1. Modern instructional approaches in science education aim to engage diverse learning styles and encourage more students to pursue science. Concept mapping, collaborative learning, and the jigsaw technique are strategies discussed. 2. Collaborative learning involves grouping students to work towards a common goal and learn from each other. Research shows it improves learning outcomes over individual work. 3. The jigsaw technique divides a topic into parts and assigns a part to each student. Students then teach their part to their group, integrating their knowledge. This encourages cooperation and perspective-taking.

1. 1
ONLINE ASSIGNMENT
Topic : Modern Instructional Approaches in Science Education
Introduction
Teachers aspire to have all of their students learn. This aspiration of reaching all
students spans disciplines, age levels, and all varieties of institutions. Most teachers do so
out of a genuine love for their discipline and desire to share the wonder of their chosen
field with others. Science teaching is no different than other disciplines in this respect.
However, try as we may in science, the lack of diversity apparent in the statistics of who
chooses to pursue scientific disciplines professionally suggests that we still have much to
learn about how to reach all students. To provide open access to science learning and
encourage a broader spectrum of students to pursue studies in the sciences, teachers must
begin to address the diversity of learning styles among the students in our classrooms.
For this modern approaches with and without use of ICT can be administrated in science
classrooms so that a diversity of learning styles can be developed in students.

2. 2
Content
There are a variety of ways by which students can accomplish meaningful
learning. In the following the author describes a number of strategies that can be used for
meaningful learning including concept mapping, analogies, summaries and answering
questions, inquiry strategies, and conceptual change strategies, strategies to address
environmental issues, and using ICT in teaching and learning.
Concept Maps
One of the teaching/learning strategies that have been shown to enhance learners’
science achievement and meaningful understanding is concept mapping. Concept
mapping has been used in science education in a variety of ways. Concept maps, for
example, can play a significant role in curriculum development, learning, and teaching in
many disciplines (Novak, 1998). They are useful in science curriculum planning for
separating significant from trivial content (Starr & Krajcik, 1990). Furthermore, concept
maps have been used as assessment tools because they measure dimensions different
from those revealed by traditionally used assessment instruments (Markham, Mintzes, &
Jones, 1994). Finally, concept maps have been used in instruction in a variety of contexts.
Each context reflects an alternative theory of knowledge acquisition. On the one hand,
the rationalist theory of learning suggests that subject matter has an inherent structure that
should be conveyed to learners. In this context, a concept map should be evaluated by
relating it to an ideal map, teacher-constructed map, or an expert concept map.
Alternatively, the constructivist theory of learning underscores the uniqueness of each

3. 3
individual’s concept map representation with respect to organization of concepts and
their construction (Beyerebach & Smith, 1990) leading to a different approach to
assessing these maps and a more student-centered instructional approach which allows
students to actively construct their own knowledge with teacher guidance. Still, both
theories concur that meaningful learning occurs when concepts are organized in an
individual’s cognitive structure.
Collaborative Learning
The concept of collaborative learning, the grouping and pairing of students for the
purpose of achieving an academic goal, has been widely researched and advocated
throughout the professional literature. The term "collaborative learning" refers to an
instruction method in which students at various performance levels work together in
small groups toward a common goal. The students are responsible for one another's
learning as well as their own. Thus, the success of one student helps other students to be
successful.
Proponents of collaborative learning claim that the active exchange of ideas within
small groups not only increases interest among the participants but also promotes critical
thinking. According to Johnson and Johnson (1986), there is persuasive evidence that
cooperative teams achieve at higher levels of thought and retain information longer than
students who work quietly as individuals. The shared learning gives students an
opportunity to engage in discussion, take responsibility for their own learning, and thus
become critical thinkers .

4. 4
In spite of these advantages, most of the research studies on collaborative learning
have been done at the primary and secondary levels. As yet, there is little empirical
evidence on its effectiveness at the college level. However, the need for noncompetitive,
collaborative group work is emphasized in much of the higher education literature. Also,
majority of the research in collaborative learning has been done in non-technical
disciplines.
The advances in technology and changes in the organizational infrastructure put an
increased emphasis on teamwork within the workforce. Workers need to be able to think
creatively, solve problems, and make decisions as a team. Therefore, the development
and enhancement of critical-thinking skills through collaborative learning is one of the
primary goals of technology. The present research was designed to study the
effectiveness of collaborative learning as it relates to learning outcomes at the college
level, for students in technology.
When implementing collaborative learning, the first step was to clearly specify the
academic task. Next, the collaborative learning structure was explained to the students.
An instruction sheet that pointed out the key elements of the collaborative process was
distributed. As part of the instructions, students were encouraged to discuss "why" they
thought as they did regarding solutions to the problems. They were also instructed to
listen carefully to comments of each member of the group and be willing to reconsider
their own judgments and opinions. As experience reveals, group decision- making can
easily be dominated by the loudest voice or by the student who talks the longest. Hence,

