Advertisement

BANGLADESHI SCIENCE TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES OF SCIENTIFIC LITERACY AND TEACHING PRACTICES

  • Mahbub SarkarEmail author
  • Deborah Corrigan
Article

Abstract

In line with a current global trend, junior secondary science education in Bangladesh aims to provide science education for all students to enable them to use their science learning in everyday life. This aim is consistent with the call for scientific literacy, which argues for engaging students with science in everyday life. This paper illustrates Bangladeshi science teachers’ perspectives of scientific literacy along with their views on teaching practices. Participating teachers held a range of perspectives of scientific literacy, including some naive perspectives. The paper also reports that whilst teachers’ verbalised practices in relation to their emphasis on engaging students with science in everyday life follows the emphases as required in teaching for promoting scientific literacy, their assessment practices may not be useful to promote it. The discussion explores the meaning of these findings and provides implications for school science educational practice in Bangladesh.

Key words

Bangladesh developing countries scientific literacy school science student engagement teachers’ perspectives teachers’ practices 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aikenhead, G. (2008, March). Scientific literacy: Expanding the research agenda. Paper presented at the Research Seminar, Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Asia and the Pacific Programme of Educational Innovation for Development [APEID] (1991). Science curriculum for meeting real-life needs of young learners. Bangkok, Thailand: Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.Google Scholar
  4. Bangladesh Bureau of Educational Information and Statistics [BANBEIS] (2006). Output statistics. Retrieved October 30, 2008, from BANBEIS, Government of Bangladesh http://www.banbeis.gov.bd/db_bb/out_sta.htm
  5. Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  6. Central Intelligence Agency [CIA] (2013) The world factbook: Bangladesh. Retrieved April 3, 2013, from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html
  7. Corrigan, D., Gunstone, R., Bishop, A., & Clarke, B. (2004, July). Values in science and mathematics education: Similarities, differences and teacher views. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of Australasian Science Education Research Association 2004, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
  8. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Goodrum, D. (2004). Teaching strategies for science classrooms. In G. Venville & V. Dawson (Eds.), The art of teaching science (pp. 54–72). Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  11. Goodrum, D. (2007). Teaching strategies for classroom learning. In V. Dawson & G. Venville (Eds.), The art of teaching primary science (pp. 108–127). Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  12. Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. J. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools: A research report. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  13. Hofstein, A., Eilks, I. & Bybee, R. (2011). Societal issues and their importance for contemporary science education—A pedagogical justification and the state-of-the-art in Israel, Germany, and the USA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1459–1483. doi: 10.1007/s10763-010-9273-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holbrook, J. (2005). Report on organizing the ROSE survey in Bangladesh. Retrieved from http://www.uv.uio.no/ils/english/research/projects/rose/partners/bangladesh/report-bgd.pdf
  15. Holbrook, J. (2009). Meeting challenges to sustainable development through science and technology education. Science Education International, 20(1/2), 44–59.Google Scholar
  16. Jenkins, E. & Nelson, N. (2005). Important but not for me: Students’ attitudes towards secondary school science in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23(1), 41–57. doi: 10.1080/02635140500068435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. B. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Knamiller, G. W. (1984). The struggle for relevance in science education in developing countries. Studies in Science Education, 11(1), 60–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Millar, R. (1996). Towards a science curriculum for public understanding. School Science Review, 77(280), 7–18.Google Scholar
  21. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London, England: King’s College.Google Scholar
  22. Ministry of Education (2000). National Education Policy 2000 [English version]. Dhaka: Ministry of Education, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  23. Ministry of Education (2010). National Education Policy 2010 [in Bengali]. Dhaka: Ministry of Education, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  24. Morse, J. M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 189–208). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Nargund-Joshi, V., Rogers, M. A. P. & Akerson, V. L. (2011). Exploring Indian secondary teachers’ orientations and practice for teaching science in an era of reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 624–647. doi: 10.1002/tea.20429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. National Curriculum and Textbook Board [NCTB] (1995). Curriculum and syllabus: Junior secondary level (grades VI-VIII) [in Bengali]. Dhaka: Ministry of Education, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  27. National Research Council [NRC] (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA. Paris, France: OECD.Google Scholar
  29. Osborne, J. & Simon, S. (1996). Primary science: Past and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 27(1), 99–147. doi: 10.1080/03057269608560079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reiss, M. (2007). What should be the aim(s) of school science education? In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The re-emergence of values in science education (pp. 13–28). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  31. Rennie, L. J. (2007). Values in science in out-of-school contexts. In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The re-emergence of values in science education (pp. 197–212). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  32. Rennie, L. J. (2011). Blurring the boundary between the classroom and the community: Challenges for teachers’ professional knowledge. In D. Corrigan, R. Gunstone & J. Dillon (Eds.), The professional knowledge base of science teaching (pp. 13–29). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Sarkar, M. (2012). School science textbooks: A challenge for promoting scientific literacy in Bangladesh. In W. K. Chan (Ed.), Asia pacific education: Diversity, challenges and changes (pp. 154–168). Melbourne, Australia: Monash University.Google Scholar
  35. Tapan, M. S. M. (2010). Science education in Bangladesh. In Y.-J. Lee (Ed.), World of science education: Science education research in Asia (pp. 17–34). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  36. The Asia Foundation (2013, March 27). The next Asian tiger? A conversation with U.S. Ambessador to Bangladesh Dan Mozena. In Asia: Weekly Insight and Analysis from The Asia Foundation. Retrieved from http://asiafoundation.org/in-asia/2013/03/27/the-next-asian-tiger-a-conversation-with-u-s-amb-to-bangladesh-dan-mozena/
  37. Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Clark, J. C. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the primary-secondary school transition. Canberra, Australia: Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.Google Scholar
  38. Zhang, B., Krajcik, J. S., Sutherland, L. M., Wang, L., Wu, J. & Qian, Y. (2003). Opportunities and challenges of China’s inquiry-based education reform in middle and high schools: Perspectives of science teachers and teacher educators. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(4), 477–503. doi: 10.1007/s10763-005-1517-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Monash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations