| . |
. |
. |
|
A
Language-Sensitive Science Teacher Training Approach
|
|
|
Mr. N, a standard-three teacher from Kwazulu
Natal, came to the Primary Science Program (PSP) with a problem. "I've tried
everything," he said, "I've written all about frogs on the board. I've gone over
it with my students, and they just don't understand." His lesson contained numerous
facts about frogs. He had written these facts on the board as a list of English sentences:
Frogs are green. Frogs are amphibians. They live in water and on land. Frogs lay eggs. He
drilled these sentences and then asked, "What color are frogs?" An eager student
replied, "Water!" Mr. N couldn't help but be frustrated. The student couldn't
help but read his frustration at her own failure.
|
|
|
The goal of the Primary Science Program in this
case is to get Mr. N to rethink his approach to the content; to encourage him to probe and
build on what his students already know about frogs; to have him consider the cognitive
skills (e.g., description) that he is trying to engender; to invite him to question his
use of English as the best means to engender these skills.
|
|
|
Children in Kwazulu Natal know about frogs. They
hear them croaking in the summer. They play with them in rivers and in back yards. If Mr.
N. had asked his students to tell him about frogs in Zulu, then he would not have
experienced the same frustration.
|
|
|
Now what if Mr. N had used the student responses
to questions about frogs to build a web/mind map on the board? (See Figure 1.)
|
|
|
He could have isolated parts of the web for
discussion and could have introduced new content on frogs through the web, or added new
content to it. He could have had students explain verbally or in writing any part or all
of the web. The science content (frogs), would still have been covered, but the cognitive
academic skill (description) would also have been taught.
|
|
|
This proposed alternative for Mr. N requires him
to reconceptualize his approach to both content and method. The Primary Science Project
has found that to get teachers to this point is a slow, evolutionary process. It requires
the examination and change of many entrenched, apartheid-era assumptions about pedagogy,
language, and science. It also requires the analysis of real teaching situations to see
where implementation falls in line with new concepts, and where it does not.
|
|
|
Charlotte du Toit, National Language Coordinator
for the Primary Science Program has developed a twelve-step approach to teacher
development which will facilitate this kind of reconceptualization. Components of this
framework are consistently used throughout South Africa in PSP INSET workshops. A diagram
of this framework is shown in Figure 2. One desired outcome within the series of workshops
where this approach is implemented is that teachers will design tasks (classroom,
individual, pair, and group) which will develop both language and science.
|
|
|
The model uses Roberts' (1982) seven emphases in
Science Education to help teachers articulate their own views listed below:
|
|
|
1. The "Everyday Coping"
emphasis: The selected set of messages constituting this emphasis declares, in
sum, that science is an important means for understanding and controlling one's
environment, be it natural or technological. Scientific principles are seen as a means for
coping with individual and collective "problems."
|
|
|
2. The "Structure of Science"
emphasis: The substance of this emphasis is a set of messages about how science
functions intellectually in its own growth and development. The messages are communicated
through repeated discussion of such matters as the interplay of evidence and theory, the
adequacy of a particular model for explaining phenomena at hand, the changing and
self-correcting nature of scientific knowledge, the influence of an investigator's
"conceptual principles" on the kind of theory developed, etc.
|
|
|
3. The "Science, Technology, and
Decisions" emphasis: Unlike the Everyday Coping Emphasis, this emphasis
concentrates on the limits of science in coping with practical affairs, e.g., science's
important but limited role in deciding on the route for an oil pipeline.
|
|
|
4. The "Scientific Skill
Development" emphasis: With this emphasis, process is more important than
product. It places heavy, virtually exclusive, emphasis on means, thereby communicating to
the student the implicit message that skillful use of means (scientific process) will
automatically yield for him/her a correct end product.
|
|
|
5. The "Correct Explanations"
emphasis: This emphasis stresses "products." "Master now, question
later." It encourages students to entrust themselves freely to the basic theory.
