Building intellectual competencies such as autonomous learning, problem-solving, decision-making, and critical thinking is a top emphasis in today’s scientific education in Asian countries. To attain this goal, it is commonly acknowledged that scientific education should move away from traditional schooling and toward more constructivist instruction. Schraw et al., (2016) stress the importance of scientific education in fostering students’ meta-cognition and self-regulation, identifying six key areas for doing so: (a) inquiry-based learning; (b) the impact of students’ and teachers’ beliefs; (c) strategy instruction to improve problem-solving and critical thinking; (d) strategies for helping students construct mental models and experience conceptual change; (e) the use of technology; and (f) the impact of students’ and teachers’ beliefs. These concepts about the goals and methods of scientific education have dominated the community of science educators over the last few decades. However, progress has been slow at the school level, and most studies are still conducted using traditional approaches, such as the instructor providing information or pupils executing various tasks in an algorithmic way. Teachers must not only have in-depth subject matter knowledge in the domain they specialize in, such as mathematics, physics, or biology, but also teach solid and assessment strategies to encourage students’ higher-level thinking, according to practically universal agreement. Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clear that teachers’ ability to reflect on their teaching is intrinsically linked to their ability to organize, administer, and improve education in the classroom that fosters higher cognitive processes. In Israel, significant efforts have been undertaken to support scientific professors in biology, chemistry, and physics in their professional growth. Scientific accomplishment, conceptual comprehension, attitude, and interest are all frequently documented and examined in science education across countries. Only a few research have compared the natures of teachers’ instructional and assessment practices, despite the fact that some studies have used TIMSS and PISA data to analyze teachers’ instructional and assessment practices across nations. According to Dancy and Henderson’s (2017) approach, there are two categories of instructional practices: traditional instructional practices and alternative instructional practices. Several studies have looked at the effects of successful teaching methods on student achievement, performance, and the learning process. Students benefit from interactive teaching approaches in the classroom. They discovered that interactive learning is linked to higher exam performance. In science education, instructional practices such as I Engaging Resilient Preconceptions (addressing students’ initial understanding and preconceptions about topics), (ii) Organizing Knowledge Around Core Concepts (providing a foundation of factual knowledge and conceptual understanding), (iii) Supporting Metacognition and Student Self-Regulation (teaching strategies that will help students take control of their learning), and (iv) Cooperative Learning (allocating students to work together on a project) (National Research Council, 2015). Despite most scientific educators’ greater knowledge, comprehension, and proficiency in teaching topics and methodology, well-known Malaysian research indicated that instructional strategies were typically teacher centered. Some educators would prefer stick to tried-and-true methods than try anything new. Furthermore, classroom activities were frequently carried out utilizing a technique for presenting content from a textbook. Demonstrations and laboratory activities were utilized by teachers to assess topics covered in class and to explain exercises offered after the textbook to acquaint students with test problems. According to research, Malaysian instructional techniques have a low degree of participation, with instructors doing the majority of the talking and teaching and only a few students speaking out. As a result, Malaysian pupils continue to lag their peers in many areas, particularly when compared to children in more developed nations such as Germany. Rather of relying just on prior summative exam scores, educational reformers have advocated for using many sources of classroom evaluation data. The Malaysian Ministry of Education has devised a new national evaluation system for all public schools in response to this shift in assessment. The goal of the reform was to move away from a largely centralized testing system and toward one that included both school-based and centralized testing. Existing assessment practices of in-service teachers must be found prior to the reformation of the assessment system to take necessary steps to improve in-service teachers’ assessment abilities.
By: Jerry B. Macaday|Teacher III|Alternative Learning System (ALS)|Olongapo City
