Tag: Science

Could a short professional development program enhance children’s science learning outcomes?

By Winnie Tam, Centre for University and School Partnership, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

A recent experimental study by Guan and Hu in southeast China investigated two approaches to improving early childhood pre-service teachers’ science teaching abilities and children’s learning outcomes: the Making the Most of Classroom Interactions (MMCI) course alone, and an integrated intervention program that combined MMCI with peer coaching.

The MMCI course consisted of four 2-hour sessions focused on effective instructional support strategies, utilizing video analysis and sharing of strategy implementations. The peer coaching was a collaborative approach in which teachers worked in small groups to review one another’s teaching videos and provide structured feedback.

The researchers randomly assigned 87 pre-service teachers, who received standard training, to three conditions: MMCI alone (n=31), MMCI plus peer coaching (n=30), and a control group (n=26). The intervention lasted four weeks, and teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, skills, and classroom practices were measured through self-reported questionnaires, video-based tests, and teaching video assessments. Researchers assessed learning outcomes for 305 children (mean age = 5.69) in these teachers’ classrooms.

The findings revealed that both MMCI and MMCI with peer coaching significantly improved teachers’ science teaching beliefs, knowledge, instructional practices, and skills. Both approaches enhanced children’s science problem-solving skills and beliefs about the ease of learning science, though no significant improvements were found on science competence, science liking, or concept understanding.

Notably, the MMCI group with peer coaching demonstrated greater gains in teaching knowledge and children’s problem-solving abilities compared to the MMCI-only group. The study highlights the importance of integrating structured training like MMCI with collaborative peer coaching to maximize pre-service teacher development and children’s learning.

Can AI reduce teacher workload? Early evidence from a UK trial with ChatGPT

By Carmen Pannone, University of Cagliari, Italy

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools like ChatGPT are becoming increasingly common in classrooms—not just for students, but also for teachers. In England, the Department for Education has acknowledged that educators are using GenAI more often to plan lessons, create teaching materials, and even write exam questions. A major reported advantage is the potential to save time, which is especially relevant as workload remains a key factor behind teacher attrition.

To explore whether AI can help reduce this burden, the National Foundation for Educational Research recently conducted a rigorous trial. The study involved 68 secondary schools and 259 science teachers, who were randomly assigned to prepare Year 7 and 8 science lessons either with or without ChatGPT. Teachers in the ChatGPT group were given a practical guide to support their use of the tool. Over a 10-week period in the summer term of 2024, they logged how much time they spent preparing lessons, with a particular focus on weeks 6 to 10—after an initial adaptation phase.

The findings were encouraging. On average, teachers using ChatGPT spent 25 minutes less per week on lesson preparation than those in the non-AI group—56 minutes versus 81.5—representing a 31% time saving. Importantly, an independent expert panel found no difference in the quality of lesson materials between the two groups.

Use of the support guide also declined over time, suggesting that teachers grew more confident in integrating the tool into their practice. Looking ahead, future research could explore how GenAI tools like ChatGPT are used for other aspects of teachers’ work—such as administrative duties—and whether their impact differs across subjects or age groups, especially as new and more advanced versions continue to roll out.

Six recommendations for improving elementary science teaching

By Feifei Wang, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Recently, the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) released the “Improving Primary Science: Guidance Report”, highlighting the importance of high-quality science teaching in elementary education for fostering students’ curiosity and critical thinking. Drawing from a systematic review of international evidence and in consultation with academics and expert practitioners, this report presents six recommendations for making meaningful improvements to primary science teaching for students ages 5-11.

The six recommendations are as follows. First, develop students’ scientific vocabulary so they can participate in science learning, engage with new concepts, and communicate their understanding. Second, encourage students to explain their thinking in either verbal or written forms. This creates opportunities for students to recall, organize, and refine their understanding. Third, guide students to work scientifically by including activating prior knowledge, explicit strategy instruction, modeling of learned strategies, memorization of strategies, guided practice, independent practice, and structured reflection. Fourth, connect science learning to relevant real-world contexts. Fifth, use assessment to facilitate learning and responsive teaching. Sixth, strengthen science teaching by incorporating effective professional development into the implementation process. It is suggested by EEF that the six recommendations should be considered together, with careful reflection on how to align them with the specific school circumstances and teachers’ professional judgment.

Randomized evaluation of an experiential science program

By Susan Davis, Johns Hopkins University

A recent article published in AERJ by Schneider and Bradford reported the results of a cluster randomized control trial evaluating the effectiveness of the Multiple Literacies in Project-Based Learning (ML-PBL) science intervention for third graders. This study was undertaken to add to the developing evidence of the program, which had previously undergone teaching experiments, a pilot test, and a field test. ML-PBL consists of four units, and uses a “driving question” for each lesson to spark students’ interest and engagement. It incorporates cooperative, experiential learning for the students, assessments to ensure students meet learning expectations, and teacher professional development.

The study included 2371 third graders (1165 in the experimental group, 1206 in the control group which received their business as usual science instruction)) from 46 schools (23 E, 23 C) with 91 teachers (41 E, 50 C) from 111 classrooms (54 E, 57 C) during the 2018-19 school year. There were no differences between the two groups at baseline regarding ethnicity, socioeconomic status, third grade enrollment, and math/reading scores on the prior year’s state standardized testing. The ML-PBL intervention included teacher training to support classroom discussions that encouraged students to connect the content to their own lives and fostered student participation.

Post-testing was done using a test based on the MDE state test, as well as a test of social-emotional factors related to science learning. Academic results showed statistically significant gains in science for the experimental students, with an effect size of +0.27. These gains were evident regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, SES, and geographic region within the state. In addition, experimental students reported greater self-reflection and collaborative behaviors than controls. The implications of these findings for classroom practice are discussed.