Teaching and learning implications on group experiments and teacher demonstrations to teaching of process skills in biology: A case of two Namibian secondary schools

Hedwig U. Kandjeo-Marenga



The article reports on the teaching and learning implications of teacher demonstrations and group experiments for practical work in biology at Namibian secondary schools. The study involved three teachers and two secondary school centers. Data on were collected using a video observation quoting schedule. The findings showed that teacher demonstrations in biology provide fewer opportunities (if any) to students for acquiring intended process skills (practical skills) compared to group experiments. Teacher demonstrations were found to develop a few process skills, such as making observations, recording observed results, and writing conclusions, whereas group experiments allowed students to acquire variety of process skills. Teacher demonstrations provided little opportunity to students to discuss and negotiate subject content knowledge at the intermental plane.



Full Text:



Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understanding of the nature of science: the impact of a philosophy of science course on pre-service teachers’ views of instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 15 – 42.

Beeth, M. E. (1998). Facilitating conceptual change learning: the need for teachers to support metacognition. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(1), 49 – 61.

Bennett, J. (2003). Teaching and Learning science: a guide to recent research and its applications. London: Continuum.

Bennett, J. and Kennedy, D. (2001). Practical work at the upper high school level: the evaluation of a new model of assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 23(1):97–110.

Bless, C. and Higson-Smith, C. (2000). Fundamentals of social research methods: An african perspective. 3rd edition. Lansdowne: Juta Education (Pty) Ltd., 176 pp

Boz, Y. and Uzuntiryaki, E. (2006). Turkish prospective chemistry teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1647 – 1667.

Brooks, J. G. and Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: the case for constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Press, 143 pp.

Chin, C. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1315 – 1346.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education. 5th ed. London: Routledge, 464 pp.

Creswell, J. W. (2006). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions. 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks. SAGE Publications, 416 pp.

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd Edition. London: Sage Publications, pp. 1–29.

DOE (Department of Education). (2002). National Curriculum Statement. Grades R–9 (Schools). Pretoria: Department of Education.

Duit, R. and Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science- from behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. J. Fraser and K. J. Tobin (Eds.). International Handbook of Science Education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 3–25).

Erduran, S. (2006). Fuming with reasons: towards research-based professional development to support the teaching and learning of argumentation in science. In E. Gaigher, L. Goosen & R. de Villiers (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (SAARMSTE) (pp. 14 – 33). Pretoria: University of Pretoria.

Frost, J. (2005). Planning for learning and teaching science. In J. Frost and T. Turner (Eds.), Learning to teach science in the secondary school: a comparison to school experience (pp. 91 – 175). 2nd Edition. London: Routlege Falmer.

Gott, R. and Duggan, S. (1996). Practical work: its role in the understanding of evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(2):183–201.

Harlen, W. (1999). Effective teaching of science: a review of research (Chapter 2). Great Britain: The Scottish Council for Research in Education.

Hodson, D. (1996). Practical work in schools science: exploring some directions for change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7):755–760.

Hodson, D. and Hodson, J. (1998a). From constructivism to social constructivism: a Vygotskian perspective on teaching and learning science. School Science Review, 79(289), 33 – 41.

Hodson, D. and Hodson, J. (1998b). Science education as enculturation: some implications for practice. School Science Review, 80(290):17–24.

Hofstein, A., Novon, O., Kipmis, M. and Mamlok_Naaman, R. (2005). Developing students’ ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 42(7), 791 – 806.

Jones, C. (2000). The role of language in the learning and teaching of science. In M. Monk and J. Osborne (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: what research has to say (pp. 88 – 103). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Martinez-Losada, C. and Garcia-Barros, S. (2005). Do Spanish secondary teachers really value different sorts of procedural skills? International Journal of Science Education, 27(7), 828 – 854).

McMillan, J. H. and Schumacher, S. (1997). Research in Education: A conceptual introduction. 4th Edition. New York: Longman, 684 pp.

McNeil, K. and Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on students learning. International Journal of Science Education, 45(1), 53 – 78.

