QUESTION 1….

Research has pointed out the important role of experiments and hand-on-activities
in science learning. Reading, writing, and communicating are essential aspects of
helping students construct science understanding. Yet informational text is seldom used
to complement the rich and interactive nature of hands-on activities in science
classrooms.

Hands-on activities allow students to experience and manipulate scientific

phenomena and so are an integral part of project-based and design-based approaches
to science learning. However, a concern has been raised that hands-on activities, despite
their numerous strengths, may allow students to concentrate on the construction
activities and build a working solution by trial and error without understanding the
underlying deep science principles and phenomena.

Most teachers feel that the most important aspect of any curriculum (whether it be
social studies, math, or science) is not vocabulary or factual knowledge, but instead an
understanding of the concepts and how research to discover those concepts in that
particular discipline is conducted.

As teachers, one of the dispositions we would like our students to have is an

inquiring mind. We would, in addition, like our students to actually have the capacity to
make use of this inquiring disposition. Since no student can live on inquiry alone, we
would also like to see community, critical thinking, and life long learning become
dispositions and capacities of our students.
 Inquiry teaching takes children to new levels of awareness and involvement in
science. As a student-centered activity, inquiry gives children ownership of the learning
process and inspires them to become more independent learners. As students engage in
critical thinking and problem solving, questioning, probing and discovering answers, they
gain a more meaningful and longer lasting understanding of scientific processes. By
questioning and designing systems for gaining knowledge, students become more
resourceful, developing self-reliance and a greater under-standing of the life-long
learning process.

Inquiry is a form of critical thinking which students can use for solving everyday
problems in their personal lives and in their communities for the rest of their lives. Inquiry
is important in the science classroom because it allows students to model the behavior
and methods of real scientists.

For many years science education has been handicapped by lack of access to
authentic scientific evidence and a lack of funds sufficient to purchase the tools needed
to conduct real scientific work in the classroom. The proliferation of affordable
technology has affected science education in many positive ways. Now students have
the tools necessary to answer their scientific questions.

Lesson planning for inquiry takes too much time and it's too difficult to blend an
inquiry-based curriculum with the mandated one. As with any new curriculum, inquiry
requires an investment of time and energy but the payoffs are significant. By taking the
process one step at a time-and when possible-in collaboration, it's much simpler.

• Give careful thought up-front to gathering necessary resources and determining

the nature and order of the activities.
 • Spend time gauging students' levels of content knowledge at the start of the
lesson.

• Determine when and how assessment will occur.

Traditional techniques such as lecturing straight from the text or having students read and
memorize reflect tried and true methods-and make it easier to cover the curriculum. Inquiry
requires a different set of pedagogical practices that take a lot of time to learn.

Many of the pedagogical practices used in the traditional classroom can apply in an
inquiry-based environment although they may be used differently: direct teaching, guided
practice, modeling, questioning and group discussion among others. During inquiry teaching
teacher guide students instead of lead them, becoming a facilitator. Instead of tossing away
traditional teaching methods, teacher builds and add new ones.

While inquiry does require a willingness to learn within a different structure, even
the youngest of schoolchildren can be successfully engaged. In this unique setting,
teacher has as much freedom to establish ground rules for behavior as in a traditional
classroom. When students are given an inquiry structure, they do adapt.

Actually, like in a traditional classroom, assessment helps drive instruction. It

allows teachers to track student progress and needs, while providing a basis for lesson
planning, instructional modification, and reflection on teaching strategies. Inquiry
objectives are also assessable in various ways such as through observation, one-on-one
questioning, science journals, portfolios, and rubrics.
 When teacher use the inquiry method, both teacher and students embark on a
process of exploration and discovery. Both discover the thrill of unexpected outcomes but
still use and learn identifiable and specific scientific concepts and principles along the
way.

Inquiry is an evolving process. Students may not always arrive at a complete

answer, but the point is they experience things that are new and different, conduct
investigations, supply evidence to support ideas, connect with scientists and experts,
keep written records of thoughts and conclusions, and continue asking questions.

Highlights of the inquiry-based science classroom:

• Learning is student-focused with the students determining the lessons'

direction. Inquiry shifts ownership of the learning process from teacher to student,
making the process through which students learn concepts and develop skills as
important as the science content. In this setting, teacher act as a facilitator in the
process.
• Students engage in scientific inquiry by asking questions and devising
answers. Inquiry requires students to describe objects and events, ask questions
and devise answers, collect and interpret data and test the reliability of the
knowledge they've generated. They also identify assumptions, provide evidence
for conclusions and justify their work.
• Teachers ask questions that encourage inquiry and stimulate thinking. To
guide students through inquiry, you engage in open-ended questions such as
"How do you know?" and "How does your data support your conclusions?" in
order to encourage further probing and discovery.
• Students are engaged in problem solving, constructing meaningful
experiences. Because students act as scientists, engaging in meaningful problem
 solving, they can construct meaning out of their experiences. Endeavors include
hands-on exercises as well as critical and logical thinking activities.
• Students gain a greater understanding of the purpose of learning. Inquiry lets
teacher create a framework where students understand how and why to ask
questions. Students reflect on the lesson and explain why it is important-and gain
a greater understanding about the inquiry process and how it relates to learning.
• Inquiry is a creative learning environment using both group and individual
discovery techniques. Inquiry involves setting short- and long-term goals and
adapting them to students' interests. Within this framework you might involve
students in hands-on activities, whole class instruction, or group collaboration.
This learning environment allows students the freedom to explore and investigate
while making connections and drawing conclusions.
• Students interact purposefully with each other and the teacher, leading to
effective communications. Inquiry teaching encourages students to collaborate
with one another, communicate ideas and thoughts, ask questions, justify answers
and seek advice from others.
• Assessment is ongoing. Inquiry takes the focus off memorization and instead
promotes assessing students' ability to understand, reason and use their
knowledge. Assessment can be achieved through questioning, observing, using
checklists, portfolios and more.

Bibliography
Bergman, A.B. (1993). Performance Assessment for Early Childhood. Science and Children. Vol.
30:5, p.20-22.

Bourne, ed. (in progress) Taking Inquiry Outdoors. York, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.

Bourne and Saul. (1994). Exploring Space. New York: Morrow Junior Books. California
Assessment Program. (1990). New Directions in Science Assessment (Draft). Sacramento, CA:
State Board of Education.

Flick, L. (1998, in press). Cognitive Scaffolding that Fosters Inquiry in Middle Level Science.
Journal of Science Teacher Education.

Good, T.L and Brophy, J.E. (1997). Looking in Classroom, Seventh Edition. New York:
Longman. Hamm, M. and Adams, D. Portfolio Assessment. The Science Teacher. May:1819.

Harlan, W. (1985) Primary Science: Taking the Plunge, "The Right Question at the Right Time."
Oxford, England:

Heinemann. Hein, G. (1990). The Assessment of Hands-On Elementary Science Programs. Grand
Forks, ND: Center for Teaching and Learning, University of North Dakota.

Lambert, N.M. and McCombs, B.L. (1998). Introduction: Learner Centered Schools and
Classrooms as a Direction for School Reform. In N.M. Lambert and McCombs, B.L. (Eds.). How
Students Learn: Reforming Schools through Learner Centered Education. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.

Meng, E. and Doran, R. (1990). What Research Says About Assessment. Science and Children.
May:26-27.

Mills, R.P. (1990). Using Student Portfolios to Assess Achievement. The Education Digest.
April:51-53. National Academy of Sciences. (1996).

National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. NAEP
(National Assessment of Educational Progress). (1987). Learning by Doing: a Manual for
Teaching and Assessing Higher Order Thinking Skills in Science and Mathematics. Report No.17-
HOS-80. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Palincsar, A.S. and Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension Fostering and
Comprehension Monitoring Activities. Cognition and Instruction. 1, 117-175.

