Mr. Dhakal is the most experienced participant in this study, he has been working as a senior science teacher at one of the top schools for thirty years. His kindly nature influenced me so highly that I immediately fell for his in-depth perceptions. Normally, we used to communicate for the special task purpose as he is guiding the Science Teachers’ Association Nepal-STAN in Gandaki province, and also an eighth-month research colleague for Tata Institute of Social Science-TISS. We rarely talked about our past experiences concerning our profession and schooling, but when I increased my rate of communication after being informed about this research, slowly I started to be enlightened with a unique perspective, challenges, and practices for science education. As he is working as the leader of STAN, Gandaki Province, he has more than enough friends in his circle for strengthening the profession; therefore, he could reflect a large scale of teaching practices on behalf of hundreds of active science teachers. I followed him for long days, and due to the inconvenient time availability, we were unable to meet but one day when I was returning from the university, I got a chance to visit his school.
Mr. Sunar is a dynamic and active science teacher with a charming voice and extensive experience. He is of Nepali origin but spent much of his life in India, where he completed his education at an army school and later earned a Bachelor’s degree in science from Nehru Education in Shillong, Meghalaya State. In 2007, he returned to Pokhara and began his teaching career. He chose not to go abroad as he needed to care for his mother. After several years of experience in different schools, he has been teaching science at GBS at the secondary level for ten years. Similarly, Mr. N. Dhakal is a kind and active science teacher with a soft voice and extensive experience. He grew up in a remote area of western Nepal, in the Rukum district of Karnali province, where he faced many challenges during his schooling at a community-based school. He completed his I Sc. and BSc. degrees at Amrit Campus in Kathmandu and has been teaching for twenty years.
Three Different Backgrounds of Teachers
[To begin with, I put a query concerning their school background about their cultures of science learning, and to what extent they experienced the hands-on activities connected to the real world.]
Mr. Dhakal: “During my school days, science subjects were optional and there were only four students in the class. Due to an extreme lack of science teachers, we struggled hard to achieve science education. I remember an unforgettable incident with my Indian science teacher in ninth grade. The topic was Susmadarsak yantra (microscope) and Durdarsak yantra (telescope) under the optical instrument chapter. Due to the unavailability of blackboard, chalk, and copies, my teacher could not draw a ray diagram of a microscope and telescope. He simply delivered the definition and application of that instrument. I rote-memorized the definitions and applications of them. Once I asked my Indian science teacher whether we could observe a louse the size of an elephant from the microscope. I don’t know whether he responded normally or by scolding me, but he replied yes! If we observe you through a microscope then we can see you as your father. Later, I topped the SLC board exam from the Syangja district, and thus I was motivated to join I.Sc.
Mr. Sunar said, “I schooled in an Army school following the CBSE curriculum in Shillong, India, and there used to be a weekly routine for science-related projects either in the laboratory experimentation or for home-assigned projects. I experienced science learning with theoretical and practical engagements simultaneously. My teachers often emphasized active participation in an interaction where I was driven by the mindset of deeper understanding from an authentic inquiry-based approach.”
Mr. N. Dhakal said, “I was schooled at a government school in a remote area of Rukum, Nepal. In my time, science subjects were introduced only after class four. There used to be simple real-life-based observatory engagements otherwise my science learning was mostly lecture-based and rote memorization. In addition, after the sixth class, my new science teacher was newly appointed in the school actually from a Sanskrit background, and his teaching approach was completely lecture-based. I still remember the event in eighth class when the district administration once donated a microscope to the school with several slides. Even after several attempts, we didn’t observe the cell and at last, my science teacher claimed the fault in the microscope. At that time, we were so disappointed with that microscope and now I assume that it might be because my teacher was not aware of the mirror configuration for light enrichment to the slide. I added that project-based science learning was far from expected, we struggled hard to pass exams and score good marks in science through rote memorization.”
[I was depressed about the scenario of Mr. Dhakal & Mr. N. Dhakal and moved ahead, inquiring about how often they experienced authenticity, collaboration, reflection, and critical discussion and assessment during the project. Here, Mr. Dhakal and Mr. N. Dhakal did not share as they had not experienced them enough as shareable during their school time.]
Mr. Sunar said, “Yes, I experienced enough collaboration and peer-based projects; most of the projects were aligned with the curriculum, real-life problem-solving, and learner-focused which means we were empowered to complete them. I still remember some of the projects at the tenth standard like exploring the nutrition profile of soybean oil, experimentation for measuring the effectiveness of antibiotics, and so on. My science teachers used to probe multiple questions concerning the process and outcomes of every project as we had to reflect on our project with scientific reports in our reporting worksheets, and according to that evaluation used to be done, but I remember few peer collaborations and evaluation as most of the projects were individually completed.”
[Immediately I probed a query to know what Mr. Sunar thinks about the development of 21st-century skills from those projects.]
Mr. Sunar: “At that time I was not aware of 21st-century skills but referencing the present context, I think the attitude of interaction during the learning process, communication skills, creative and problem-solving skills, and design thinking were some of the skills that I developed while doing projects at my school age. I added that, from early grade, my teachers used to encourage all to speak and raise questions and assign creative work like drawings, designing, and model making.”
Mr. Dhakal and Mr. N. Dhakal faced challenges in learning science due to a lack of resources and qualified teachers. Their science education was based on lectures and memorization, which is a conventional approach (Yeo & Nielsen, 2020) which reflects the conventional learning culture. In contrast, Mr. Sunar had a positive experience with science education in an Army school in India, where he learned science through weekly projects that were aligned with the curriculum and focused on real-life problem-solving. His science education followed an inquiry-based learning approach, which is a dynamic and student-focused teaching method (Kokotsaki et al., 2016). Mr. Sunar developed skills such as communication, creativity, and problem-solving through doing projects. His teachers also encouraged art-based teaching, which is important for fostering innovation and design thinking (Halverson & Sawyer, 2022).
Common Culture of the Three Teachers: Well Structured
[Knowing the saturated information of past experiences was recalled, I switched my queries to teaching practices. At the very first, I inquired about their teaching methodology and how often and what kinds of projects they are incorporating regularly.
All teachers reported that they share a common approach to assigning and implementing projects, which involves following a weekly science worksheet. This worksheet contains content and curriculum-based activities for both in/out-lab and at-home learning. These activities are designed to foster cognitive, communicative, and hands-on skills in students.] In addition,
Mr. N. Dhakal: “I promote the use of local, low-cost, and no-cost teaching materials for projects, such as using old pens to make syringes or using glue guns to create models of levers.”
Mr. Sunar: “I shared an example of an in-class activity where students observed the effects of different voltages on a fan and classified the dependent, independent, and controlled variables.”
Mr. Dhakal: “We have to make a terminal and a yearly plan for our subject including chapter-wise learning objectives and supporting teaching methodology. For activity-based classes, we have to follow the weekly activity workbook which is prepared by ourselves aligning with the ongoing curriculum. Moreover, I advocate more engagement of students in the teaching and learning process beyond their practical workbook.”
[All teachers stated that their students and school management are supportive of hands-on activities and that at least one activity is planned for each topic. They also have access to laboratory assistants who help set up experiments and provide supervision during activities. Therefore, they claimed that they were good and covered the maximum criteria for formative assessment.]
[Connecting to their practices, I further posed queries about their culture of conducting the project and any activities.
All three teachers claimed that they are practicing highly activity-based science classes where even their theoretical classes become highly interactive as they also prioritize inquiry-based classes. Moreover, their hands-on activities are mostly content-based and activity-based, and they remembered fewer contextual and real-life problem-based projects as compared to other types, reasoning that they assigned only four or five problem-based projects this year per class as they are time-consuming and require prolonged assessments. They assign both individual and group-based activities for common objectives. In the case of laboratory-based activities, their students have to follow the guidelines provided by their assistants and must approach identical outcomes; however, in/out-lab or home-based activities, their students are free to design and articulate their ideas and creative skills to present their way expecting diverse art forms of the presentation and content conceptualization. They said all the projects and activities for the whole session are already in their provided science workbook, so every time on the day of the activity they expect some curiosity and preliminary preparation for the interaction from their students. On the activity day, firstly they divide their students into two equal numbers, assign two assistants separately, and then make groups of students for peer collaboration. They informed me that their students from the primary level are familiar with laboratory equipment so they aren’t facing any challenges while doing any activity. So far, every assigned experimentation or project work is completed in the targeted time and they can maintain a portfolio of every individual after each formative assessment.
I am impressed by their perfection and am curious about any challenges or difficulties they may face in their practices. Specifically, I would like to know why they are assigning fewer problem-based projects or activities and, if these are time-consuming, what their intentions are going forward.]
Mr. Dhakal: “We are hiring project assistant teachers to support both teachers and students in completing science activities within the targeted time. Home-based individual or group projects are not costly and are designed using local, low-cost, or no-cost materials. These projects include modeling objects such as human vital systems, cell division, DNA formation, and celestial bodies using materials such as clay, paper, and comic strips. I am concerned that assigning expensive, time-consuming, or collaborative home projects could result in challenges from guardians. The school has two laboratory classrooms with ample space and equipment for group discussions. However, unexpected school closures can disrupt practical schedules, requiring the use of normal days or home assignments to meet term plans and assessment systems.” [Mr. Sunar supports these pieces of information.]
