COMPLEXITY OF PRACTICAL WORK IN PORTUGUESE PRIMARY SCIENCE TEXTBOOKS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2021v26n3p281Palavras-chave:
Conceptual demand, Practical work, Primary school, Textbook analysisResumo
Practical work and textbooks have an important role in primary science education. This study analyses the complexity of practical work in Portuguese primary science textbooks. The level of complexity was appreciated by the level of conceptual demand of practical work, as given by the type of practical work, the complexity of scientific knowledge, the complexity of cognitive skills and the degree of relation between theory and practice. The explicitness of practical work was also analysed. The study followed an approach that combines quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis and a total of 176 units of analysis were evaluated from six science textbooks, chosen among the most selected in Portuguese primary schools. The results showed that textbooks evidence a tendency towards a low level of conceptual demand of practical work, considering the proposals for practical activities and the related evaluation questions. Practical activities, mainly focused on practical exercises and illustrative experiences, tend to mobilize scientific knowledge and cognitive skills of a low level of complexity and point out to an apparent relation between theory and practice. The evaluation questions present a lower level of conceptual demand. The results also showed a weak concern with the explicitness of the practical work. However, findings also indicated that there are differences between the textbooks.Referências
Abrahams, I. (2017). Minds-on practical work for effective science learning. In K. Taber, & B. Akpan (Eds,), Science education: An international course companion (pp. 402-413). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945-1969. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701749305
Andersen, K. (2020). Assessing task-orientation potential in primary science textbooks: Toward a new approach. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 481-509. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21599
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. (Eds.), Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, United States of America: Longman.
Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, codes and control: Volume IV, The structuring of pedagogic discourse. London, England: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425699995380
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique (rev. ed.). London< England: Rowman & Littlefield.
Caamaño, A. (1992). Los trabajos prácticos en ciencias experimentales: Una reflexión sobre sus objetivos y una propuesta para su diversificación. Revista Aula de Innovación Educativa, 9 [Versión electrónica].
Calado, S., Neves, I., & Morais, A. (2013). Conceptual demand of science curricula: a study at the middle school level. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 8(3), 255-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2013.795698
Camargo, F., Silva, A., & Santos, A. (2018). A microbiologia no caderno do aluno e em livros didáticos: análise documental [Microbiology in textbooks and in booklets: documental analysis]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 78(2), 41-58. https://doi.org/10.35362/rie7823199
Cantu, L. L., & Herron, J. D. (1978). Concrete and formal Piagetian stages and science concept attainment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15(2), 135-143.
Chakraborty, D., & Kidman, G. (2021). Inquiry process skills in primary science textbooks: Authors and publishers’ intentions. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-09996-4
Chiappetta, E. L. (1997). Inquiry-based science: Strategies and techniques for encouraging inquiry in the classroom. Science Teacher, 64(7), 22-26.
Chin, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in school: A theoretical framework for evaluating in inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10001
Correia, M., & Freire, A. (2016). The influence of an in-service programme on primary teachers conceptions about practical work. Revista electronica interuniversitaria de formacion del profesorado, 19(2), 259-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/reifop.19.2.254971
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conduction mixed methods research (2nd ed.). California, United States of America: Sage Publications.
DGE (Direção-Geral de Educação). (2018). Aprendizagens Essenciais - Ensino Básico [Essential Learnings – Basic Education]. Retrieved from http://www.dge.mec.pt/aprendizagens-essenciais-ensino-basico
DGE (Direção-Geral de Educação). (2019). Lista de manuais escolares adotados: Ano Letivo 2019/2020 [List of selected textbooks: Academic year 2019/2020]. Retrieved from https://www.dge.mec.pt/lista-de-manuais-escolares-adotados
Dogan, O. (2020). Methodological? Or Dialectical?: Reflections of Scientific Inquiry in Biology Textbooks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10120-7
Duschl, R., Schweingruber, H., & Shouse, A. (Ed.) (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grade K-8. Washington, United States of America: National Academies Press.