Paulson, F.L., Paulson, P.R., Meyer, C.A. (1991). What Makes a Portfolio a Portfolio?
Educational Digest. Feb:60-63.

Perrone, W. (ed.) (1991). Expanding Student Assessment. Yearbook: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.

Rowe, M.B. (1973). Teaching Science as Continuous Inquiry. New York: McGrawHill.
Saul and Reardon, eds. (1996). Beyond the Science Kit: Inquiry in Action. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.

Saul, Reardon, Schmidt, Pearce, Blackwood, and Bird. (1993). Science Workshop. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.

Valencia, S. (1990). A Portfolio Approach to Classroom Reading Assessment: The Why, Whats
and Hows. The Reading Teacher. Jan:338-340.

Distributed by PBS Video 1 20 Braddock Place Alexandria, VA 22 14-169 1- 00- 44- 7

www.pbs.org/teachersource

Constructionism / Constructivism
http://members.shaw.ca/ncpg/links_constructivism.html
Constructivism http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/constructivism.html
Constructivism http://www.edwebproject.org/constructivism.html
Developmental Psychology
http://www.u.arizona.edu/ic/indv101/greenberg/devlect.htm
Huitt, W. & Hummel, J. (1998). Cognitive development. Retrieved February 10, 2002
from the World Wide Web: http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/piaget.html
Kafia, Y.B. & Resnick, M. (1996). Introduction. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick. (Eds.)
Construction in practice designing, thinking and learning in a digital world. Mahwah,
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associated, Publishers.
Liebert, R.M., Wicks-Nelson, R., & Kail, R.V. (1986). Developmental Psychology. (4th
ed). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
PBS Online. (1998). A Science odyssey: People and discoveries. Retrieved February
10, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.pbs.org/plweb-cgi/fastweb?
getdoc+asodata+asodata+58+0+wAAA+piaget
Selected Jean Piaget Resources http://www.questia.com/Index.jsp?
CRID=jean_piaget&OFFID=se1
Slavin, R.E. (1988). Educational psychology theory into practice. (2nd ed).
Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall.
Summary of Presentation by Prof. Murray on Piaget and Cognitive Development
http://www.udel.edu/billf/armen2.htm

Piaget's Key Ideas

Adaptation What it says: adapting to the world through assimilation and

accommodation
 Assimilation The process by which a person takes material into their mind from the
environment, which may mean changing the evidence of their senses to
make it fit.

Accommodation The difference made to one's mind or concepts by the process of

assimilation.
Note that assimilation and accommodation go together: you can't have
one without the other.

Classification The ability to group objects together on the basis of common features.

Class Inclusion The understanding, more advanced than simple classification, that some
classes or sets of objects are also sub-sets of a larger class. (E.g. there
is a class of objects called dogs. There is also a class called animals. But
all dogs are also animals, so the class of animals includes that of dogs)

Conservation The realisation that objects or sets of objects stay the same even when
they are changed about or made to look different.

Decentration The ability to move away from one system of classification to another
one as appropriate.

Egocentrism The belief that you are the centre of the universe and everything
revolves around you: the corresponding inability to see the world as
someone else does and adapt to it. Not moral "selfishness", just an
early stage of psychological development.

Operation The process of working something out in your head. Young children (in
the sensorimotor and pre-operational stages) have to act, and try
things out in the real world, to work things out (like count on fingers):
older children and adults can do more in their heads.

Schema (or The representation in the mind of a set of perceptions, ideas, and/or
scheme) actions, which go together.

Stage A period in a child's development in which he or she is capable of

understanding some things but not others

Stages of Cognitive Development

Stage Characterised by
 Sensori-motor Differentiates self from objects
(Birth-2 yrs)
Recognises self as agent of action and begins to act intentionally:
e.g. pulls a string to set mobile in motion or shakes a rattle to
make a noise

Achieves object permanence: realises that things continue to exist

even when no longer present to the sense (pace Bishop Berkeley)

Pre-operational Learns to use language and to represent objects by images and

(2-7 years) words

Thinking is still egocentric: has difficulty taking the viewpoint of

others

Classifies objects by a single feature: e.g. groups together all the

red blocks regardless of shape or all the square blocks regardless
of colour

Concrete operational Can think logically about objects and events

(7-11 years) Achieves conservation of number (age 6), mass (age 7), and
weight (age 9)

Classifies objects according to several features and can order them

in series along a single dimension such as size.

