No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
The aim of this paper is not to bury practical work in school science but to (once again) reconsider it. We draw on three main areas of discussion: accounts of science and ‘school science work'; teachers and others’ views of the nature of science; and our own data on teachers’ reactions to ‘critical incidents’ and practicals which go wrong. We use this as a basis for re‐thinking the role of practicals. An account of practical work is suggested which has as its main feature diversity rather than a single model or template. Within this diversity we believe that teachers should be open and honest with pupils about which type of practical work they are doing and why. We advocate that students should be made aware of the different kinds of practical work they do and the purposes of this practical work. In short, teachers should explain to students what type of practical work they are doing and why. Our second message is that teachers’ views about the nature of science both inform and are informed by their classroom practices and experiences‐‐especially during lab‐work. To encourage, promote and support critical reflection of these classroom practices and experiences is therefore a vital part of teacher professional development; this in time will promote science curriculum development.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 59 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.