Mr. N. Dhakal: “To add something from Mr. Dhakal, my regular teaching activities go beyond the workbook, resulting in a slower progression through the course according to the term plan. I have been questioned by the administration for not providing enough time for exam preparation but maintain that my approach is more effective and produces better outcomes.”
[In regards to my main concern, I inquired about their key factors when assigning projects, such as whether they address students’ space, collaboration, peer evaluation, and assessment mechanisms.]
Mr. Sunar: “We address students’ space by allowing them to design and construct the process independently, with a focus on content understanding and reflection. Most lab-based and home-based projects are done in pairs or groups, requiring collaboration to achieve objectives. The teacher’s role is to initiate the project through direct or indirect instruction and actively observe students’ activities for assessment using rubrics, with the assistance of laboratory helpers. However, we do not practice peer evaluation or critical questioning. Instead, practical exams are taken at the end of each term, where students randomly select a topic, conduct an experiment, and face a viva process.”
[Mr. Dhakal and Mr. N. Dhakal expressed their agreement with this approach. Additionally, I posed one more query: How do they think and practice fostering 21st-century skills by their pattern of implementing project-based classes.]
Mr. N. Dhakal: “Our approach has been successful, as evidenced by our inclusion in the top ten at a recent project expo at a science conference in Nepal. I attribute this success to our teaching methods, which focus on developing skills such as ICT, critical reflection, collaboration, communication, foresight thinking, and risk assessment.”
Mr. Sunar: “The school tracks student progress through portfolios and workbooks and collaborates with the Gandaki Province Academy of Science and Technology (GPAST) which is the governmental body to provide additional opportunities for skill development.”
Mr. Dhakal: “The school is committed to ensuring that students are prepared to learn and adapt to the school’s culture and values, which prioritize the development of 21st-century skills. The school has a reputation for providing a peaceful environment for science education and has contributed to numerous science project-related programs organized by both governmental and private organizations.”
[Despite their success, all three teachers acknowledged that they were not accustomed to guiding their students in peer evaluation and responding to critical questions during project activities or presentations. They pledged to address these issues shortly.
Seems all teachers are very positive about the existing curriculum and teaching process, however, I put a query concerning their recommendations and perceptions or expectations for science education.]
Mr. Dhakal: “My experiences with the previous science curriculum for the school level, which was heavily content-focused and encouraged rote memorization. Despite this, our teaching approaches incorporated project-based, inquiry-based, and activity-based methods, which were not significantly different from our current practices. The current curriculum aligns with our teaching culture by prioritizing contextual, activity-based, and problem-solving approaches, and addresses modern needs for science education such as ICT knowledge and skills, collaborative work, cognitive development, and presentation skills. All three of us teachers are satisfied with the current curriculum and are striving to meet its criteria.”
Reflection on the Observation
Two weeks after the interview, I urged them to let me observe a regular activity-based science class. During this time, regular updates and proofreading of data were conducted through phone and messenger. Before the observation, it was discussed that all three teachers had identical activities for different classes. However, Mr. Dhakal’s and Mr. Nand Dhakal’s classes were interrupted by an NGO program that required the attendance of all secondary-level teachers and students after the fourth period. As a result, I was able to observe Mr. Sunar’s activity-based class and some other lower-level activities. Additionally, Mr. Dhakal and Mr. N. Dhakal reported that observing one class would be sufficient to generate ideas, as they were all following identical approaches to meet the targets outlined in their worksheets.
The activity was conducted with tenth-grade students from Section C, who were divided into two groups and supervised by one additional teacher and two laboratory assistants. The main objective of the activity was to handle and observe permanent slides with different resolutions. Each group of twenty-two students was further divided into seven subgroups, with each subgroup receiving seven microscopes and several permanent slides. All necessary materials were pre-arranged with the help of the assistants, and students were shuffled according to their group assignments.
Initially, the teacher provided brief instructions on the parts, functions, and handling of the microscope. The floor was then opened for peer collaboration and discussion on how to handle the microscope. From my observation, it was clear that the students were comfortable in the laboratory setting and adhered to the code of conduct for science laboratories, such as maintaining silence, avoiding rushing, handling equipment with care, and collaborating cooperatively. The students worked together and sincerely sought assistance from the teacher; I even assisted some students in focusing their view by adjusting the aperture, mirror, and focus. The teachers and assistants were actively observing and assisting the students throughout the activity. After approximately fifteen minutes, all students were asked if they had successfully viewed the cell. At this point, only four groups had successfully done so at different resolutions, while the remaining three groups in the first hall were still trying their best. In the next hall, two groups were also struggling to view the cell; one group claimed that their microscope was faulty and used the tools of a group that had already completed the task.
