1 23

International Journal of Science andMathematics Education ISSN 1571-0068 Int J of Sci and Math EducDOI 10.1007/s10763-015-9708-4

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation ofInquiry-Based Teaching: Encounters andExperiences of Experimento Multipliers inOne South African Province

Washington Takawira Dudu

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and

all rights are held exclusively by Ministry

of Science and Technology, Taiwan. This e-

offprint is for personal use only and shall not

be self-archived in electronic repositories. If

you wish to self-archive your article, please

use the accepted manuscript version for

posting on your own website. You may

further deposit the accepted manuscript

version in any repository, provided it is only

made publicly available 12 months after

official publication or later and provided

acknowledgement is given to the original

source of publication and a link is inserted

to the published article on Springer's

website. The link must be accompanied by

the following text: "The final publication is

available at link.springer.com”.

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementationof Inquiry-Based Teaching: Encounters and Experiencesof Experimento Multipliers in One SouthAfrican Province

Washington Takawira Dudu1

Received: 29 September 2015 /Accepted: 22 November 2015# Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2015

Abstract This paper explores the experiences of 37 physical science high schoolteachers who participated in a professional development (PD) programme coordinatedby three Experimento multipliers. The Experimento programme is a Siemens Stiftunginternational educational programme aimed at providing didactic and methodologicalapproaches to classroom experiments using an inquiry-based approach to scienceeducation. Experimento multipliers are the facilitators of the PD. The main data sourcecomprised teacher interviews, school observation visits on classroom activities usingthe Experimento 10+ box and the facilitators’ field notes. Findings suggest that there isa shift from the traditional approaches of science teaching to the implementation ofinquiry-based teaching which was encouraged by the gradual formation of a commu-nity of practice, a reconceptualization of the term ‘practical activities’ as prescribed bythe CAPS document, and the need for experiments which facilitate action-orientedteaching. The discussion highlights the implications of these findings for the practicingteachers’ professional development and the problems of linking theory with practice insuch development. The study recommends more interventions throughout the year toenable teachers to improve their skills of implementing inquiry-based teaching, contentknowledge and science pedagogy as evidenced by analysis of their summative evalu-ation of the intervention.

Keywords Experimento . Facilitation . Inquiry-based teaching .Multipliers

Int J of Sci and Math EducDOI 10.1007/s10763-015-9708-4

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10763-015-9708-4)contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

* Washington Takawira Duduwtdudu@gmail.com

1 North West University, Mafikeng, North West, South Africa

Author's personal copy

Introduction

Facilitation to support and guide teachers in small-scale implementation of inquiry-based teaching for the benefit of learners has grown in significance over the pasttwo decades worldwide, including in South Africa (Pretorius, De Beer &Lautenbach, 2014). In the process of such facilitation, it is hoped that teachersdevelop their content knowledge, didactics and pedagogy (Holland, 2005).Facilitation is a process where support in providing professional development isdelivered to classroom teachers and its focus is on a particular subject mattercontent and pedagogical approaches intended to build their instructional skills(Yost, Vogel, & Rosenberg, 2009). However, questions remain unanswered as tohow facilitation is actually implemented and achieved in practice as it takesdifferent forms (Waterman, Boaden, Burey, Howells, Harvey, Humphreys &Spence, 2015). Moreover, little evidence exists on what it is that researchers do tosupport the implementation process and achieve in practice during facilitation(Waterman et al., 2015). Pretorius et al. (2014) lament that professional develop-ment interventions in South Africa do not always address teachers’ needs nor dothey necessarily result in better realisation of outcomes in science. Pretorius et al.(2014) further argue that South African teachers’ learning of science and theiremerging science pedagogy need urgent attention and that this paucity can beaddressed through focused professional teacher development (PTD) programmes.This notion gives credence to the undertaking of this study given that South Africanteachers’ learning of science content and their emerging science pedagogy needurgent attention. This is attested by prior studies which found that teachers weremore likely to change their instructional practices and gain greater subject knowl-edge and improved teaching skills when their professional development was di-rectly linked to their daily pedagogical experiences, as well as aligned with curric-ulum standards and assessments (Holland, 2005).

Participation in inquiry-based science education, which focuses on student-constructed learning, has been linked to academic success (Roehrig & Luft, 2006).Inquiry-based education involves engagement in the learning process and challengeslearners to interrogate concepts as they seek new knowledge (Crawford, 2007). Unliketraditional learning settings, inquiry-based education recognises that learners engagewith their experiences laden with preconceptions about the world. Inquiry-basededucation allows learners to seek evidence and construct solutions to support theirreasoning (Gillies & Nichols, 2015). It also emphasises learners’ understanding ofconcepts rather than acquiring skills (Ramnarain & Schuster, 2014). It encourages‘teachers to move away from the tradition in which knowledge is viewed as discrete,hierarchical, sequential, and fixed and towards an environment in which knowledge isviewed as an individual construction created by the learner’ (Draper, 2002, p. 521).Furthermore, inquiry-based education provides learners with the opportunity to developtheir meta-cognition skills and capacities to monitor and direct how they think and learn(Warner & Myers, 2008). The benefits of the application of this method have been welldocumented in the context of science education (Bybee, Taylor, Gardner, Scotter,Powell, Westbrook & Landes, 2006; Wolf & Fraser, 2008). Whereas the benefits ofthis type of science education are evident, access to such high-quality science curric-ulum is not easily obtained (Ohana, 2004).

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

Anecdotal accounts from science educators suggest that few teachers useinquiry-based instruction in science teaching. However, there is little empiricalevidence to support this claim (Capps & Crawford, 2013). Recently, researchershave claimed that although inquiry-based teaching aims at implementing authen-tic scientific practices in science teaching and learning, classroom implementa-tion remains a major challenge (Alhendal, Marshman & Grootenboer, 2015;Ruhrig & Höttecke, 2015). Teachers are reluctant to adopt new pedagogicalpractices unless they believe that the new practices will be effective with theirstudents (Ruhrig & Höttecke, 2015). Some research studies offered explanationsfor the problems that impede the use of inquiry-based instruction, and theseincluded availability of resources, administrator and other teachers’ support, classsize, poor funding and inadequate facilities (Alhendal et al., 2015). To addresssuch problems, professional development should be provided to teachers withopportunities to practice inquiry-based instruction during training. Thus, learningto teach through inquiry-based instruction is supposed to play a decisive role inscience education and most governments—for example, the National ResearchCouncil—demand and support inquiry-based teaching (National ResearchCouncil, 2000). But if teachers are expected to teach science using inquiry-based approaches, they must have adequate practice adapting lessons to becongruent with inquiry-based instruction (Al-Abdali & Al-Balushi, 2015; Capps& Crawford, 2013). Surprisingly, there seems to be a lack of studies investigat-ing the extent teachers employ inquiry-based instruction in their schools partic-ularly when certain facilities such as resources and teacher support have beenmade available (Krämer, Nessler, & Schlüter, 2015)—in this case, provided bythe Siemens Foundation.

Implementation of inquiry-based learning in classrooms presents a number ofsignificant challenges such as insufficient time for inquiry, learner expectationsand abilities, concern about the potential of not accomplishing specified learninggoals, overcrowded classrooms and fear of the unknown among others (Alhendalet al., 2015). For example, in South Africa, some learners have less access andfewer opportunities to engage in inquiry-based lessons due to insufficient appara-tus and chemicals and teachers who lack relevant knowledge and skills to performsuch lessons (Nompula, 2012). It is therefore critical to understand the implemen-tation of inquiry-based teaching and the present study is designed to exploresmall-scale facilitation of such a process. This paper describes encounters andexperiences of Experimento multipliers in one province which is running aprofessional development programme in facilitating small-scale implementationof inquiry-based teaching in various schools of South Africa. In this paper,experiences refer to practical contact with and observation of facts or eventspertaining to content knowledge, didactics and pedagogy. Encounters, on the otherhand, refer to unexpected challenges that multipliers’ face in facilitating inquiry-based learning.

Given this background, the purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectivenessand value of the use of the Experimento 10+ kits as well as assess the extent of use ofcooperative learning methodologies by teachers who have been exposed to these bymultipliers in science classrooms. Encounters and experiences of Experimento multi-pliers would then be ascertained in the process of this evaluation.

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

Research Question

This study was guided by the following research questions:

1. To what extent are teachers effectively using the Experimento 10+ kits to promoteinquiry-based learning in their classrooms?

2. How are teachers using cooperative learning methodologies exposed to themduring the professional development programme to enhance inquiry-basedlearning?

3. What are the implications of this research for classroom practice and sciencecurriculum development?

Experimento—the International Education Programme of Siemens Stiftung.Experimento is the name of the Siemens Stiftung international scientific educationalprogramme. It provides didactic and methodological approaches to classroom scienceexperiments. The aim is interactive, real-world classroom instruction that inspireslearners to discover science and technology and improve their future career prospects.Experimento is being implemented with a regional focus on Latin America (e.g. Chile,Peru); Africa (e.g. South Africa, Kenya); and Europe (e.g. Germany). In order to meetthe specific requirements for teaching and learning in each country, Siemens Stiftungworks in close cooperation with international educational partners located in specificcountries. ‘Experimento consists of three progressive modules for the age groups 4–7(Experimento 4+), 8–12 (Experimento 8+) and 10–18 (Experimento 10+)’ (SiemensStiftung, 2011, p. 2). Since it is an international project developed for teachers to putinto practice the principle of discovery-based learning, the contents have been adaptedto the specific needs and educational curricula of each country, in cooperation withteacher training institutes and local universities.

In South Africa, since the mid-1990s, curricula and teacher training were strictlydivided during the apartheid era but have been aligned step by step (Pretorius, DeBeer, & Lautenbach, 2014). Only recently have experiments become a requiredcomponent in the curriculum (South Africa Department of Education [DoE], 2005).Experimento has been active in South Africa since 2011. It offers materials,methods, and guidance to teachers based on the principle of experiment anddiscovery-based learning. The subject matter is tailored for local lesson plans byworking with teacher training institutes and local universities. Currently, in SouthAfrica, around 270 teachers and over 20,000 pupils work with Experimento—asuccessful development that is steadily progressing. Four competence centres havebeen established and running in South Africa in four provinces namely, Gauteng(Johannesburg), Western Cape (Cape Town), KwaZulu-Natal (Durban) and EasternCape (Mthatha). In the last few months of 2015 at the Science Competence Centrein Johannesburg, for example, teachers and student teachers have received trainingin the teaching tools of Experimento. ‘Experimento does not only connect conven-tional wisdom with modern teaching; but it also supports interdisciplinary knowl-edge. It offers teachers a practical and curriculum-oriented selection of topics in theareas of energy, health, and environment’ (Siemens Stiftung, 2011, p. 1). Seminarsdeveloped especially for that purpose provide teachers with the relevant expertise in

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

using Experimento. Specific instructions, methods and materials for experimentshelp to embed the programme successfully into teaching.

In 2011, two trainers came from Germany to train teacher educators and teacherswho are branded as multipliers. The multipliers later train more teachers on how to useExperimento kits in their schools. The Experimento kits are donated to schools for free.However, they are donated only to those schools whose science teachers would haveundergone training. In 5-day workshops, the trainers show teacher educators how toprepare exciting experiments with simple equipment and implement these in scienceand technology teaching in educationally engaging ways. Experiments enthral not justchildren, but teachers too, as is evident from the frequency of missed coffee breaks andvoluntary overtime once teachers get started with training. Many teachers first have tolearn how to experiment themselves. In many cases, their training at school anduniversity had few practical components. By using simple, readily available materialsand showing them interactive methods, the week-long workshop programme aims totake away teachers’ fear of experimenting in the classroom (Siemens Stiftung, 2011).The Experimento programme is ultimately only a catalyst. The methods imparted bythe workshops encourage teachers to think beyond the instructions provided to them.New and creative approaches are born—generating a completely different type ofteaching (Siemens Stiftung, 2011).