Ferreira, S., & Morais, A. (2014). Conceptual demand of practical work in science curricula: A methodological approach. Research in Science Education, 44(1), 53-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9377-7
Harlen, W. (1999). Purpose and procedures for assessing science process skills. Assessment in Education, 6(1), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695949993044
Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 22(1), 85-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560022
Hofstein, A. (2017). The role of laboratory in science teaching and learning. In K. Taber, & B. Akpan (Eds,), Science education: An international course companion (pp. 357-368). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
Kahveci, A. (2010) Quantitative analysis of science and chemistry textbooks for indicators of reform: a complementary perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1495-1519. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903127649
Katchevitch, D., Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2013). Argumentation in the chemistry laboratory: Inquiry and confirmatory experiments. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 317–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9267-9
Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J. E. (2002). How well do middle school science programs measure up? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 522–549. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10035
Kupske, C., Hermel, E., & Güllich, R. (2014). Concepções de experimentação nos livros didáticos de ciências [Conceptions of experimentation in science textbooks]. Revista Contexto & Educação, 29(93), 138-156. https://doi.org/10.21527/2179-1309.2014.93.138-156
Lunetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M. (2007). Learning and teaching in the school science laboratory: An analysis of research, theory, and practice. In N. Lederman, & S. Abel (Eds,), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 393-441). Mahwah, United States of America: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ma, Y., Wang, T., Wang, J., Chen, A., & Yan, X. (2019). A comparative study on scientific inquiry activities of Chinese science textbooks in high schools. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09902-z
Mafra, P., & Lima, N. (2009). The microorganisms in the Portuguese national curriculum and primary school textbooks. In A. Mendez-Vilas (Ed.), Current research topics in applied microbiology and microbial biotechnology (pp. 625-629). Badajoz, Spain: World Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812837554_0130
Martins, I., Veiga, M., Teixeira, F., Tenreiro-Vieira, C., Vieira, R., Rodrigues, A., & Couceiro, F. (2007). Educação em Ciências e Ensino Experimental - Formação de Professores (Science Education and Experimental Teaching - Teacher Training). Lisbon: Ministério da Educação. Retrieved from http://www.dge.mec.pt/guioes-didaticos-eb
Marzano, R. J. & Kendall, J. S. (2007). The new taxonomy of educational objectives (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, United States of America: Corwin Press.
Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2008). Designing & assessing educational objectives: Applying the new taxonomy. Thousand Oaks, United States of America: Corwin Press.
Ministry of Education (2004). Organização curricular e programas ensino básico – 1.º ciclo: Estudo do Meio [Curricular organization and basic education programs - 1st cycle: Environment Study] (4th ed.). Lisbon, Portugal: Departamento da Educação Básica.
Morais, A. M., & Neves, I. P. (2010). Basil Bernstein as an inspiration for educational research: Specific methodological approaches. In P. Singh, A. R. Sadovnik, & S. F. Semel (Eds.), Toolkits, translation devices and conceptual accounts: Essays on Basil Bernstein’s sociology of knowledge (pp. 11–32). New York, United States of America: Peter Lang.
Morais, A. M., & Neves, I. P. (2016). Vertical discourses and science education: Analyzing conceptual demand of educational texts. In P. Vitale, & B. Exley (Eds.), Pedagogic rights and democratic education: Bernsteinian explorations of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (pp. 174-191). London, England: Routledge.
Rola, A., Pereira, L., & Gomes, C. (2013). What do I want to know about rocks? A study with 3rd grade Portuguese students. In L. G. Chova, A. L. Martinez, & I. C. Torres (Eds.), Iceri2014: 7th international conference of education, research and innovation (pp. 364–369). Sevilla, Spain: IATED Academy.
Silva, J., Duarte, J., & Durães, M. (2019). Natureza das atividades laboratoriais de investigação nos manuais escolares de Físico-Química do 8.º ano [The nature of laboratory investigations in the 8th grade textbooks of physics and chemistry]. Comunicações, 26(2), 145-159. https://doi.org/10.15600/2238-121X/comunicacoes.v26n2p145-159
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, United States of America: Sage.
Vojí?, K., & Rusek, M. (2019). Science education textbook research trends: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Science Education, 41(11), 1496-1516. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1613584
Woolnough, B., & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical work in science. Cambridge, United States of America: Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
A IENCI é uma revista de acesso aberto (Open Access), sem que haja a necessidade de pagamentos de taxas, seja para submissão ou processamento dos artigos. A revista adota a definição da Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), ou seja, os usuários possuem o direito de ler, baixar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir, buscar e fazer links diretos para os textos completos dos artigos nela publicados.
O autor responsável pela submissão representa todos os autores do trabalho e, ao enviar o artigo para a revista, está garantindo que tem a permissão de todos para fazê-lo. Da mesma forma, assegura que o artigo não viola direitos autorais e que não há plágio no trabalho. A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões emitidas.
Todos os artigos são publicados com a licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional. Os autores mantém os direitos autorais sobre suas produções, devendo ser contatados diretamente se houver interesse em uso comercial dos trabalhos.