Millar, R., Le Marechal, J. F., and Tiberghien, A. (1999). “Mapping†the domain-varieties of practical work. In J. Leach and A. Paulsen (Eds.), Practical Work in Science Education: Recent Research Studies. Denmark: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Roskilde University Press, pp. 33–59.

Morge, L. (2005). Teacher-pupil interaction: a study of hidden beliefs in conclusion phase. International Journal of Science Education, 27(8), 935 – 956.

Mortimer, E. and Scott, P. (2000). Analysing discourse in the science classroom. In: R. Millar, J. Leach and J. Osborne (Eds.). Improving Science Education: The Contribution of Research. Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 126–142.

Mortimer, E. and Scott, P.H. (2003). Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Philadelphia: Open University Press, 160 pp.

Nakhleh, M. B., Polles, J. and Malina, E. (2002). Learning chemistry in a laboratory environment. In J. K. Gilbert et al. (Eds.), Chemical Education: towards research-based practice (pp. 69 – 94). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Ogborn, J., Fress, G., Martins, I. and McGillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom (pp. 77 – 95). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Ogunniyi, M.B. and Mikalsen, O. (2004). Ideas and process skills used by South African and Norwegian students to perform cognitive tasks on acids, bases and magnetism. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(2), 151 – 164.

Ogunniyi, M. (2006). Effects of discursive course on two science teachers’ perceptions of the nature of science. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(1), 93 – 102.

Oh, P. S. (2005). Discursive roles of the teacher during class sessions for students presenting their science investigations. International Journal of Science Education, 27(15), 1825 – 1851.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. 2nd ed. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 532 pp.

Pella, M. O. (1969). The laboratory and science teaching. In H. O. Anderson (Ed.), Reading in Science Education for the Secondary School . London: Macmillan Company.

Ramorogo, G.J. (1998). Effects of exemplary teaching and learning materials on students’ performance in Biology. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Cape Town: University of the Western Cape.

Richardson, V. (1997). Constructivist teaching and teacher education: theory and practice. In V. Richardson (Ed.) Constructivist Teacher Education building a world of new understanding (pp. 1 – 3). London: The Farmer Press.

Roberts, R. and Gott, R. (2000). Procedural understanding in biology: how is it characterised in text? School Science Review, 82(298):83–91.

Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science: knowing and learning in open-inquiry science laboratory. Dodrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Solomon, J. (1994a). Group discussions in the classroom. In R. Levinson (Ed.), Teaching Science (pp. 76 – 84). London: Routledge.

Solomon, J. (1994b). Group discussions in the classroom. In R. Levinson (Ed.), Teaching Science (pp. 7 – 21). London: Routledge.

Stake, R. E. (2000). Case study. In: N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications, pp. 435–454.

Stake,R. E. (2000). Case study. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd Edition. London: Sage Publication.

Staver, J. R. (1998). Constructivism: sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 501 – 520.

Trumbull, D. J., Scarano, G. and Bonney, R. (2006). Relations among two teachers’ practices and beliefs, conceptualizations of the nature of science, and their implementation of students’ independent inquiry projects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1717 – 1750.

Wellington, J. (2000). Teaching and learning secondary science: contemporary issues and practical approaches (Chapters 7 and 8). London: Routledge.

White, L. (2003). Process skills: Are teachers equipped and ready to implement? In: B. Putsoa, M. Dlamini and V. Kelly (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Annual Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (SAARMSTE). Mbabane: Waterford Kamhlaba, pp. 763–768.

Windschitl, M. (1999). A vision educators can put into practice: portraying the constructivist classroom as a cultural system. School Science and Mathematics, 99(4):89–196.

Wu, H. K. and Hsieh, C. E. (2006). Developing sixth graders’ inquiry skills to construct explanations in inquiry-based learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1289 – 1313.

Zady, M. F., Portes, P. R. and Ochs, V. D.( 2002). Examining classroom interactions related to difference in students’ science achievement. Science Education, 87(1), 40 – 63.


  • There are currently no refbacks.