This paper focuses on encounters and experiences of Experimento multipliers onlyin the Gauteng province when they were facilitating a small-scale implementation ofinquiry-based teaching using the Experimento 10+ box. The three Experimento mul-tipliers run four workshops each year with each cohort of sampled teachers.

Conceptual Framework

This study is guided by the literature on operationalization and categorization ofconstructivist descriptions of inquiry-based teaching (Warner & Myers, 2008) andprofessional development (Bell & Gilbert, 1996).

According to Paulson, Williams-Tuenge, Roth, Wippler and Paulson (2009). inquiryis perhaps one of the most misunderstood approaches to teaching and learning. Oftenoversimplified as merely ‘asking a question’, and more often seen as a fad that deniescentral themes and content within the discipline, inquiry seems to defy a consensualdefinition. Paulson et al. (2009) says part of the confusion rests in the term implyingboth a teaching strategy as well as a learning strategy, and part of the contested meaningrests within the diverse facets of its implementation within dissimilar disciplines. Interms of interpretation, inquiry for school science has been a subject of contentiousdebate. However, scholarship agrees that the nature of inquiry for science teaching andlearning is not fixed (Abell & Lederman, 2007). Inquiry-based teaching is a pedagog-ical approach that invites learners to explore academic content by posing, investigatingand answering questions (Centre for Inspired Teaching, 2008). Also known as problem-based teaching, this approach puts learners’ questions at the centre of the curriculumand places just as much value on the component skills of research as it does onknowledge and understanding of content (Alhendal et al., 2015).

Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of inquiry-based instruction(Ruhrig & Höttecke, 2015). These studies suggest that using inquiry-based instruction

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

in science is meaningful and relevant to students and improves student achievement(Krämer, Nessler, & Schlüter, 2015). Nevertheless, for various reasons, the role ofinquiry-based science instruction in normal instructional practice (around the world) isstill somewhat limited—specifically in South Africa. To improve the quality ofeducation, the South African Department of Education encourages teachers to imple-ment inquiry-based instruction (South Africa DoE, 2011). The Department ofEducation (2011) has strongly promoted the need for improving quality educationprogrammes in schools. This increasing emphasis on quality of education in schoolshas seen a focus on pedagogy, and specifically in science education, the aim has beento improve science teaching (Al-Abdali & Al-Balushi, 2015; Ebrahim, 2012). Toenable the South African education system to compare and compete globally, teachersshould be able to develop students’ scientific knowledge and skills through inquiry-based instruction. To this end, using an interpretative approach, this study contributesimmensely to this body of knowledge by providing an illustrative example to guidescience teachers to set inquiry into normal practice even in schools where teachers arenot familiar with inquiry-based science instruction. Despite inquiry-based scienceinstruction generally being viewed as a highly significant part of science education,this study intends to show that this is possible only if certain facilities are available—in this case provided by the Siemens Foundation, especially by providing a set ofexperiments concerning learning of energy.

Given this background, teachers play a vital role in adapting the inquiry process tothe knowledge and ability level of their learners. According to Warner and Myers(2008). when using inquiry-based lessons, teachers are responsible for the following:(1) starting the inquiry process, (2) promoting learner dialogue, (3) transitioningbetween small groups and classroom discussions, (4) intervening to clear misconcep-tions or develop learners’ understanding of content material, (5) modelling scientificprocedures and attitudes and (6) utilising learner experiences to create new contentknowledge. Based on the objectives of the lesson and the abilities of the learners,teachers must decide how much guidance they will provide. Regardless of the amountof assistance that teachers provide, the fundamental goal of inquiry-based teaching islearner engagement during the learning process. This inquiry process fits well intoExperimento’s aims as mentioned in the preceding section.

Professional development (PD) is the second phrase which needs operationalisation.According to Loucks-Horsley and Stiles (2001). designers of professional developmentcan be guided by the extensive body of research on how effective change occurs ineducational settings. Current research into the effective professional development ofteachers indicates that the way in which it is structured and delivered needs to bereconceptualised (Kriek & Grayson, 2009). Dass (1999, p. 2) reported that ‘traditional‘one-shot’ approaches to professional development have been inadequate and inappro-priate in the context of current educational reform efforts.’ Ball and Cohen (1999, p. 5)indicate that professional development of teachers is ‘intellectually superficial, discon-nected from deep issues of curriculum and learning, fragmented and non-cumulative.’Professional development that is of longer duration is more likely to contain the kindsof learning opportunities necessary for teachers to integrate new knowledge intopractice (Brown, 2004). Recent findings suggest that multiple studies are necessaryto determine what works in professional development, a view consistent with recentpanels on scientifically based research in education (Cummings & Worley, 2014).

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi, and Gallagher (2007) findings are consistent with theview that studies of different curricula are likely to yield overlapping but distinctfindings about what makes professional development effective.

In reviewing particular studies and synthesising findings across studies, the partic-ular curricular and school contexts need to be taken carefully into account, as do thelimits of generalisability of research findings. For example, Bell and Gilbert’s (1996)Science teacher development model emphasises three components:

(a) Personal development in which the teacher must be aware that there is a need forprofessional development and acknowledges the desire to acquire new ideas orstrategies;

(b) Social development in which the teachers have opportunities to discuss ideas withother teachers, and to collectively renegotiate what it means to teach science andbe a teacher of science; and

(c) Professional development in which the teachers are supported in implementing thenew ideas and strategies in their classroom practice, drawing on the changes theymake personally and socially.

These three components are viewed as essential to building teachers’ commitment toenacting change within their own classrooms and professional communities.Identifying teachers committed to personal development enables selecting participantswhilst social development and professional development aspects of the model facilitatedesigning teacher development programmes. The three components emphasised byBell and Gilbert’s (1996) science teacher development model became the guidingprinciple of perceiving teachers as learners. The model achieved this by synthesisinga range of accounts of teacher learning in the professional development interventionprogramme described in this paper.

Cooperative Learning Methodologies (Classroom Strategies). Cooperative learningis a successful teaching strategy in which small teams, each with students of differentability levels, use a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of asubject. Each member of a team is responsible, not only for learning what is taught, butalso for helping their teammates to learn (Qablan & DeBaz, 2015). In this study, 8classroom strategies were chosen among the 75 strategies introduced by Keeley (2008)to facilitate in-service science teachers’ implementation of inquiry science teaching.The following passages describe each cooperative learning method or classroomstrategy and possible procedures of applying this in the classroom:

1. Think-pair-share: This technique combines thinking with communication. Theteacher poses a question and gives individual students time to think about thequestion. Students then pair up with a partner to discuss their ideas. After pairsdiscuss, students share their ideas in a small group or whole-class discussion(Qablan & DeBaz, 2015).

2. Numbered heads: This technique is used to ensure all students participate duringthe lesson. The teacher asks students in each group to assign a number for eachmember in the group. When a teacher wants to choose a student to answer aquestion, they can call a random number and let the student answer.

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

3. Gallery walk: This technique allows students to see others’ work. In this technique,each group of students is asked to write their investigation on a poster and hang iton a board or a wall to share it with other groups in the classroom. The teacher asksthe students to walk around the classroom and read other students’ posters.

4. Give members of the group roles: This technique is used to assign different roles tolearners in a group such as resource manager, time keeper, scribe, experimenter,etc.

5. Placemat: In this technique, a paper is subdivided in sections. For example, fivesections for a group of four. The middle part is for the group to write theirperceived accurate group answer to the teacher’s question after each learner willhave written individual answers on his/her section before the group looks at eachanswer and then framing one group answer.

6. Group identity: This technique allows learners to come up with a group identitybased on concepts the teacher will be focusing on.

7. Group formation: These are various techniques which are used to put learners intodifferent groups. They involve birthdays, height, shuffling cards, puzzles, etc.

8. Buddy book: In this technique, a paper is folded into eight pages where questionson different experiments or activities can be written for learners to complete andshare the answers when engaged in inquiry-based lessons.

Methods and Data Sources

As we were concerned with focusing on implementation, meaning and practice, weadopted an interpretative approach to explore encounters and experiences of threeExperimento multipliers during and after facilitation of the Experimento interventionprogramme over a period of 3 years. The sample for the workshopped teachers is 37from 37 high schools (three workshops in total; first workshop had 13 teachers, secondand third workshops had 12 teachers each) in Gauteng province of South Africa; hence,multipliers’ encounters and experiences are drawn from these for reflection. There areno differences between the three groups of teachers for the three workshops. Teacherswere trained in three groups at different times due to space limitations in the laboratory.Of the 37 schools, 15 were former model C schools and 22 were township schools. Allthree workshops had five teachers from former model C schools. The first workshophad eight teachers from township schools whereas the second and third workshops hadseven teachers each from township schools. Former model C schools are schools whichused to have the best resources, best educational opportunities for learners and bestteachers, and up to today, some of these schools enjoy these privileges. Townships arehistorically settlements designated for blacks and characterised by poor socio-economicconditions and poor education structure and resources. However, the former model Cschools sampled for this study now accommodate white, coloured and black learners,meaning they do not discriminate according to race. Teachers from the first workshopwere assigned code A (e.g. A3 for teacher 3) whilst those from the second workshopwere assigned code B (e.g. B6 for teacher 6) and from the third workshop teachers wereassigned code C (e.g. C5 for teacher 5).

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

Interpretive studies ‘are framed by descriptions of, explanations for, or meaningsgiven to phenomena by both the researcher and the study participants rather than bythe definitions and interpretations of the researcher alone’ (LeCompte & Preissle,1993, pp. 31–32). Such an approach suggests that social research should capitaliseupon the researchers’ ‘personhood’ (Stanley & Wise, 1983) and ‘reflexivity’ as ‘thehuman capacity for participant observation. We act in the social world and yet areable to reflect upon ourselves and our actions as objects in that world’ (Hammersley& Atkinson, 1995, p. 21). As the Experimento programme came to a close witheach group of teachers, our experiences as facilitators fuelled questions regardingour own and the teachers’ roles. The main data sources analysed in the study arequestionnaire, semi-structured individual interviews with all 37 teachers whovolunteered to participate in the PD programme, observations made during schoolvisits to check on the state of the Experimento 10+ kit and researchers’ field notes.A group of teachers was selected by one of the multipliers after an open call wassent to all public and private high schools; 42 teachers initially responded, but 5withdrew for personal reasons.

Of the remaining 37 teachers, 24 were females whilst 13 were males who came fromdifferent schools in Gauteng province and whose professional experience rangedbetween 4 and 30 years. They were all teaching physical science at FurtherEducation and Training (FET) level, that is, grades 10–12, during the period ofExperimento 10+ PD programme. The questionnaire was given to teachers to completeby two of the multipliers who conducted school visits. The questionnaire designed bySiemens Stiftung, which is also available on their website, was validated for face,content and criterion validity in several countries in three continents (Africa, LatinAmerica and Europe). The reliability of the instrument was determined by calculatingthe Cronbach’s coefficient and α = .90 was found, which is very high. According toLeedy and Omrod (2010). a good rule of thumb is that reliabilities should be 0.7 andabove to be acceptable. The coefficient obtained for the instrument is well above thisrecommended value, suggesting the instrument was reliable. Interviews were conduct-ed after completing the questionnaire when the multipliers would have gone throughthe responses. Participants were informed of the reflective aim of the study and that thedata would be available to the three facilitators for analysis and reflection. During theinterview, teachers were asked to narrate their experiences on their participation in theprogramme, from volunteering to participation to the whole process of experimentingin their classroom and interacting with the group of teachers they were trained withduring the PD programme. They also expanded on their views on how often theyconducted experiments using the Experimento 10+ kit, critical reasons for conductingcertain experiments, evaluation of aspects regarding the Experimento kits, evaluation ofaspects regarding the Experimento instructions and cooperative learning techniquesthey used in their classrooms, PD and teacher professionalism among others.

