Thinking Science

t hinking

Sonia Hueppauff

science

Thinking Science: a professional development and cognitive acceleration program to help develop STEM skills in students

Students find many scientific concepts difficult to grasp. Defining accurately which scientific ideas are ‘hard’ also presents a challenge and educational experts have looked to theories in educational psychology about cognitive development for answers. (Smith, 2016).

A recent Australian College of Educational Research (ACER) report (Masters, 2016) highlights that levels of literacy and numeracy in Australian students have been declining on international tests from 2000-12. There has also been a decline in students studying high-level mathematics and science subjects at upper secondary level (Kennedy, Lyons & Quinn, 2014). Masters (2016) concludes that there are a number of challenges facing Australian school education, including equipping students with the necessary skills for life and work in the twenty-first century, especially in regard to STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics).

Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE), also known as Thinking Science, is a proven practical response to the challenges outlined above. It is an evidence-based program that has been put through the academic scrutiny of research in many different contexts and countries and has stood the test of time (McCormack, Finlayson & McCloughlin, 2014). Thinking Science consists of 30 lessons delivered to year 7 (15 lessons) and 8 (15 lessons) students. It is comprised of a theoretical basis, a set of resources, and a teacher professional development program. Overall, it has been shown to raise student outcomes through teachers changing their pedagogy in regard to student skills including higher-order thinking, problemsolving, communication, teamwork, and critical and creative thinking (Dullard & Oliver, 2012).

The Thinking Science program is being implemented in Australia, particularly in Queensland and Western Australia. In both states, there are support networks and resources available to enable schools to implement the program using a best practice professional development model. With a growing interest in producing students with STEM skills now on the political education agenda, Thinking Science is a well-established way to ensure our students are equipped with the skills and attributes necessary for life and work in the twenty-first century.

The unique parts of a Thinking Science lesson

There are five unique components (known as ‘pillars’) of a Thinking Science lesson: (1) concrete preparation, (2) cognitive conflict, (3) social construction, (4) metacognition, and (5) bridging. Concrete preparation is where the context of the lesson is established.

New terminology and apparatus are introduced to allow data collection or observations to be easily collected (McCormack, et al., 2014). Cognitive conflict stems from the idea that when the mind encounters a challenge, it requires a more sophisticated cognitive structure than what is currently available. As a result, the brain attempts to make sense of the experience and move beyond what it already knows in order to meet the challenge and accommodate the new demand. From a Vygotskian perspective, cognitive acceleration requires a student to be working within their zone of proximal development – the zone just beyond the student’s current unaided capability.

Managing the right amount of cognitive challenge in this zone requires the skill of the teacher (Adey, Hewitt, Hewitt, & Landau, 2004). The third pillar, social construction, relates directly to Vygotskian psychology, which holds that learning is basically a social process, involving listening to other students, discussing and contributing to discussions (Adey et al., 2004; McGregor & Gunter, 2001). The fourth pillar is metacognition, which is when students become conscious of their own thinking and overtly share this with their peers in the class (Adey et al., 2004; Oliver, Venville & Adey, 2010). Finally, bridging is where the student develops, applies and generalises reasoning patterns to other contexts. Teachers bridge when they transfer the specific Thinking Science pedagogy to the rest of their teaching (McCormack et al., 2014).

How are teachers ‘different’ in a Thinking Science lesson?

In order to develop and successfully implement the five pillars during a Thinking Science lesson, teachers need to carefully consider their approach to the way they interact with students, including a shift away from: • a teacher-directed pedagogy: rather than the teacher being at the centre of the lesson, they become a ‘director’ of discussion in the room; • one correct answer: the emphasis is not on the content of the curriculum and the correct answer but rather finding out from students how they got the answer, why they thought that, and whether there is more than one answer; • thinking of the teacher as the ‘font of all

knowledge’: the teacher takes a step back and consciously avoids giving out or confirming the answer if asked; emphasis on tests/assessments to drive learning: in Thinking Science lessons the teacher steps away from the regular curriculum once a fortnight and the focus shifts to developing thinking skills; rote learning of information: the emphasis is on processes: students are asked to think about how they worked out/solved a problem, and whether they can explain their thinking to the class; individual crafting of ideas: students think in many different ways and Thinking Science lessons help to reveal this. They work in small groups to develop answers and are given the opportunity to listen to each other’s answers, which helps them to further refine their own thinking. They begin to understand that there may be more than one way to reach the same final outcome. (Hueppauff, 2016).

During a Thinking Science lesson, the emphasis is on: • building a classroom environment where students feel safe to express their ideas where all answers are accepted and listened to even if they are not 100% correct or ‘perfect’; • hearing more from the students – there is less teacher talk and more listening to what students have to say without casting judgement; • being a facilitator or enabler rather than a director of learning. (Hueppauff, 2016).