5. 5
it was insisted that every group member must be given an opportunity to contribute his or
her ideas. After that the group will arrive at a solution.
Group Selection and Size
Groups can be formed using self- selection, random assignment, or criterion-
based selection. This study used self- selection, where students chose their own group
members. The choice of group size involves difficult trade- offs., Smaller groups (of
three) contain less diversity; and may lack divergent thinking styles and varied expertise
that help to animate collective decision making. Conversely, in larger groups it is difficult
to ensure that all members participate. This study used a group size of four. There were
24 students in the collaborative learning treatment group. Thus, there were six groups of
four students each.
Grading Procedure
According to Slay, for effective collaborative learning, there must be "group
goals" and "individual accountability". When the group's task is to ensure that every
group member has learned something, it is in the interest of every group member to spend
time explaining concepts to group mates. Research has consistently found that students
who gain most from cooperative work are those who give and receive elaborated
explanations. Therefore, this study incorporated both "group goals" and "individual
accountability". The posttest grade was made up of two parts. Fifty percent of the test
grade was based on how that particular group performed on the test. The test points of all

6. 6
group members were pooled together and fifty percent of each student's individual grade
was based on the average score. The remaining fifty percent of each student's grade was
individual. This was explained to the students before they started working
collaboratively.
After the task was explained, group members pulled chairs into close circles and
started working on the worksheet. They were given 30 minutes to discuss the solutions
within the group and come to a consensus. At the end of 30 minutes, the solution sheet
was distributed. The participants discussed their answers within the respective groups for
15 minutes. Finally, the students were tested over the material they had studied.
According to Vygotsky, students are capable of performing at higher intellectual
levels when asked to work in collaborative situations than when asked to work
individually. Group diversity in terms of knowledge and experience contributes
positively to the learning process. Bruner contends that cooperative learning methods
improve problem- solving strategies because the students are confronted with different
interpretations of the given situation. The peer support system makes it possible for the
learner to internalize both external knowledge and critical thinking skills and to convert
them into tools for intellectual functioning.
In the present study, the collaborative learning medium provided students with
opportunities to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate ideas cooperatively. The informal
setting facilitated discussion and interaction. This group interaction helped students to
learn from each other's scholarship, skills, and experiences. The students had to go

7. 7
beyond mere statements of opinion by giving reasons for their judgments and reflecting
upon the criteria employed in making these judgments. Thus, each opinion was subject to
careful scrutiny. The ability to admit that one's initial opinion may have been incorrect or
partially flawed was valued.
The collaborative learning group participants were asked for written comments on
their learning experience. In order to analyze the open- ended informal responses, they
were divided into three categories: 1. Benefits focusing on the process of collaborative
learning, 2. Benefits focusing on social and emotional aspects, and 3. Negative aspects of
collaborative learning. Most of the participants felt that group work helped them to better
understand the material and stimulated their thinking process. In addition, the shared
responsibility reduced the anxiety associated with problem- solving. The participants
commented that humor too played a vital role in reducing anxiety. A couple of
participants mentioned that they wasted a lot of time explaining the material to other
group members.
For collaborative learning to be effective, the instructor must view teaching as a
process of developing and enhancing students' ability to learn. The instructor's role is not
to transmit information, but to serve as a facilitator for learning. This involves creating
and managing meaningful learning experiences and stimulating students' thinking
through real world problems.

8. 8
Cooperative learning
An interpersonal, competitive situation is characterized by negative goal
interdependence, where, when one person wins, the others lose. In an individualistic
learning situation, students are independent of one another and are working towards a set
criteria where their success depends on their own performance in relation to an
established criteria. The success or failure of other students does not affect their score. In
spelling if all students are working on their own and any student who correctly spells
90% or more words passes, it would be an individualistic structure.
In a cooperative learning situation, interaction is characterized by positive goal
interdependence with individual accountability. Positive goal interdependence requires
acceptance by a group that they "sink or swim together." A cooperative spelling class is
one where students are working together in small groups to help each other learn the
words in order to take the spelling test individually on Friday. Each student's score in the
test is increased by bonus points earned by the group. In that situation a student needs to
be concerned with how she or he spells and how well the other students in his or her
group spell. This cooperative umbrella can also be extended over the entire class if bonus
points are awarded to each student when the class can spell more words than a
reasonable, but demanding, criterion set by the teacher
There is a difference between "having students work in a group" and structuring
students to work cooperatively. A group of students sitting at the same table doing their
own work, but free to talk with each other as they work, is not structured to be a