|
|
|
6. The "Self as Explainer"
emphasis: This emphasis highlights the character of science as a cultural
institution. To animate the history of science is to examine growth and change in
scientific and cultural preoccupations of the particular settings in which the ideas were
developed and refined. The aim is for the student to find his/her own place in a matrix of
contextualized scientific ideas.
|
|
|
7. The "Solid Foundation"
emphasis: This emphasis holds that science instruction should be organized to
facilitate the student's understanding of future science instruction. Elementary science
is preparation for secondary science. It assumes a structure which has been thought about
and planned.
|
|
|
Initially, the majority of teachers in the PSP
concentrate on the "Correct Explanations" and the "Solid Foundation"
emphases. Only later do they come to the others such as "Self as Explainer."
They begin to ask themselves where they, individually and collectively, fit into the
development of science as a field.
|
|
|
PSP inservice teachers are asked to look at
their content in a particular way. How is this content linked with the self, the society,
the context in which it is taught? This step calls for the connection between content and
values. In light of the values and emphases examined in Step 1, how does the section of
the national curriculum for which they are responsible appear?
|
|
|
This step calls for the connection of topics
within the national syllabus. It asks the teachers to transform their particular section
of the syllabus from a list of disparate topics into a map of interlinking ideas. It
represents the teachers' own conceptualization of the content to be taught. For example,
one section begins "Air, water, heat..." Teachers are asked to visualize and
chart how these three topics interrelate. Teachers' charts may show the effects of heat on
both air and water. They may consider evaporation under conditions of heat. Each teacher
will have her own interpretation-his/her own map of the topic list.
|
|
|
The objective of Step 3 is to get teachers to
attain a more global view of their content, to see how the discrete units of the list
interrelate.
|
|
|
Step 4 asks teachers to reflect on Step 3. It
introduces the notion that making connections is one way of constructing knowledge.
|
|
|
It introduces other activities to entice them to
look at this concept more deeply. For example, it gives brain teasers like "Can you
make a square bubble?" The objective here is to get teachers to make explicit through
discussion, the connections they make between scientific knowledge and the problem itself.
|
|
|
These activities should be fun. Enjoyment is
critical to the process.
|
|
|
Step 5 introduces the Vygotskian notion of
knowledge construction through language. If you want teachers to believe that when you
begin to construct knowledge, it is an active and social phenomenon, then you have to make
explicit the link between thought and language. Invite teachers into discourse on this
subject. Let them think about questions like: Can babies think? Can they think before they
can talk? What can you do with children to make their thoughts verbal? What can you do
with them so that their speech can become rational?
|
|
|
One topic within this discourse is sequencing.
Children will be able to sequence pictures, but bringing that sequence onto the verbal
plane can pose problems for them, especially in their second language. What can a teacher
do to help children explain what they have done so that the sequence is imbedded clearly
in the verbal message? This is an example of mediation.
|
|
|
This step in our model is developed through real
classroom data that the teachers can analyze. They look at videos and observe real-life
classrooms. Then they talk about what they see in light of the ideas which have come out
in Steps 1 through 4. They ask if the teacher is being observed actually mediating. At
what moments is she or isn't she mediating? This type of observation and analysis is the
bedrock of this approach. It takes many observations and much discussion to bring teachers
to a level of awareness about mediation.
|
|
|
Reconceptualization of one's approach, which is
the long-term goal of PSP, happens slowly, over years of exposure; and then only if
teachers are in a supportive environment where they can share their own evolution of
awareness. This environment comes from a "critical mass" of teachers within a
school who are moving through the same process. This is why PSP invites teachers from
multiple disciplines to its workshops. Without them, a critical mass cannot be reached.
|
|
|
From this Vygotskian discourse, if the teacher
decides that she wants to mediate learning in her classroom, then she has to make a
decision about the role and the status of the mother tongue. Teachers have got to talk
about language with their students. Since we pray and solve problems in our mother tongue,
why can't we learn in it? The mother tongue is the only medium that primary school
students have to express higher order thinking. They must understand the consequences of
selecting L2-only instruction.
|
|
|
Just as the teacher-trainer mediates awareness
among teachers, so must teachers mediate awareness among students. This is especially
applicable as it relates to mother-tongue status and role. A dilemma exists between the
realization of the importance of the mother tongue and the status of learning English.