Additional data used as supplementary in this paper included field notes written bythe multipliers as they visited schools to observe the enactment of science activities inteachers’ classrooms and the status of additional apparatus and equipment the schoolshave besides the Experimento kits which were freely given to participating schools.Permission was sought and granted to use the Siemens Stiftung name in this paper,hence ethical considerations were adhered to through the organisation’s informedconsent (Leedy & Omrod, 2010).

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

Data Analysis

Adopting a grounded approach and moving between productive and inductive analyt-ical techniques, the three facilitators conducted open coding and later axial andselective coding, as we first identified concepts and codes, and then reduced them tocategories and themes (Creswell, 2007). We then focused on those themes that referredto different encounters and experiences of Experimento multipliers as observed fromthe conception of the Experimento programme and as written and narrated by theteachers during inquiry-based lessons when using the Experimento kits, with an eye onunpacking and untangling the ways in which the teachers involved created meaningsregarding the kits and the PD programme. The findings in the following section areorganised around the three research questions of this study most closely relating to theencounters and roles of the multipliers.

Results

The first research question asks to what extent teachers are effectively using theExperimento 10+ kits to promote inquiry-based learning in their classrooms. To addressthis question, data was sought from the questionnaire, interviews and observationsmade during school visits. One question on the questionnaire asked what period of timelay between the training and the first usage of the Experimento set. Of the 37 teachers,14 indicated that they used the Experimento set within 1 month, 20 teachers used theset within 3 months and 3 teachers used the set between 3 and 6 months. Teacher A3,during interviews said, ‘I immediately used the Experimento set after receiving itbecause I did not have any other apparatus and chemicals to use.’ Observations madeduring school visits indeed confirmed that the sets were being used. However, ac-knowledging use of the Experimento set does not imply effective use of the sets. So,other questions on the questionnaire sought to provide information on the efficacy ofusing the kits. For example, two other questions asked, how often teachers conductedexperiments with the Experimento set. A follow-up question asked how often teachersused Experimento materials for other experiments besides the prescribed ones.Contrary to expectations, 27 teachers responded by saying they frequently used theset whilst 10 teachers attested that they occasionally use the set. These figures wereconfirmed during interviews when school visits were embarked on to makeobservations.

Having determined the frequency of use of the Experimento set, the next questionsought to establish how experiments are conducted using the set. In response to thisquestion, 5 teachers indicated that they leave learners to experiment on their own,whilst 12 submitted that the learners watch them conducting the experiments(demonstration) and 20 penned that learners conduct the experiments under theirsupervision. Teacher B6 said, ‘I let the learners conduct the experiments under mysupervision regardless of huge class numbers, which is what you taught us …’ Linkedto this question, all 37 teachers agreed the experiments can be conducted with a highnumber of learners, 24 teachers agreed that the experiments can be conducted bylearners on their own and 13 teachers acknowledged that it is policy at their schoolsthat learners should never do experiments on their own. Teacher C4 said, ‘I would have

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

liked the learners to be on their own with the Experimento set when doing their scienceprojects but school policy does not allow learners to be on their own when doingexperiments.’

The questionnaire also asked teachers the critical reasons for them to conduct certainexperiments. Of the 37 teachers, 26 responded by saying the curriculum dictates thetopics on which experiments should be done, 22 acknowledge that experimentingallows action-oriented teaching, 7 teachers believe experiments can easily be conductedby learners on their own, 19 teachers wrote learners are motivated by the experiments,14 hinted that the material for the experiments is readily available and 24 believe thelearners’ autonomy is supported through this experiment kit. During interviews,teachers had a lot to say when probed on their responses. Teacher A10 said,

The material in the Experimento set enables us to do some prescribed practicalactivities (PPA) with great accuracy. The thermometers are very sensitive anddurable. I use them when doing water heating and cooling curves, a prescribedexperiment for Grade 10. Imagine we do the experiment in a test tube. The resultsare so good to the extent that all learners produce smooth curves …

Asked to evaluate several aspects regarding the Experimento kits, 24 teachers notedthat there is sufficient material in the kit, all teachers highlighted that materials in the kitdo not break easily but consumables had to be replenished and 25 teachers acknowl-edged that instructions in the manual are very helpful when setting up experiments.During interviews, the teachers reiterated the views they had put on the questionnaire.Teacher C5 from a well-resourced school said, ‘There is sufficient material in the kit.’However, on the same point, teacher C7 from a poorly resourced school said, ’Materialin the kit is insufficient, we need more material.’ Regarding durability, all 37 teachersinterviewed confirmed the material does not break easily and is good. Teacher B12said, ‘The manuals which accompany the Experimento 10+ kits are so helpful. Theyguide us in setting up the experiments but most importantly they have backgroundcontent regarding concepts in which the experiments are done.’ Twenty-six respondentsacknowledged that the curriculum dictates the topics from which experiments shouldbe set. Teacher A11 had this to say:

As much as I want to do more experiments, I do not have the liberty and time todo that. The curriculum is packed with content. At the end of the day, I only dothose experiments which the curriculum says we should perform. We call themprescribed practical activities …

The second research question related to how the teachers fused cooperative learningmethodologies exposed to them during the professional development programme toenhance inquiry-based learning. Part of the Experimento PD programme entails equip-ping teachers with cooperative learning techniques as they implement inquiry-basedteaching in their classrooms. As mentioned earlier, cooperative learning is the instruc-tional use of small groups so that learners work together to maximise their own andeach other’s learning. The first question on the questionnaire linked to the secondresearch question asked the teachers to identify the cooperative techniques they wereusing in their classrooms. The majority of the teachers (34 out of 37) identified the

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

group formation technique they learned during the PD as the most popular technique inuse. This was followed by 28 teachers mentioning assigning members of the grouproles such as resource manager, time keeper, scribe and experimenter. Eight teachersnoted that they were using both think-pair-share and placemat techniques. Seventeachers acknowledged they were using the gallery walk technique whilst six attestedto using the buddy book and only five teachers acknowledged still remembering andusing the numbered heads technique. The second question solicited if teachers wantedmore training in cooperative learning techniques. In response, 34 out of 37 confirmedthat they indeed needed more training. During interviews, this is what some of theteachers had to say about cooperative learning techniques:

