Volume/Issue :

Article type :

Editorial

Page No :

4-11

Abstract :

The patterning, correction and expansion of primary natural science education that is based on exhaustive research are necessary to perceive the peculiarities of natural science education of the junior pupils aged from 6 to 12. The revision of particular training issues of the junior period (content, methods and forms) is insufficient in order children should become the equal members of society, nation and the world yet in childhood. Foreign scientists carry out a number of different investigations in the field of primary natural science education. In fact, the importance of natural science education is accepted putting emphasis on primary school. In considering the place of the natural sciences in the curriculum of schools, one cannot fail to recognize their centrality in the lives and work of those of us living in the industrialized countries around the globe (Shafer, 1996). After 1950 the subsequent positions were more frequent: primary natural science education has to be a creative process, sciences teaching cannot be only nature study. Scrupulous attention is devoted to chemistry issues in primary school. It is underlined that the field should be revised more attentively as the child faces plenty of chemical substances in daily life. The proceeding following moments are worth to be mentioned: • children have a natural sense of wonder and curiosity about their world (Qualter, 1994; Alford, 1997); • exists a distinction between children’s life knowledge and scientific knowledge. The transition from the first to the second is not always automatic or linear (Black, Lucas, 1993); • learning in primary science is most effective when children can interpret their own experience and investigations in scientific terms (Wenham, 1995). It can be concluded that: • one of the burning issues is natural science and technological literacy; • much attention is devoted to broadening children’s cognitive abilities, it is emphasized that the success of primary natural science education should depend on teaching quality that is given to children; • a consistent important didactic pattern is stressed – from simple visions to the interpretation, development, etc. of scientific concepts; • It is sought to examine the impact of the cognitive factors on the success of learning (achievements) as well as that of motivation, teaching methodology, classroom microclimate, a social environment, etc.; • more and more attention is focused on the alteration of natural science education paradigms – from academic science subjects teaching to “science for all”. The most important directions of research are the final goals of natural science education of the present century and the most effective strategies of teaching; • primary teachers’ natural science competency is given very close attention. Different approaches are searched for making primary natural science education more effective. Akvileva ir Klepinina (2001, p.3) state that one of the weakest links in the training of primary natural science teachers are limited students’ abilities to transfer theoretic knowledge into practical activities; • natural science education curricula and its planning are very important aspects. Though a curriculum itself does not guarantee the quality of natural science education, it is a suitable instrument for the teacher. Designing of primary natural science education curricula is one of the obligatory components of the teacher’s competency. The content of the curricula of the main science subjects remains problematic. It is clear that the content of primary natural science education should be integrated. However, it does not mean that the knowledge of biology, chemistry, and physics is not introduced. The question about the balance of the main fields arises. Assessment shows that the knowledge of chemistry is very poor and requires obligatory and exhaustive research in the field. Unusually prominent “biologization” makes pupils’ natural science education poor, lays down preconditions to give up on chemistry and physics.

Keywords :

creative process, natural science education, natural science competency

References :