Formal operational Can think logically about abstract propositions and test hypotheses
(11 years and up) systemtically

Becomes concerned with the hypothetical, the future, and

ideological problems

HISTORY …OF…. JEAN PIAGET

 Jean Piaget (August 9, 1896 - September 16, 1980) was a
Swiss philosopher, natural scientist and developmental
psychologist, well known for his work studying children and
his theory of cognitive development. According to Ernst von
Glasersfeld, Jean Piaget is also "the great pioneer of the
constructivist theory of knowing"

Born: August 9, 1896 Died: September 16, 1980

Jean Piaget was born in Neuchatel, Switzerland, on August 9, 1896. His father,
Arthur Piaget, was a professor of medieval literature with an interest in local history. His
mother, Rebecca Jackson, was intelligent and energetic, but Jean found her a bit
neurotic -- an impression that he said led to his interest in psychology, but away from
pathology! The oldest child, he was quite independent and took an early interest in
nature, especially the collecting of shells. He published his first “paper” when he was
ten- a one page account of his sighting of an albino sparrow.

He began publishing in earnest in high school on his favorite subject, mollusks. He

was particularly pleased to get a part time job with the director of Nuechâtel’s Museum of
Natural History, Mr. Godel. His work became well known among European students of
mollusks, who assumed he was an adult! All this early experience with science kept him
away, he says, from “the demon of philosophy.”

Later in adolescence, he faced a bit a crisis of faith: Encouraged by his mother to

attend religious instruction, he found religious argument childish. Studying various
philosophers and the application of logic, he dedicated himself to finding a “biological
explanation of knowledge.” Ultimately, philosophy failed to assist him in his search, so
he turned to psychology.

After high school, he went on to the University of Neuchâtel. Constantly studying

and writing, he became sickly, and had to retire to the mountains for a year to
recuperate. When he returned to Neuchâtel, he decided he would write down his
philosophy. A fundamental point became a centerpiece for his entire life’s work: “In all
fields of life (organic, mental, social) there exist ‘totalities’ qualitatively distinct from their
parts and imposing on them an organization.” This principle forms the basis of his
structuralist philosophy, as it would for the Gestaltists, Systems Theorists, and many
others.

In 1918, Piaget received his Doctorate in Science from the University of

Neuchâtel. He worked for a year at psychology labs in Zurich and at Bleuler’s famous
psychiatric clinic. During this period, he was introduced to the works of Freud, Jung, and
others. In 1919, he taught psychology and philosophy at the Sorbonne in Paris. Here he
met Simon (of Simon-Binet fame) and did research on intelligence testing. He didn’t care
for the “right-or-wrong” style of the intelligent tests and started interviewing his subjects at
a boys school instead, using the psychiatric interviewing techniques he had learned the
year before. In other words, he began asking how children reasoned.
 In 1921, his first article on the psychology of intelligence was published in the
Journal de Psychologie. In the same year, he accepted a position at the Institut J. J.
Rousseau in Geneva. Here he began with his students to research the reasoning of
elementary school children. This research became his first five books on child
psychology. Although he considered this work highly preliminary, he was surprised by
the strong positive public reaction to his work.

In 1923, he married one of his student coworkers, Valentine Châtenay. In 1925,

their first daughter was born; in 1927, their second daughter was born; and in 1931, their
only son was born. They immediately became the focus of intense observation by Piaget
and his wife. This research became three more books!

In 1929, Piaget began work as the director of the International Bureau of

Education, a post he would hold until 1967. He also began large scale research with A.
Szeminska, E. Meyer, and especially Bärbel Inhelder, who would become his major
collaborator. Piaget, it should be noted, was particularly influential in bringing women
into experimental psychology. Some of this work, however, wouldn’t reach the world
outside of Switzerland until World War II was over.