9. 9
cooperative group as there is no positive interdependence. There needs to be an accepted
common goal on which the group will be rewarded for their efforts. In the same way, a
group of students who have been assigned to do a report where only one student cares,
does all the work and the others go along for a free ride, is not a cooperative group. A
cooperative group has a sense of individual accountability that means that all students
need to know the material or spell well for the group to be successful. Putting students
into groups does not necessarily gain positive interdependence and/or individual
accountability; it has to be structured and managed by the teacher.
Common practice in schools today has teachers striving to separate students from
one another and have them work on their own. Teachers continually use phrases like,
"Don't look at each other's papers!", "I want to see what you can do, not your neighbor!"
or "Work on your own!". Having students work alone, competively or individualisticly, is
the dominant interaction pattern among students in classrooms today. The paradox is that
the vast majority of the research comparing student-student interaction patterns indicates
that students learn more effectively when they work cooperatively. The data suggest:
1. Students achieve more in cooperative interaction than in competitive or
individualistic interaction. With several colleagues, we recently did a meta-
analysis on all the research studies that compare cooperation, competition and
individualistic learning (122 studies from 1924 to 1980). The results indicated that
cooperation seems to be much more powerful in producing achievement than the

10. 10
other interaction patterns and the results hold for several subject areas and a range
of age groups from elementary school through adult.
2. Students are more positive about school, subject areas, and teachers or professors
when they are structured to work cooperatively.
3. Students are more positive about each other when they learn cooperatively than
when they learn alone, competitively, or individualistically - regardless of
differences in ability, ethnic background, handicapped or not.
4. Students are more effective interpersonally as a result of working cooperatively
than when they work alone, competitively or individualistically. Students with
cooperative experiences are more able to take the perspective of others, are more
positive about taking part in controversy, have better developed interaction skills,
and have a more positive expectation about working with others than students
from competitive or individualistic settings.
Jigsaw Technique
One of the basic purposes of language and literary education is to maintain a target
population and the use of proper attitude, method and technique in proper learning
environments. Therefore, proper attitudes and methods are to be resorted for students to
become active elements of the environment throughout the learning-teaching process.
One of the methods to attain this aim is the cooperative learning and jigsaw technique.
Having this method and technique utilized interlockingly, they maintain a significant
parallelism in terms of structural aspects and functionality, and thereby operate decisively

11. 11
in the development of language skills. In this study, having focused on the use of
cooperative method and jigsaw technique in teaching literary genres, an attempt was
made to assess their effectivity. Making use of both quantitative and qualitative research,
this study was preceded over a work group, which comprised 60 students. In accordance
with the qualitative and quantitative findings attained, therefore, cooperative learning and
jigsaw technique.
This technique was developed by Aronson. Students are divided into groups of 5 -
6 per each. Each group which is given a subject is divided into smaller parts equal to the
number of its members so that each student is given a section. After the students learn
their own sections, they regroup, and each member teaches his/her section to the other
members of the group. They exchange questions and make sure that the subject is
understood completely. Integrity is achieved by having all the group members make their
presentations, so as to bring all pieces together. Jigsaw technique may be used in
numerous subject matters from elementary school to university . So, to achieve complete
learning of a subject matter, each student becomes both a learner and a teacher as well.
Therefore, there is no environment that enables some of the students to surpass the others.
This is a unique group-learning experience, in which students are to cooperate with each
other so as to achieve a certain goal. Integration is a teaching technique that is being used
successfully particularly in teaching foreign languages, math and reading by means of
this technique, students become more kind to each other while developing their empathic
power.

12. 12
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to ascertain the beliefs of elementary teachers
regarding the teaching and learning of science and the extent to which the teachers'
beliefs were consistent with the philosophy underlying science education reform. Sixteen
teachers from two school districts involved in a local systemic initiative for science
education reform participated in the study. Each teacher was observed teaching a lesson
from the program. The observation served as the context for an interview with the teacher
regarding his or her beliefs about the teaching and learning of science. One overarching
belief emerged: Teachers believe that the teaching and learning of science should be
student centered. Five patterns of teachers' responses support this characterization of the
teachers' belief. Although varying gaps exist between the teachers' beliefs and the
principles of reform, the teachers' beliefs suggest that the teachers are moving in a
direction consistent with science education reform.
Reference
1. Teaching Science of Biological and Physical Science. Dr. Mariamma Mathew
2. www.wikipedia.com
3. www.aabri.com