… I always use the group formation technique when doing practical activitieswith my learners. Remember you taught us quite a number of them; I usually usethe birthday, height and puzzle techniques. They work so well with me andlearners enjoy them. They have really made my life easier when I am preparing todo practical activities … (Teacher B4)

… Assigning roles to members of each group has been working for me. Alllearners are involved and they do this on rotational basis. They say being aresource person is more demanding. The learners have now come to understandwhat each role entails and this strategy has made them responsible learners …(Teacher C8)

… I enjoy the gallery walk technique. It enables me to cover so many interrelatedconcepts at each given time. My learners now understand how it works. Once in awhile I also use the numbered heads technique …. (Teacher A9)

The third research question focuses on implications of this research for classroompractice and science curriculum development. To address this question, interview databecame valuable. During interviews, teacher A7 said:

… hands-on activities in real laboratories not only improved our technologicalpedagogical content knowledge as teachers but also motivated us to includeteaching strategies in science classroom practices … Cooperative learning tech-niques enabled us to ensure that all learners are involved. After the PD pro-gramme, my teaching approach has definitely changed …

Teacher B2 said:

… the Experimento PD programme has helped my knowledge on how to strive toprovide opportunities for learners to collaboratively build, test and reflect on theirlearning. I have gone on to implement what I have learnt from this programmeand my learners are becoming confident and independent learners and arecollaborating within and beyond the classroom …

It is interesting to note that during interviews, teacher C5 reiterated aspects ofinquiry-based teaching by saying:

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

… this training has helped me a lot. When doing practicals, my learners can noweasily identify and test hypotheses within collaborative settings. The cooperativelearning techniques I learnt are becoming useful. The learners are even acknowl-edging that my ways of presenting content of the subject have changed and theyare developing deep understanding of content knowledge ....

During school visits to observe classroom enactment of activities using theExperimento 10+ box, researchers managed to observe teachers implementinginquiry-based teaching. This is further evidence to excerpts above from teacher inter-views. In sum, inferring from the data above which addresses the three researchquestions, all 37 teachers agreed that they have shifted from the traditional approachesof science teaching to the implementation of inquiry-based teaching. This was madepossible by the knowledge the teachers received on cooperative teaching techniquesduring training and the subsequent use of these techniques in teachers’ classrooms aswell as the equipment in Experimento kits which enables the teachers to organiselearners in groups. After posing problems to the learners for them to solve, the learnerswould cooperatively work together, assisting each other rather than relying solely onthe teacher. The shift in the teaching approaches was encouraged by the gradualformation of a community of practice which commenced during training and hascontinued to be of existence.

Discussion

The results given in the previous section in addressing the question on the extent towhich teachers are effectively using the Experimento 10+ kits to promote inquiry-basedlearning in their classrooms are moderately encouraging. For one reason, this was anunanticipated finding which surprised even the multipliers. Multipliers initially had abelief that the kits were not going to be well-received by the teachers. There are severalexplanations for this result. Firstly, some schools had no apparatus and chemicals at alland the Experimento kit enabled the teachers to conduct practical activities. This madeteachers confident in designing practical activities as well as allowing their learners toperform practical activities. This finding corroborates the ideas of Nompula (2012) whosuggested that many schools in South Africa have insufficient equipment to performpractical activities and do not implement inquiry-based learning during science class-rooms as they cite lack of resources as an excuse.

Another explanation for this might be linked to the frequency teachers conductedpractical activities. Given that quite a number of teachers were still demonstrating someof the practical activities citing lack of time to perform the activities, these findings arerather disturbing but consistent with results from the study of Neuby (2010). This isdespite the fact that teachers now have access to the Experimento 10+ kit which theycan use to drive inquiry-based classroom instruction. The results of this studyestablished the teachers’ priority areas as being prescribed as practical activities mostly,which are assessed by Department of Education officials. They relegate all otherrecommended practical activities which could be very useful in implementinginquiry-based teaching and promoting concept development and understandings.These findings disconfirm Warner and Myers’ (2008) facets of inquiry-based lessons

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

which include starting the inquiry process and promoting student dialogue amongothers.

Still, another possible explanation for the unanticipated finding is that teachers fromwell-resourced schools might have seen the Experimento kits as additional equipmentbut a bit technologically advanced compared to what they had. In turn, this group ofteachers might have been tempted to conduct inquiry-based lessons using the newequipment. However, teachers from schools with insufficient resources might havebeen elated to have relevant science equipment for the first time and indeed, they mighthave wanted to perform prescribed practical activities as recommended by the curric-ulum documents. This finding is in agreement with Ramnarain and Schuster’s (2014)findings who found that availability of resources influence the methods adopted byteachers towards inquiry or direct instructional approaches.

Another interesting finding was that the Experimento kit allowed teachers to conductpractical activities with huge classes. Class size has been identified as a contextualfactor militating against dynamic methods that could be adopted by teachers whenteaching various topics in their respective schools. It is interesting to note that teachershaving huge class sizes praised the Experimento kit mainly because of the way theapparatus and chemicals are packed in the kit. Most of the apparatus are in groups ofeight, meaning that a teacher may set up to eight groups of one experiment with eachclass. Teachers are therefore able to perform inquiry-based lessons as opposed to directinstructional approaches regardless of class sizes. However, the findings of the currentstudy do not support the previous research and differ from Ramnarain and Schuster’s(2014) findings that South African physical science teachers gave huge class size as oneof the contextual factors which dissuaded them from performing inquiry-based lessons.

