Competence of matric physical science teachers in some basic problem-solving strategies
Keywords:
Intellectual strategies, questions testing strategies, problem solving, teacher training, curriculum 2005, physical science
Abstract
The National Curriculum Statement for matric physical science places strong emphasis on the development of critical thinking and reasoning abilities of pupils. The successful implementation of this curriculum therefore requires teachers who are competent in the cognitive (intellectual) skills and strategies needed for learning science effectively. Testing of teachers’ competence in this aspect is therefore important. I therefore analysed teachers’ answers to questions that were carefully designed to test competence in some basic intellectual strategies that are important for problem solving in physical science courses. A total of 73 matric physical science teachers, from about 50 Dinaledi schools in the North West and KwaZulu-Natal provinces in South Africa, were tested in five intellectual strategies: clear representation of problems, identifying and focusing on the goal, identification and use of relevant principles, use of equations for deductions and proceeding step-by-step with the solution. The teachers’ competence was poor in all the intellectual strategies tested. About 60% (the average performance in all 13 questions used for testing) of teachers tested were unable to solve the questions correctly. An important objective of the curriculum is the development of critical thinking, scientific reasoning and strategies of pupils. This study shows that the achievement of this objective will be seriously handicapped because of the lack of competence of many teachers in intellectual strategies. There is therefore a need to train teachers in order to increase their competence in this aspect.References
1. Marzano RJ, Brandt RS, Hughes CS, et al. Dimensions of thinking: A framework of curriculum and instruction. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 1988.
2. Jones BF, Idol F, editors. Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction. Chicago: The North Central Regional Educational Laboratory Publications; 1990.
3. Costa AL, editor. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 2001.
4. Beyer BK. Developing a scope and sequence for thinking skills instruction. In: Costa AL, editor. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001; p. 248–252.
5. Presseisen BZ. Thinking skills: Meanings and models revisited. In: Costa AL, editor. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001; p. 47–53.
6. Selvaratnam M. Coherent, concise and principle based organisation of chemical knowledge. J Chem Educ. 1993;70:824–826. doi:10.1021/ed070p824
7. Kelder KH, Govender D, Govender J. Study and master physical sciences. Grade 12, learner’s book. Cape Town: Cambridge University Press, 2007; p. v.
8. Rogan JM. Out of the frying pan…? Case studies of the implementation of Curriculum 2005 in some chemistry classrooms. Afr J Res Math Sci Technol Educ. 2004;8(2):165–179.
9. Velupillai V, Harding A, Engelbrecht J. Out of (another) frying pan…? Case studies of the implementation of Curriculum 2005 in some mathematics classrooms. Afr J Res Math Sci Technol Educ. 2008;12(1):55–73.
10. Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE). Doubling for growth. Addressing the mathematics and science challenge in South Africa’s schools. Johannesburg: CDE; 2008.
11. Drummond HP. Students’ competence in the intellectual skills and strategies needed for learning South African matriculation chemistry. PhD thesis, Mafikeng, North West University, 2003.
12. Drummond HP, Selvaratnam M. Intellectual skills needed for the effective learning and application of chemical knowledge. S Afr J Chem. 2009;62:179–184.
13. Selvaratnam M, Mavuso N. Competence of Science Foundation students in basic intellectual skills. S Afr J Sci. 2010;106(1/2):70–75.
14. Selvaratnam M, Frazer MJ. Problem solving in chemistry. London: Heinemann Education Publishers; 1982.
15. Selvaratnam M. A guided approach to learning chemistry. Cape Town: Juta, 1998; p. 17–22.
16. Grjosswirth M, Salny AF, Stillson A. Match wits with Mensa. Cambridge: De Capo Press, 1988; p. 66.
17. Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two. Some limits to our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev. 1963;70:81–97.
18. Johnstone AH. Chemistry teaching; science or alchemy? J Chem Educ. 1997;74:262–268. doi:10.1021/ed074p262
19. Selvaratnam M, Mazibuko B. Importance of focusing sharply on the goal for successful problem solving. S Afr J Chem. 1998;51:42–46.
2. Jones BF, Idol F, editors. Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction. Chicago: The North Central Regional Educational Laboratory Publications; 1990.
3. Costa AL, editor. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 2001.
4. Beyer BK. Developing a scope and sequence for thinking skills instruction. In: Costa AL, editor. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001; p. 248–252.
5. Presseisen BZ. Thinking skills: Meanings and models revisited. In: Costa AL, editor. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001; p. 47–53.
6. Selvaratnam M. Coherent, concise and principle based organisation of chemical knowledge. J Chem Educ. 1993;70:824–826. doi:10.1021/ed070p824
7. Kelder KH, Govender D, Govender J. Study and master physical sciences. Grade 12, learner’s book. Cape Town: Cambridge University Press, 2007; p. v.
8. Rogan JM. Out of the frying pan…? Case studies of the implementation of Curriculum 2005 in some chemistry classrooms. Afr J Res Math Sci Technol Educ. 2004;8(2):165–179.
9. Velupillai V, Harding A, Engelbrecht J. Out of (another) frying pan…? Case studies of the implementation of Curriculum 2005 in some mathematics classrooms. Afr J Res Math Sci Technol Educ. 2008;12(1):55–73.
10. Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE). Doubling for growth. Addressing the mathematics and science challenge in South Africa’s schools. Johannesburg: CDE; 2008.
11. Drummond HP. Students’ competence in the intellectual skills and strategies needed for learning South African matriculation chemistry. PhD thesis, Mafikeng, North West University, 2003.
12. Drummond HP, Selvaratnam M. Intellectual skills needed for the effective learning and application of chemical knowledge. S Afr J Chem. 2009;62:179–184.
13. Selvaratnam M, Mavuso N. Competence of Science Foundation students in basic intellectual skills. S Afr J Sci. 2010;106(1/2):70–75.
14. Selvaratnam M, Frazer MJ. Problem solving in chemistry. London: Heinemann Education Publishers; 1982.
15. Selvaratnam M. A guided approach to learning chemistry. Cape Town: Juta, 1998; p. 17–22.
16. Grjosswirth M, Salny AF, Stillson A. Match wits with Mensa. Cambridge: De Capo Press, 1988; p. 66.
17. Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two. Some limits to our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev. 1963;70:81–97.
18. Johnstone AH. Chemistry teaching; science or alchemy? J Chem Educ. 1997;74:262–268. doi:10.1021/ed074p262
19. Selvaratnam M, Mazibuko B. Importance of focusing sharply on the goal for successful problem solving. S Afr J Chem. 1998;51:42–46.
Published
2011-01-27
Section
Research Articles