There is a definite value judgment made in reconciling the two. For those who stress
English as the language of the wider community, the question remains as to whether they
want to limit themselves to working exclusively in English.
|
|
|
This model proposes that cognitive academic
language proficiency (CALP) skills will not develop in English unless they are first
developed in the mother tongue. It cites Cummins' (1986) notion of proficiency transfer:
CALP skills developed in L1 can be transferred into L2. For example, one CALP proficiency
is sequencing. By Cummins' model, students who know how to sequence in the mother tongue
can also sequence in their second language. The issue is solely one of code.
|
|
|
In traditional classes like the one in the
initial scenario with Mr. N, children are not challenged to give longer, connected
explanations. They only need to repeat or give short replies such as "Water!"
Under this scenario, no CALP skills are developed since there is nothing to transfer.
|
|
|
This model advocates tackling difficult concepts
with one's best tool: the mother tongue. Implicit in this belief is the elevation of the
L1 to the status of best tool. Children can be proud to gain knowledge through their own
language.
|
|
|
In this step, macrolanguage policy in South
Africa is examined. Some questions in this examination are: Why was the apartheid language
policy what it was? What were the effects? It incorporates the examination of historical
and policy documents having to do with language.
|
|
|
The first 7 steps work to raise language
consciousness. The next steps deal with language development theory within the classroom.
|
|
|
This step encourages teachers to look at
mistakes as a sign of learning, not of failure. For instance, in the phrase, "My bike
has two weles," the mistake lies in the spelling of "wheels," and yet this
"weles" uses the English silent "e" to make the initial vowel long. It
shows that the student knows the silent "e" rule. It also shows that the student
knows the proper usage of the vocabulary making up the phrase. In many ways, this sentence
is a success, not a failure.
|
|
|
When errors are treated as signs of development
and learning opportunities, trust is developed. Students are less afraid of making errors
and their self-esteem is less likely to suffer.
|
|
|
Language acquisition can occur in an atmosphere
of trust where error is not feared. This step introduces Krashen's theory of comprehensive
input. It is based on the precept that the instant one comprehends something in the L2,
one has taken the first step towards its acquisition; therefore the best way to promote
language acquisition is to maximize examples which help make input comprehensible. When
asked how to maximize comprehensible input, PSP's in-service teachers have a number of
suggestions: posters, gestures, cartoons, pictures for teachers along these lines.( Footnote 1 ) Teachers are also asked
to consider where and with what input their learning was best facilitated.
|
|
|
This step ties together Krashen's theory and
that of Cummins. It asks teachers to resolve the notions of comprehensible input and
proficiency transfer by developing CALP skills activities which allow for the use of
ordinary language-comprehensible input.
|
|
|
In these CALP skills activities, students are
asked to compare, describe, sequence, interpret, predict, and explain. These activities
ideally involve some physical action that is then brought into the verbal plane. One such
activity involves sequencing pictures to make a story, which the students then tell. The
teacher's role is to help the students integrate action and words to create a situation
where the verbal component arises from the children's own efforts.
|
|
|
Step 11 focuses on science content. Here
teachers are asked what scientists do. They generally have no problem with their response:
interpret, observe, record, compare, report, measure. Then the question is posed: Can you
do any of these without language? This model asserts that process skills and language
functions are often identical.
|
|
|
The final step is to have teachers develop tasks
that develop both process skills and language functions. It is not enough simply to ask
primary science students to observe and record. They often need more structure, which
should be built into the task itself. Formats such as tables, webs, and charts can be
taught through science tasks. Note-taking skills can also be taught explicitly, recording
key words instead of full sentences. Language-sensitive tasks grow out of the notion that
when one "does what scientists do," one uses the four skills of listening,
speaking, reading, and writing.
|
|
|
One teacher-generated example of a
language-sensitive science task is from the Kwazulu Natal Primary Science workbook. Its
goal is to develop the CALP skills of description and classification. It presents four
birds and asks students to classify them by their beaks and their feet. It has students
record these classifications in a table. It then provides paragraph structures with
logical connectors already written for students to record, in prose, what was expressed in
the table.
|
|
|
PSP encourages teachers to be critical about
their own practice; to ask, "Have my goals been met?"
|
|
|
Most workshops allow for the actual
implementation of one of the newly designed tasks. A test class of students is brought
into the workshop. Teachers design tasks, put them in lessons, get children in, and try
them out, all during one workshop. The idea is that teachers see, in reality, with real
children, how the ideas from the workshop play out in the classroom.
|
|
|
Implications for further research
|
|
|
The Primary Science Program has implemented this
science teacher training model, in whole and in part, in workshops throughout South
Africa. Evidence of its effectiveness has been gathered by PSP in the form of
post-training interviews with teachers.
|
|
|
A research opportunity exists within Primary
Science to further investigate the effectiveness of the training as a whole, and the
relative effectiveness of different components of the model. The model remains as a
hypothesis and can be improved and adjusted with further research.(Footnote 2)
|
|
|
- Cummins, J. and M. Swain. 1986. Bilingualism in education: Aspects of theory. London,
Longman.
- Driver, R., and V. Oldham. 1986. A constructivist approach to curriculum development.
Studies in Science Education, 13, pp. 105-122.
- Krashen, S. 1985. Inquiries and insights. Hayward, CA, Almeny Press.
- Roberts, D. 1982. Developing the concept "curriculum emphases" in science
education. Science Education 66, 2, p. 243-260.
- Luckett, K. 1993. Behind Bilingualism. Bua 8, 2. Cape Town: National Language Project.
- Vygotsky, L. 1984. The development of academic concepts in school aged children. In The
Vygotsky Reader. eds. Van der Veer, R. and J. Valsiner. Oxford: Blackwell.
|
|
|
Elaine
Diamondidis , a former English Teaching Fellow for USIA in Port Elizabeth, South
Africa from 1995-96, currently lives and teaches in Cairo, Egypt. |
|
|
Return
|
|
|
Significant
Writing in Egypt
|
|
|
In the summer of 1995 I was one of nineteen
Egyptian teachers who went to the United States as part of a summer program sponsored by
the Binational Fulbright Commission of Egypt. We took courses at Georgia State University
and observed, assisted, and taught at a local secondary summer school.
|
|
|
While I learned a lot about teaching, I was most
impressed by the sight of bulletin boards with a lot of small notes. They seemed to chase
me in the school, university, and even in the dormitory:
|
|
|
(Figure) The idea of being able to communicate
easily on paper amazed me. American teachers and students think and talk on paper.
Egyptians do most of this by talking. We rarely write. We don't like to. What I mean here
is significant and enjoyable writing. I want to write more, and I want my students to
write more.
|
|
|
The most significant regular writing teachers do
is in their required daily preparation note books. Everyday we write the same thing: date,
class, aims of lesson, revision, presentation, etc. Yet we rarely look at them again. We
keep our writing safe and sound for the inspectors to come and check the spelling and
that's about it.
|
|
|
Likewise, most students' writing focuses on
grammar, spelling, and structure and not on meaning, significance, and pleasure. Writing
"correct" sentences makes students forget what they are writing about. Because
English is a second language, mistakes happen all the time. I am always saying, "It's
a very good piece of writing but..." Of course "but" here is so depressing
for the students, yet I am obliged to correct them.
|
|
|
Given all of this, I had to find a way to get
them and myself to spend more time writing. I want them to think, talk, and create on
paper. I want them to write what they think about and about how they feel and act. Also, I
want writing to be a habit for me and my students. Habitual writing will influence the
style of the students in the long run since most of our examinations are, ironically,
written.
|
|
|
I asked myself how I could write and make my
students write meaningfully and regularly. During my summer in the States, I was asked by
Dr. Gail Nelson of Georgia State University to write what she called "journals."
Journals were the answer. Journals meant writing about anything inside and outside the
classroom: comments, personal reaction to texts, personal experience, important events.
