About 40 years ago, science education came to be recognized around the world as an independent field of research. The concerns of this research are distinct from the concerns of science and those of general education. Its methods and techniques were initially borrowed from the sciences but new methods are being developed suited to the research question.
Motivation for this research comes from the need to improve the practice of science education. The early studies led to many new lines of inquiry. One line looked at the social context of teaching and learning and of the interpersonal dynamics occurring in science lessons. Science is delicate yet challenging because the content and activities should develop individual’s critical and creative thinking skills and multiple intelligences that could be attained through experimentation and laboratory activities. Laboratory skills can be acquired through hands-on and minds-on approach since learners learn effectively when they are actively engaged in discovery process and with the influence and guidance of the teaching styles of teachers.
According to dela Cruz (2007), over the past 20 years, research has shown that the objectives for laboratory teaching are often not achieved and that many laboratory sessions are highly ineffective and yet expensive in terms of students and teachers and instructional facilities. Researchers have recommended a serious rethinking of objectives and teaching styles for the use of laboratory. Yet in spite of 20 years of discussions of these problems by a small group of researchers, the pedagogical problems in laboratory teaching are largely ignored.
Basically, science is an open-ended exploration, its end results are not fix in advance. The conceptual or research goals of the laboratory get lost in the attention for equipment and there is no conceptual learning, nor learning of research or inquiry skills. Many of these skills and techniques are useful both outside the science classroom and as prerequisite skills for science laboratories. Too often it is assumed that students master basic prerequisite lab skills. Various studies reported in Bryce and Robertson (1985, p.4) have shown that simple prerequisite skills like reading meters and graphs are not mastered by students (at both high school and college level) and interfered with their lab performance with their lab performance, while teachers and lab instructors were unaware of this.
Therefore it is important to pay special attention to the teaching of prerequisite skills. Labs should be straightforward and highly structured as there usually are clear-cut instructions how things should be done accurately and safely to obtain optimal results. The main function of teacher-student discussion in the lab is to clarify procedures and to stimulate student thinking about how best to perform the skill. However, such discussion in the lab is followed by the teacher explaining and demonstrating the best and safest way to perform the skill. This is where the teaching styles of teachers in teaching laboratory skills to students come into action. Therefore the skill lab is probably most efficient when it is highly structured. On the other hand, exercise of process or inquiry or laboratory skills require greater emphasis on student decision making because it affects their performance in science.
By: Resurreccion L. Domingo | T-III | New Alion Elementary School | Mariveles, Bataan
