Laboratory Activities in Israel

Rachel Mamlok-Naaman; Nitza Barnea

doi:10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

Full Text (PDF)

Rachel Mamlok-Naaman ¹ ^* , Nitza Barnea ²

More Detail

¹ Weizmann Institute of Science, ISRAEL² Ministry of Education, ISRAEL^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Laboratory activities have long had a distinctive and central role in the science curriculum, and science educators have suggested that many benefits accrue from engaging students in science laboratory activities. Many research studies have been conducted to investigate the educational effectiveness of laboratory work in science education in facilitating the attainment of the cognitive, affective, and practical goals. In Israel, on 2000, the chemical education committee, based on a needs assessment survey, recommended that the new syllabus include a whole unit of inquiry-based laboratory as part of the learning sequence. The reform highlighted the laboratory unit as the central component in the new curriculum. In this paper we will describe the chemistry laboratory curriculum in Israel, its development, implementation and assessment strategies.

Keywords

chemical education
secondary school
curriculum
practical work
science

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, Volume 8, Issue 1, 2012, 49-57

https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

Publication date: 12 Jan 2012

Article Views: 2792

Article Downloads: 1314

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Baird, J.R. (1990). Metacognition, purposeful inquiry and conceptual change. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 183–200). London: Rutledge.
Barnea, N., Dori, Y.J., & Hofstein, A. (2010). Development and implementation of inquiry-based and computerized-based laboratories: reforming high school chemistry in Israel. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(4), 218-228.
Barron, B.J.S., Schvartz, D.L., Vye, N.J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford, D.J. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem and project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3/4), 271–311.
Blosser, B.F. (1983). The role of the laboratory in science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 83, 165–169.
Bryce, T.G.K.,& Robertson, I.J. (1985). What can they do? A review of practical assessment in science. Studies in Science Education, 12(1), 1–24.
Clough, M. P. (2002). Using the laboratory to enhance student learning. In R. W. Bybee (Ed.), Learning science and the science of learning (pp. 85–94). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937.
Crawford, B.A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613-642.
Davis, C. L., & Honan, E. (1998). Reflections on the use of teams to support the portfolio process. In N. Lyons (Ed.), With portfolio in hand: Validating the new professionalism (pp. 90–102). New York: Teachers College Press.
Dori Y. J. (2003). From nationwide standardized testing to school-based alternative embedded assessment in Israel: students’ performance in the “Matriculation 2000” project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 34-52.
Dori Y. J., Sasson I., Kaberman Z. and Herscovitz O., (2004), Integrating case-based computerized laboratories into high school chemistry. The Chemical Educator, 9(1), 4-8.
Dori Y. J., Barak. M., Herscovitz O. and Carmi M., (2005), Preparing pre- and in-service teachers to teach high school science with technology. C. Vrasidas and G. V. Glass. (Eds). Preparing teachers to teach with technology, 2nd Volume of the book series: Current Perspectives on Applied Information Technologies. Information Age Publishing.
Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science (DBS) and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110.
Grant, G. E., & Huebner, T. A. (1998). The portfolio question: The power of self-directed inquiry, In N. Lyons (Ed.), With portfolio in hand: Validating the new professionalism (pp. 156–171). New York: Teachers College Press.
Green, J. E., & Smyser, S. O. (1996). The teacher portfolio: A strategy for professional development and evaluation. Lancaster, PA: Technomic.
Gunstone, R.F. (1991). Reconstructing theory from practical work. In B.E.Woolnough (Ed.), Practical science. Milton Keynes, England: The Open University.
Gunstone, R.F. & Champagne, A.B. (1990). Promoting conceptual change in the laboratory.In E. HegartyHazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 159–182). London: Routledge.
Hofstein, A. (2005, April). Evidence-based continuous professional development (CPD) programmes in six science domains. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201–217.
Hofstein, A., & Kesner, M. (2006). Industrial chemistry and school chemistry: Making chemistry studies more relevant. International Journal of Science Education. 28 (9), 1017-1039.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.
Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Chemistry inquiry lessons. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, USA, April.
Hofstein, A., Shore, R., & Kipnis, M. (2004). Providing high school chemistry students with opportunities to develop learning skills in an inquiry-type laboratory: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 47– 62.
Hofstein, A., Navon, O., Kipnis, M., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Developing students’ ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 791–806.
Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical working school science. School Science Review, 71(1), 33–40.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 597-625.
Klenowski, V. (2002). Developing portfolios for learning and assessment. London: Routledge Falmer.
Krajcik, J., Mamlok, R., & Hug, B. (2001). Modern content and the enterprise of science: Science education in the twentieth century. In L. Corno (Ed.), Education across a century: The centennial volume (pp. 205–238). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S., & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teacher of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99(5), 258–271.
Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory: Historical perspectives and contexts for contemporary teaching. In J. B. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 249–262). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Lunetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M. P., (2007). Learning and teaching in school science laboratory: An analysis of research, theory and practice. In S. A. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds). Handbook of research in science education (pp. 393–442). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaun Associates Publishers.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Pedagogical content knowledge and science education (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Marx, R. W., Freeman, J. G., Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1998). Professional development of science teachers. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 680–776). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.
Roth, W.M. (1994). Experimenting in constructivist high school physics laboratory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 197–223.
Sharan, Y., & Sharan, S. (1992). Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation. New York: Teacher College Press.
Shachar, H., & Sharan, S. (1994). Talking, relating and achieving: Effects of cooperative learning and wholeclass instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 12(4), 313–353.
Slavin, R. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1– 22.
Shulman, L. (1992, April). Portfolios in teacher education: A component of reflective teacher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Taitelbaum, D., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Carmeli, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). Evidence-based Continuous Professional Development (CPD) in the Inquiry Chemistry Laboratory (ICL). International Journal of Science Education, 30(5), 593-617.
Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90(5), 403–418.
Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry project in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112–143.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2001, November). Community of Practice: What is it, and how can we use this metaphor for teacher professional development? Paper presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Atlanta, GA, US.

How to cite this article

APA

Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Barnea, N. (2012). Laboratory Activities in Israel. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(1), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

Vancouver

Mamlok-Naaman R, Barnea N. Laboratory Activities in Israel. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2012;8(1):49-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

AMA

Mamlok-Naaman R, Barnea N. Laboratory Activities in Israel. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2012;8(1), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

Chicago

Mamlok-Naaman, Rachel, and Nitza Barnea. "Laboratory Activities in Israel". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2012 8 no. 1 (2012): 49-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

Harvard

Mamlok-Naaman, R., and Barnea, N. (2012). Laboratory Activities in Israel. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(1), pp. 49-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a

MLA

Mamlok-Naaman, Rachel et al. "Laboratory Activities in Israel". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 8, no. 1, 2012, pp. 49-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.816a