In 1940, He became chair of Experimental Psychology, the Director of the

psychology laboratory, and the president of the Swiss Society of Psychology. In 1942,
he gave a series of lectures at the Collège de France, during the Nazi occupation of
France. These lectures became The Psychology of Intelligence. At the end of the war,
he was named President of the Swiss Commission of UNESCO.

Also during this period, he received a number of honorary degrees. He received

one from the Sorbonne in 1946, the University of Brussels and the University of Brazil in
1949, on top of an earlier one from Harvard in 1936. And, in 1949 and 1950, he
published his synthesis, Introduction to Genetic Epistemology.

In 1952, he became a professor at the Sorbonne. In 1955, he created the

International Center for Genetic Epistemology, of which he served as director the rest of
his life. And, in 1956, he created the School of Sciences at the University of Geneva.
 He continued working on a general theory of structures and tying his psychological
work to biology for many more years. Likewise, he continued his public service through
UNESCO as a Swiss delegate. By the end of his career, he had written over 60 books
and many hundreds of articles. He died in Geneva, September 16, 1980, one of the
most significant psychologists of the twentieth century.

QUESTION 2…

According to Piaget, two major principles guide intellectual growth and biological
development: adaptation and organization. For individuals to survive in an environment,
they must adapt to physical and mental stimuli. Assimilation and accommodation are
both part of the adaptation process. Piaget believed that human beings possess mental
structures that assimilate external events, and convert them to fit their mental structures.
Moreover, mental structures accommodate themselves to new, unusual, and constantly
changing aspects of the external environment.

Piaget's second principle, organization, refers to the nature of these adaptive

mental structures. He suggests that the mind is organized in complex and integrated
ways. The simplest level is the schema, a mental representation of some physical or
mental action that can be performed on an object, event, or phenomenon. We now turn
to a discussion of these concepts.

His view of how children's minds work and develop has been enormously
influential, particularly in educational theory. His particular insight was the role of
maturation (simply growing up) in children's increasing capacity to understand their
world: they cannot undertake certain tasks until they are psychologically mature enough
to do so. His research has spawned a great deal more, much of which has undermined
the detail of his own, but like many other original investigators, his importance comes
from his overall vision.

He proposed that children's thinking does not develop entirely smoothly: instead, there
are certain points at which it "takes off" and moves into completely new areas and
capabilities. He saw these transitions as taking place at about 18 months, 7 years and 11
or 12 years. This has been taken to mean that before these ages children are not
capable (no matter how bright) of understanding things in certain ways, and has been
used as the basis for scheduling the school curriculum.

Subject : Science

Class : 3 KAMBAR

Time : 4.00 – 5.00pm

Topic : The Flow of Water through Soil

Learning objective :

To design a fair test to compare how well water flows through sand, clay and garden
soil.

Learning outcomes :

At the end of the lesson pupils able to know that the flow of water are different in different
types of soil.

Things need :

• Three types of soil – sandy soil, clay soil, and garden soil

• Three paper cups and three glasses

• Three beakers of water

• A stopwatch

• Nails

Teaching and learning activities :

1. Pupils are divided to groups.

2. Teacher explain the way to carry the experiment.

3. Pupils will listen to teacher and do the experiment.

4. Pupils will record their observations.

INSTITUT PENDIDIKAN GURU MALAYSIA

KAMPUS SULTAN ABDUL HALIM
 SUNGAI PETANI, KEDAH DARUL AMAN
KDC KDPM AMBILAN NOVEMBER 2008
(CLASS PT-1F, PT-1G, PT-1J)

NAME : MAHYURI D/O SONDARAM

CLASS : PT-1G_________________
DATE : ______________________

QUESTIONS :

1.Discuss why experiments and hands-on activities related to science inquiry are
important in a science classroom.

2. Write a written report of about 200 words about Piaget’s developments principles and
state at least two references.