The second research question in this research focused on the extent to whichteachers fused cooperative learning methodologies exposed to them during the PDprogramme to enhance inquiry-based learning. Overall, findings indicated that teachersgained a more sophisticated understanding of the role of these cooperative learningtechniques and their potential implications for facilitating inquiry teaching and learning.Results regarding cooperative learning techniques were encouraging. After explicitinstruction, the science teachers showed intentionality in their conceptions of inquirythrough their responses in interviews and the open-ended questionnaires, where theyreflected on the importance of utilising these classroom strategies as part of a dailyinstruction. These findings are consistent with those of Qablan and DeBaz (2015) whofound that all the preservice science teachers in their study preferred the use of the 15classroom strategies they were investigating, but the preservice science teachers tendedto use those strategies that encourage learners to share ideas and previous knowledgeabout the scientific phenomenon being studied (i.e. think-pair-share, fold and pass, andverbal fluency). Despite some teachers dealing with huge classes, cooperative tech-niques enable teachers to involve all the learners in the learning process (Keeley, 2008).Aspects of inquiry-based learning, as suggested by Warner and Myers (2008). such astransitioning between small groups and classroom discussions, the teacher interveningto clear misconceptions or develop learners’ understanding of content material as wellas modelling scientific procedures and attitudes are implemented in the process. Thisresult suggests that the use of these strategies offered science teachers practical tools toguide their learners in inquiry science learning and foster understanding on how to useinquiry in science teaching.

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

Additionally, these strategies help resolve teachers’ contradictory views about theroles of teachers and learners that might exist (Crawford, 2007) and shift their teachingviews from teacher-centred to student-centred (Roehrig & Luft, 2006). In the case ofthis study, the teachers articulated the importance of eliciting learner understanding,were able to enhance or revise instruction to support learners’ needs and proved able toprovide learners with substantive help that would have engaged learners in activeparticipation in their own learning. The combination of this study’s findings providesinsight into implications for classroom practices and science curriculum developmentfor the conceptualisation that inquiry-based teaching strategies in science classroompractices utilise learner experiences to create new content through modelling scientificprocedures which might influence learners’ attitudes. Some of the issues emerging fromthis study relate specifically to the fundamental goal of inquiry-based teaching whichfocuses on learner engagement during the learning process and more facilitation wheresupport in providing professional development is delivered to classroom teachers (Yostet al., 2009) concentrating on particular subject matter content or pedagogical ap-proaches intended to build their instructional skills and abilities. This research extendsprevious studies by helping teachers realise that inquiry science teaching requires timefor enacting various classroom strategies. This suggests that extended real teachingexperiences in which teachers engage in inquiry science planning are needed topromote effective inquiry science teaching practices (see Ohana, 2004).

The third research question focused on implications of this research for classroompractice and science curriculum development. This study’s findings have importantimplications for developing learners’ deep understanding of content knowledge andcollaboration within and beyond the classroom as learners become confident andindependent (Osborne, 2014). One of the issues emerging from this study’s results isthat facilitation of small-scale implementation of inquiry-based teaching was a successgiven that teachers who took part in the study acknowledged that they developed bothin subject matter content and pedagogical approaches. The teachers acknowledgedchanging their instructional practices and gaining greater subject knowledge as well asimproved teaching skills as the PD was directly linked to their daily experiences. Thefindings support previous studies that found that teachers were more likely to improvetheir teaching skills if PD was aligned with standards and assessments (Holland, 2005).Besides acquiring skills, the findings provide some support for the conceptual premisethat inquiry-based learning emphasises learners’ understanding concepts (Ramnarain &Schuster, 2014) as learners attested to understanding concepts better. Given that somelearners, particularly in most South African schools, have less access and feweropportunities to engage in inquiry-based lessons due to insufficient apparatus andchemicals, an issue emerging from this finding relates specifically to theExperimento professional development programme being able to donate science equip-ment and train teachers who lack relevant knowledge and skills to perform inquiry-based lessons. To a lesser extent, the issue of insufficient apparatus which was alsonoted in another study (Nompula, 2012) was addressed but most important was the useof the equipment in groups. This study notes the extensive use of various cooperativelearning techniques by teachers which has important implications for developingunderstanding of physical science as a subject. Results show that each member of ateam became responsible for helping teammates learn and thus creating an atmosphereof achievement. This finding is in agreement with Qablan and DeBaz (2015) findings

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

with preservice science teachers. Other implications of this research were conversed asresearch questions one and two were being discussed.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to ascertain encounters and experiences of Experimentomultipliers by evaluating the effectiveness and value the use of the Experimento 10+kits as well as assessing the extent of use of cooperative learning methodologies byteachers exposed to them by multipliers in their science classrooms. Facilitating theimplementation of inquiry-based teaching on a small scale was a success. Teachers’comments regarding didactic and methodological approaches to classroom experimentsusing an inquiry-based approach to science education provided anecdotal evidence thatsuggested lack of awareness of cooperative learning techniques. To a moderate extent,teachers indicated they are effectively using the Experimento 10+ kits to promoteinquiry-based learning. Cooperative learning methodologies exposed to teachers duringthe PD programme to enhance inquiry-based learning proved useful as the teachershave begun to involve all learners in inquiry-based lessons regardless of huge classsizes in some of the schools. Given that this paper’s findings point in the direction ofteachers implementing inquiry-based teaching to a moderate extent, future studiesrecommending such interventions throughout the year which might result in teachersimproving their skills of employing inquiry-based teaching are needed. Further researchshould be done to investigate encounters and experiences of Experimento multipliers inother regions such as South Africa—the unexplored provinces and Kenya); LatinAmerica (e.g. Chile, Peru); and Europe (e.g. Germany) where the Experimento pro-gramme is run differently from the one discussed in this paper given since curricula aredifferent and the training is run differently.

References

Abell, K.S. &. Lederman, N.G. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Al-Abdali, N. S. & Al-Balushi, S. M. D2015]. Teaching for creativity by science teachers in grades 5–10.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10763-014-9612-3.

Alhendal, D., Marshman, M. & Grootenboer, P. D2015]. Kuwaiti science teachers’ beliefs and intentionsregarding the use of inquiry-based instruction. International Journal of Science and MathematicsEducation. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10763-015-9671-0.