Why are the elements above important in a Thinking Science lesson – and indeed any classroom?

• Thinking science promotes active rather than passive learning by students – they are engaged and involved and are participants in their learning. • There is high student contribution and accountability; there is a high expectation from the teacher that ALL students will contribute. It explicitly develops higher order thinking skills, including critical thinking and problem solving, through the teacher’s use of the Thinking Science pedagogy associated with Thinking Science. (Hueppauff, 2016).

In order for teachers to effectively deliver Thinking Science lessons they need to adapt and change their pedagogical approach. Learning to manage the five pillars of a Thinking Science lesson is a complex process and often causes frustration for the teacher, which is why a teacher professional development program is essential to support successful implementation of the program (Adey et al., 2004; Oliver et al., 2010). Teachers need to change their pedagogy by fundamentally altering the way they select students to answer questions, for example, and by changing the way those questions are formulated (Adey et al., 2004). A high-quality, welldesigned and appropriately-delivered professional development program is therefore required.

Interested in implementing Thinking Science in your school?

Just Think Cognition works with around 20 schools in WA who are implementing the Thinking Science program. They conduct the Thinking Science professional development (PD) program which consists of six days distributed over two years. Information about each of the special Thinking Science lessons is discussed. The pedagogy of the program is emphasised at the workshops, and each time a teacher delivers a lesson they are engaging in PD because they have the opportunity to practice the pedagogy. As well Just Think Cognition offers bespoke PD which can be tailored to your schools’ needs. If you are interested in coming on board for 2021, then now is a good time to plan. Introductory PD to enable teachers to commence teaching Thinking Science lessons in 2021 will take place in the latter half of term 4. To start a conversation about Thinking Science at your school please get in touch! e: sonia@justthinkcognition.com.au w: www.justthinkcognition.com.au

About the Author

Sonia Hueppauff is the director of Just Think Cognition, an education consulting business that supports schools in the delivery of the Thinking Science and Thinking Maths programs. She is an experienced classroom teacher and leads the implementation of Thinking Science in her school.

References

1. Adey, P., Hewitt, G., Hewitt, J., & Landau, N. (2004). The professional development of teachers: Practice and theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. 2. Dullard, H., & Oliver, M. (2012). I can feel it making my brain bigger: Thinking science Australia. Teaching Science, 58(2), 7-11. 3. Hueppauff, S. (2016). Thinking Science: A way to change teacher practice in order to raise students’ ability to think. Teaching Science, 62(3), 22-28. 4. Kennedy, J. P., Lyons, T., & Quinn, F. (2014). The continuing decline of science and mathematics enrolments in Australian high schools. Teaching Science, 60(2), 34-46. 5. Masters, A. O., & Geoff, N. (2016). Five challenges in Australian school education. 6.

7.

8.

9. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/ policyinsights/5/ McCormack, L., Finlayson, O. E., & McCloughlin, T. J. (2014). The CASE Programme Implemented Across the Primary and Secondary School Transition in Ireland. International Journal of Science Education, 36(17), 2892-2917. McGregor, D. & Gunter, B. (2001). Changing pedagogy of secondary science teachers: the Impact of a two year professional development programme. Teacher Development: An International Journal of Teachers’ Professional Development. 5(1), 59-74. Oliver, M., Venville, G., & Adey, P. (2010). Thinking Science Australia: Improving teaching And learning through science activities and reasoning. Paper presented at Australasian Science Education Research Association Annual Conference, Shoal Bay, NSW, 30. Retrieved from http://www.education.uwa.edu. au/tsa/research Smith, T. (2016). Thinking Science Australia: A short history of how 30 science lessons transform learning and teaching. Teaching Science, 62(3), 16-21.

NEW Web:

PhysicsTrialTestTeam-aus.com.au

What do we provide?

 2020 Year 12 Review Questions packages (2017, 2018, 2019 also available)

What do these REVIEW QUESTIONS cover?

 They were initially designed for Year 12 students in Victoria. But since that course is at least 80% compatible with the Western Australian course, this set of thoroughly prepared questions could be useful to teachers and students in WA, and at a discounted price 20% less than paid by Victorian schools.

Who are we?

 A team of four highly experienced teachers and trial exam setters, with a total of 113 years teaching senior secondary physics in three Australian states, the UK and Germany.

What did TEACHERS say about our YEAR 12 REVIEW QUESTIONS?

 “The level of difficulty was right, the standard of questions was good, … the solutions were comprehensive.”  “The solutions provided very detailed explanations. If students used those solutions as study notes, their revision would be greatly enhanced.”

What can you order on our website?

 2020 Year 12 Review Questions package - $120 per school  2019, 2018 & 2017 Year 12 Review Questions packages - $80 each