Alford K. (1997). The development of children`s ideas in science. Australian Primary and Junior Science Journal, Vol.13, Issue 1.
Alexander R. (1992). Policy and Practice in Primary Education. London.
Asoko H. (2000). Learning to teach science in the primary school. In.: R. Millar, J. Leach and J. Os-borne (eds.) Improving Science Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Avdul R. (1994). Preparing the new elementary science teacher. Education, Vol.94, No.2, p.128.
Bargellini A., Riani P. (1991). Children`s conceptions of chemistry at elementary school level and some implications for in service training of teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education, 14(1), p. 9–18.
Bennett N. (1988). The effective primary school teacher: the search for a theory of pedagogy. Teacher and Teacher Education, 4, p. 19-30.
Bigelienė, D., Uginčienė, E. (2008). Nacionalinių mokinių pasiekimų tyrimų pristatymas švietimo konsultantams. Vilnius: ŠPC. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.pedagogika.lt/index.php?1475461344 (2008-11-11).
Black P., Lucas A. (1993). “Ways ahead?” Children`s informal ideas in science. London: Routledge.
Breiting S. (1999). Dilemmas related to teacher training for science education and pupils` action compe-tence (the MUVIN project). In.: Research in Science Education in Europe (Edited by Bandiera M. et al.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 263–271.
Campbell B. (2001). Pupils` perceptions of science education at primary and secondary school. In. H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit et al. (eds). Research in Science Education – Past, Present, and Future. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p.125–130.
Chartrain J. L., Caillot M. (2001). Conceptual change and student diversity: the case of volcanism at primary school. In. H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit et al. (eds). Research in Science Education – Past, Present, and Future. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 265–270.
DeHart Hurd P. (2002). Modernizing science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.39, Issue 1, p.3–9.
Galton M. J., Simon B., Croll P. (1980). Inside the Primary Classroom. London: Routledge.
Goodwin A. (2005). Linking Educational Research and the Teaching of Science. School Science Re-view, 84 (316), p. 119–123.
Guillermo R. F. de la Garza (2002). Experiences in Mexico in the use of hands-on, inquiry science education systems in primary schools. In.: The Challenges for Science: Education for the Twenty-First Century 19-21 November 2001, Pontificia Academia Scientiarum. Vatican City, p.118–125.
Eaton R. (1991). Chemistry and food in the primary school. Investigating: Australian Primary Science Journal, 7(3), p.14–15.
Jarvis T. (2002). Challenges and opportunities in primary science initial teacher training in England. Education in Science, November.
Jenkins E. W. (2000). “Science for all”: time for a paradigm shift. In.: R. Millar, J. Leach and J. Osborne (eds.) Improving Science Education. Buckingham: Open University Press, p. 207–226.
Harlen W. (2001). Research in primary science education. Journal of Biological Education, Vol.35, No.2.
Hellden G. (1999). A longitudinal study of pupils` understanding of conditions for life, growth and decomposition. In.: Research in Science Education in Europe (Edited by Bandiera M., et al.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 23–29.
Hellden G. (2001). Personal context and continuity of human thought; recurrent themes in a longitua-dinal study of pupils` understanding of scientific phenomena. In. H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit et al. (eds). Research in Science Education – Past, Present, and Future. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 107–112.
Howes E. V. (2002). Learning to teach science for all in the elementary grades: what do preservice teachers bring? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.39, Issue 9, p. 845–869.
Kellett M. (2005). Developing Children as Researchers. London.
Kikas E., Hannust T., Kanter H. (2002). The influence of experimental teaching on 5- and 7-year old children`s concepts of the Earth and gravity. Journal of Baltic Science Education, No. 2, p. 19–30.
Kleinberg S. (1999). Science and the young child: in praise of inquiry learning. In.: Changing Educa-tion in a Changing Society (ATEE Spring University). Klaipėda, p. 27–34.
Lamanauskas V. (2003). Natural Science Education in Contemporary School. Siauliai: Siauliai Uni-versity Press.
Lamanauskas V., Augienė D. (2008). Mokinių mokslinės tiriamosios veiklos gebėjimų ir susidomėjimo ugdymas bendrojo lavinimo mokykloje: situacijos analizė ir prognozės. Gamtamokslinis ugdymas / Natural Science Education, Nr. 3(23), p. 6–29.
Lee A. Plourde (2001). Elementary Science Education: the Influence of Student Teaching – Where it All Begins. Elementary Science Education, Vol. 123, No. 2, p. 253–259.
Littledyke M. (1997). Science education for environmental education? Primary teacher perspectives and practices. British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 23, No. 5, p. 641–659.
Marinopoulos D., Stavridou H. (2002). The influence of a collaborative learning environment on primary students` conceptions about acid rain. Journal of Biological Education, Vol. 37(1).
Nakhleh M. B., Samarapungavan A. (1999). Elementary school children`s beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.36, Issue 7, p.777–805.
Palmer D. (1997). Linking theory and practice: a strategy for presenting primary science activities. School Science Review, 79, p. 73–80.
Parker J., Spink E. (1997). Becoming Science Teachers: An Evaluation of the Initial Stages of Primary Teacher Training. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 22, Issue 1.
Petere A. (2001). Correlation between the content of integrated studies and child development in primary school. In.: Realising Educational Problems (ATEE Spring University). Klaipėda, p. 281–284.
Osborne J., Simon S. (1996). Primary science: past and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 27, p. 99–147.
Qualter, A., Schilling, M., McGuigan, L. (1994). Exploring Children`s Ideas`. Investigating, 10(1), p. 21.
Qualter A. (1999). How did you get to be a good primary science teacher? Westminster Studies in Education, Vol.22, p.75–86.
Skamp K. (1996). Elementary school chemistry: has its potential been realized? School Science and Mathematics, Vol.96, Issue 5.
Shafer S. M. (1996). Whats`s so important about science education? European Education, Vol. 28, Issue 3.
Shulman L. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, p.4–14.
So Wing-mui, Cheng May-hung, Tsang Chiao-liang. (1998). Problems of teaching science-related to-pics in Hong Kong primary schools. Journal of Basic Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, p. 43–57.
Stiggins R. J., Griswold M. M., Wikelund K. R. (1989). Measuring thinking skills through classroom assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, p. 233–246.
Reiss M. J., Tunnicliffe S.D. (2001). Students` understandings of their internal structure as revealed by drawings. In. H.Behrendt, H.Dahncke, R.Duit et al. (eds). Research in Science Education – Past, Present, and Future. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 101–106.
Teppo M., Rannikmae M., Holbrook J. (2006). Bridging the gap between research and practice – what do teachers find useful from a research report? Journal of Science Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, p. 78–82.
Tymms P. (1997). Science in primary schools: An investigation into differences in the attainment and attitudes of pupils across schools. Research in Science and Technological Education, Vol. 15, No. 2, p. 149–159.
Zembal-Saul C., Krajcik J. (2002). Elementary student teachers` science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.39, Issue 6, p.443–463.
Waldrip B. (2001). Primary Teachers` Views About Integrating Science and Literacy. Australian Primary and Junior Science Journal, Vol. 17, Issue 1.
Wenham M. (1995). Understanding primary science. Ideas, Concepts and Explanations. London.
Антонова Г. Н. (2002). Использование потенциала природоведческих текстов в начальной школе. В кн.: Общеобразовательная школа в условиях реформирования: состояние и перспективы. Витебск, с. 99–100.
Аквилева Г. Н., Клепинина З.А. (2001). Методика преподования естествознания в начальной школе. Москва: Владос.

Cite as :

Lamanauskas, V. (2009). Gamtamokslinis ugdymas pradinėje mokykloje: mokslinių tyrimų kontekstas [Natural science education in primary school: The context of scientific research]. Gamtamokslinis ugdymas / Natural Science Education, 6(2), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.48127/gu-nse/09.6.04a