Eventually, all remaining groups completed the task with assistance from teachers and assistants. The teachers checked every slide before concluding the class. Afterward, I inquired about how student performance would be assessed for this activity. The teachers responded that while there was no doubt about the students’ behavior and communication skills, the content-related assessment would be conducted through detailed reflections in their worksheets and terminal examinations where students would randomly select a topic to perform an experiment or activity again and defend their results during a viva.
Result and Discussion
Though they have diverse backgrounds of learning science, currently they are embracing the common culture of implementing project-based learning in secondary level science education. They developed the common teaching practice following the same worksheets and their culture of implementing can be highlighted as follows:
Teaching Materials, Assignments, and Teaching Strategies: The teachers use low-cost and local materials for projects, which can enhance students' creativity and engagement (Sivakumar, 2015). They assign both individual and group projects, which can foster collaboration and communication skills among students. They follow an inquiry-based learning approach, which is a dynamic and student-focused teaching method that emphasizes active participation and problem-solving (Kokotsaki et al., 2016) and art-based teaching, which is important for fostering innovation and design thinking (Halverson & Sawyer, 2022). Moreover, they enable students to explore the content through hands-on activities, which can deepen their understanding and retention of the concepts (Kolb, 1984).
Project Categorization: The teachers categorize their projects based on the content and curriculum objectives, as well as the level of difficulty and complexity. They plan at least one activity for each topic, and claim that they practice highly activity-based science classes. Their hands-on activities are mostly content-based and activity-based, with fewer contextual and real-life problem-based projects. They assign both individual and group-based activities for common objectives.
Student Space and Collaboration: The teachers adopt a liberationist approach to PBL, which considers knowledge to be of utmost importance, and guides learners to contribute towards positive change (Tsanyane, 2023). The teachers facilitate the development of well-rounded, knowledgeable, and ethical individuals by fostering an open-minded learning environment. They address students' space by allowing them to design and construct the process independently, with a focus on content understanding and reflection. They initiate the project and actively observe students' activities for assessment using rubrics, with the assistance of laboratory helpers. They focus on developing skills such as ICT, critical reflection, collaboration, communication, foresight thinking, and risk assessment and track student progress through portfolios and workbooks, which are key characteristics of the project-based teaching and learning process (Markula & Aksela, 2021).
Challenges and Solutions: The teachers face some challenges in implementing PBL, such as time constraints, lack of resources, criticism from guardians, and alignment with the term plan. They overcome these challenges by using low-cost or no-cost materials, designing home-based projects, accessing assistant teachers and laboratory helpers, and going beyond the workbook to cover the curriculum.
Evaluation: The teachers evaluate students' performance through practical exams, portfolios, workbooks, and rubrics. They do not practice peer evaluation or critical questioning, which are important aspects of PBL that can promote self-regulation and metacognition among students (Markula & Aksela, 2021). Additionally, they are positive about the existing curriculum, which is more aligned with their practices than the previous one, which was more content-specific and encouraged rote memorization.
Acknowledgement
I express my heartfelt gratitude to the participating teachers and their dear students for their commendable dedication and commitment to fostering an enriching learning environment. Their passion for teaching and ability to bring out the best in their students is truly inspiring. Their invaluable insights and experiences have been instrumental in this endeavor.
References
Halverson, E., & Sawyer, K. (2022).
Learning in and through the arts. Journal
of the Learning Sciences, 31(1),
1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2029127
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based
Learning: A review of the literature. Improving
Schools, 19(3), 267-277. DOI:10.1177/1365480216659733
Markula, A., &
Aksela, M. (2022). The key characteristics of project-based learning: how
teachers implement projects in K-12 science education. Disciplinary and
Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00042-x
Sivakumar, R. (2015). Impact of low-cost
teaching aids in teaching science. Innovative Thoughts International
Research Journal, 2(3). Researchgate.net
Fenstermacher, G. D., & Soltis, J. F. (2009).
Approaches to Teaching. In J. F. Soltis (Ed.), Approaches to Teaching (4th ed., pp. 1-10). Teachers College
Press.
Yeo, J. & Nielsen, W. (2020). Multimodal science teaching
and learning, Learning: Research and Practice, 6:1, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2020.1752043
Cite this article:
Limbu, S. (2023). Exploring the Culture of Practicing Project-based Learning by In-service Science Teachers: An Ethnographic Inquiry [MPhil dissertation, Kathmandu University].
