b
t
t
t
t
.310 9.6*** -.318 -9.7*** .317 9.6*** -.281 -8.4***
Specialisation subject
(1 =phys, 2 =soc.sc.)
Nationality
-.114 -3,.7*** .118 3.9***
(1=Norwegian, 2=Finnish)
ns
ns
Subject interestingness
-.006 -.18
.022 .61
(1=uninteresting)
ns
ns
Student sex (1=girl, 2=boy)
-.032 -1.1
-.037 -1.2
ns
Quality of instruction (1= poor) -.075 -2.5* -.004 -.13
ns
Workload of the subject
.028 .97
.074 2.6**
(1= small)
ns
ns
Subject easiness (1= difficult)
-.025 -.82
-.035 -1.2
R
.37
.35
2
R
.14
.12
F
27.3***
23.7***
ns
1) p > 0,05, * p < 0,05, ** p < 0,01, *** p < 0,001
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
ns
.055
1.8
.111
3.0**
-.038
.021
-.011
-1.2
ns
.70
ns
-.38
ns
-.095 -3.0**
ns
-.013 -.41
ns
.030 1.0
-.041
ns
-.025
-1.3
.31
.10
19.5***
.065
2.1*
.017
.46
ns
-.79
.27
.07
13.2***
ns
14
Conclusions and
Implications 1
• It is typical that in Physics teacher present new
material or solve problems on the blackboard. This is
also students’ wish.
• The students would like to discuss more about
concepts and problems as well as work with them in
small groups. The teacher should support autonomy!
• The differences between Finnish and Norwegian
students are dealing with how students work with
problems: in Finland teacher should present or solve problems
- in Norway the students like to work individually
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
15
Conclusions and
Implications 2
• Student gender as well as other predictors, except
nationality and subject of specialisation, explain
only little about students wishes how they like to
study their specialisation subject.
• The students preferred more versatile teaching
methods than it is in present used and, therefore,
the teacher should also think about models when
(s)he plan instruction
18.8.2003
E S E R A 2003
16
Thank you!