Teachers don't correct them. They just make sure the students write.
|
|
|
Journals are perfect for many reasons. They
require students to express personal attitudes and reactions which they don't usually do
in our curriculum. I do not have to correct them, a double blessing for me and the
students. I do not have to worry about a load of papers from a typical class of 45-50
students. The students feel comfortable writing without me looking over their shoulder. I
must confess I find myself fighting my urge to correct.
|
|
|
On the first day of school I asked students to
get a small notebook for their journals. I explained what journals were and asked them to
write about anything they wanted; additionally, I gave them an option. I started slowly
with a modified plan because I knew it wasn't easy for most of the students to write
freely if they did not have specific topics. So, I helped them by giving some general
ideas. Still, some students could not write about general topics without having guide
words or start-up ideas. The first general option I used was: Write about a place you want
to visit.
|
|
|
Some wrote about countries like France, the
U.S.A., and Greece. Other students wrote about places inside Egypt like the Pyramids,
Luxor, and Aswan. Some imaginative students wanted to visit the moon, Mars, or Tiba, the
capital of ancient Egypt.
|
|
|
At first they were reluctant, but when I asked
selected students to read their writing aloud in the class the next day, they were very
enthusiastic. Reading aloud was a reward. For the first time they could write about and
discuss their feelings and thoughts. I wanted to let all of them read, but we were limited
by time.
|
|
|
The next step was writing their response to
certain quotations from some plays. For example, I gave them a small quotation from A
Tale of Two Cities:
|
|
|
It was the best of times, it
was the worst of times. It was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness.
|
|
|
I didn't specify what I wanted exactly. I just
asked for their response. Some summarized and explained what they understood. Other
students wrote what they felt or remembered when they read this quotation. One I liked the
best was from 14-year old Eman. She wrote, "I think these words explain what I feel
now. Sometimes I feel very happy like a bird and maybe after some short time I feel like
if I am in a prison I can't even breath. Maybe I believe in something or someone and
defend it very hard but after sometimes I may forget all about it."
|
|
|
Another scene was the three witches' prophecy in
Macbeth. Mohamed wrote, "Macbeth would have done what he had done even if he didn't
listen to the witches' prophecies. These prophecies rang a bell for his ambitions. One of
them came true after a little while and that was a green light for him to go for the rest
of them."
|
|
|
Both Eman and Mohamed expressed what they
understood and expressed it very beautifully. Though they used simple sentences with some
mistakes, they not only understood, they used the language with flair and imagination.
What they wrote was significant for them, and for me.
|
|
|
To use Mohamed's phrase, journals are a green
light for me and my students to go on with writing enjoyable, expressive writing without
fear.
|
|
|
Working with the students for a year on journals
gave me a lot of new ideas and gave me a push to work on journals next year also. I
thought that I should give the students more choices to write about, so those who find
free writing difficult can have some hints.
|
|
|
Jack Marlowe, one of the many American teachers
with whom I have worked on this article and as part of this exchange project, suggested
that we can choose topics that subtly reflect the students' problems. For example, I can
suggest writing about their examination grades. Or let them write about something personal
they wouldn't like to talk about to anyone except their paper and pen, like being treated
badly by someone or impressed or depressed by something. Writing here would be a kind of
relief for them. I try to set a good example and write in my journal while they are
writing. I also read some of my work to the class.
|
|
|
Journals achieved most of my goals. I write on
my own all of the time. I write much more than I wrote before. This article would not be
possible without the confidence I gained with my journal writing. My students write what
they want to say, not what is correct. They are getting the habit of writing. Their
writing and my writing is gaining and will continue to gain significance.
|
|
|
Manal
Shaheen teaches English as a second language at El-Nasr Language Preparatory
School in Cairo. |
|
|
Return
|
|
Footnote 1
1. For information on obtaining these teaching aids, contact Shell Education Service,
P.O. Box 2231, Cape Town, 800 South Africa. Fax: (21) 25 3807.
Back to Article
|
. |
. |