Ball, D. L. & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-basedtheory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learningprofession (pp. 3–31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bell, B. & Gilbert, J. (1996). Teacher development: A model from science education. London, England:Falmer Press.

Brown, J. L. (2004). Making the most of understanding by design. Washington, DC: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.

Bybee, R., Taylor, J., Gardner, A., Scotter, P., Powell, J., Westbrook, A. & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5Einstructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy

Capps, D. K. & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: arethey happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(3), 497–526.

Centre for Inspired Teaching (2008). Inspired issue brief: inquiry-based teaching. Retrieved from http://www.ciblearning.org/.

Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal ofResearch in Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five Approaches (2nd ed.).London, England: Sage.

Cummings, T. G. & Worley, C. G. (2014). Organisation, development and change (10th ed.). Stamford, CT:Cenage Learning.

Dass, P. M. (1999). Evaluation of a district-wide in-service professional development program for teachingscience: challenges faced and lessons learned. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 4, 1–19.

Draper, R. (2002). School mathematics reform, constructivism, and literacy: A case for literacy instruction inthe reform-oriented math classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 520–531.

Ebrahim, A. (2012). The effect of cooperative learning strategies on elementary students’ science achievementand social skills in Kuwait. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(2), 293–314.

Gillies, R. M. & Nichols, K. (2015). How to support primary teachers’ implementation of inquiry: Teachers’reflections on teaching cooperative inquiry-based science. Research in Science, 45, 171–191. doi:10.1007/s11165-014-9418-x.

Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: principles in practice (2nd ed.). London, England:Routledge.

Holland, H. (2005). Teaching teachers: Professional development to improve student achievement. AmericanEducational Research Association’s Research Points, 3(1), 1–2.

Keeley, P. (2008). Science formative assessment: 75 practical strategies for linking assessment, instruction,and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Pres.

Krämer, P., Nessler, S. H. & Schlüter, K. (2015). Teacher students’ dilemmas when teaching science throughinquiry. Research in Science & Technological Education, 33(3), 325–343. doi:10.1080/02635143.2015.1047446.

Kriek, J. & Grayson, D. (2009). A holistic professional development model for South African physical scienceteachers. South African Journal of Education, 29, 185–203.

LeCompte, M. D. & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed.).San Diego, CA: Academic.

Leedy, P. D. & Omrod, J. E. (2010). Practical research: planning and design (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River,NJ: Pearson Education International.

Loucks-Horsley, S. & Stiles, K. E. (2001). Professional development designed to change teaching andlearning. In J. Rhoton & P. Bowers (Eds.), Professional development planning and design (pp. 13–24).Arlington, TX: NSTA Press.

National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teachingand learning. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

Neuby, B. (2010). Inquiry teaching in the college classroom. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 10(1), 4–21.Nompula, Y. (2012). An investigation of strategies for integrated learning experiences and instruction in the

teaching of creative art subjects. South African Journal of Education, 32(3), 293–306.Ohana, C. (2004). Extended field experiences and cohorts with elementary science methods: Some unintended

consequences. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15, 233–254.Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher

Education, 25(2), 177–196.Paulson, P., Williams-Tuenge, L., Roth, S., Wippler, R. & Paulson, D. (2009). Inquiry is elementary: Differing

approaches to inquiry within two elementary schools. In R. Yager (Ed.), Inquiry: The key to exemplaryscience (pp. 139–150). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R. & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional develop-ment effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational ResearchJournal, 44(4), 921–958.

Pretorius, E., De Beer, J. & Lautenbach, G. (2014). Professional development of science teachers: the A-teamhybrid ecology of learning practice. In UJ, Faculty of Science (Ed.) Proceedings of the ISTE FirstInternational Conference. (pp. 553–566). Johannesburg, South Africa: University of Johannesburg.

Qablan, A. M. & DeBaz, T. (2015). Facilitating elementary science teachers’ implementation of inquiry-basedscience teaching. Teacher Development, 19(1), 3–21. doi:10.1080/13664530.2014.959552.

Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based Teaching

Author's personal copy

Ramnarain, U. & Schuster, D. (2014). The pedagogical orientations of South African physical sciencesteachers towards inquiry or direct instructional approaches. Research in Science Education, 44, 627–650. doi:10.1007/s11165-013-9395-5.

Roehrig, G. H. & Luft, J. A. (2006). Does one size fit all? The induction experience of beginningscience teachers from different teacher-preparation programs. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 43, 963–985.

Ruhrig, J. & Höttecke, D. (2015). Components of science teachers’ professional competence and theirorientational frameworks when dealing with uncertain evidence in science teaching. InternationalJournal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 447–465. doi:10.1007/s10763-015-9628-3.

Siemens Stiftung (2011). Experimento—discovering, researching and explaining. Retrieved from www.dsj.co.za/en/projects/siemensstiftung.html.

South Africa. Department of Education (2005). Grades 10–12, physical sciences, national curriculumstatement. Pretoria, South Africa: Government Printers.

South Africa. Department of Education (2011). Grades 10–12, physical sciences, curriculum assessmentpolicy statement. Pretoria, South Africa: Government Printers.

Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1983). Breaking out: Feminist theory and feminist research. London, England:Routledge.

Warner, A.J. & Myers, B.E. (2008). Implementing inquiry-based teaching methods. Retrieved from https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/WC/WC07600.pdf.

Waterman, H., Boaden, R., Burey, L., Howells, B., Harvey, G., Humphreys, J. & Spence, M. (2015).Facilitating large-scale implementation of evidence based health care: insider accounts from a co-operative inquiry. BMC Health Services Research, 15(60), 1–13. doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0722-6.

Wolf, S. J. & Fraser, B. J. (2008). Learning environment, attitudes and achievement among middle-schoolscience students using inquiry-based laboratory activities. Research in Science Education, 38, 321–341.

Yost, D. S., Vogel, R. & Rosenberg, M. D. (2009). Urban professional development working to createsuccessful teachers and achieving students. Middle School Journal, 38(3), 34–40.

W. T. Dudu

Author's personal copy