Tasks in Science Instruction and Textbooks in the Czech Republic: A Comparative Review of Research Methods Tereza Čéšková, Veronika Lokajíčková, Tomáš Janko ■One of the currently most monitored characteristics of instruction in the Czech Republic is its quality. Therefore instruction ] puts emphasis on the development of key competencies. Pupils are strongly expected to transfer the acquired knowledge a and skills to various situations, especially to situations which they can encounter in real life. The aim of the poster is to review | the methods used in research on tasks in primary and lower secondary Science instruction (which in the Czech context • consists of biology, geography, physics, and chemistry) realized in the Czech Republic during last 25 years to present and to I summarize selected results. 'MHIHMIIW ■■■WUill hh MW—I IM ll'll—HIWll M H< JHHI INI Ill— Theoretical Background ijKey Competencies i5Key competencies have been included in the Czech curricula (as well as in other countries) since 2005 as one of new general! 5aims of education. Weinert (2001, p. 53) sees key competencies as .complex systems of knowledge, beliefs, and action! I tendencies, that are constructed from well-organized domain-specific expertise, basic skills, generalized attitudes, and|| | converging cognitive styles". Appropriate tasks can be considered as the core activity for developing key competencies in| | instruction. Tasks, questions and their cognitive level iDoyle (1983, p. 161) understands academic tasks as „the products that students are expected to produce, the operations that! • students are expected to use to generate those products, and the resources available to students while they are generating! J the products". Tasks are mostly assigned in the form of teacher's question. Ve define a teacher question in the classroom settings as an instructional stimulus that conveys the content elements the 5 I pupils are to learn and directions regarding what they are to do and how they are to do it (c. f. Cotton, 1988). The mostly used I (jtask and question classification systems are based on the type of cognitive process required to answer (Gall, 1970).f I According to Wine (1979, p. 14), lower cognitive questions are those which „askthe student merely to recall verbatim or in | I his/her own words material previously read ortaughtby the teacher". Wine (ibid.) defined higher cognitive questions as those I (which ,ask the student to mentally manipulate bits of information previously learned to create an answer or to support an | • answer with logically reasoned evidence". We suppose that especially demanding tasks can support higher cognitive! I processes necessary for developing key com petencies. Core Methods Used in Research of Academic Tasks In Science instruction In Primary and Lower Secondary School | Core Methods Used in Research of Academic Tasks In Science j Textbooks in Primary and Lower Secondary School ■■■■■■■■ [Methodology In order to find relevant studies for our review, we searched the ANll [database (a database of articles from Czech newspapers and] I periodicals) of the National Library of the Czech Republic andj J relevant monographs. Using keywords "task", "learning task", "analysis", "analyse", "research" and "competence", we found in 5 | total 2453 potentially relevant studies that included the keyword(s)| I in the title or abstract. We excluded the studies that were not! i empirical, published in a peer reviewed journal or did not pertain to | i Science instruction (2431 in total). Full texts of 22 studies were then I J reviewed; 13 of them were excluded thereafter as they did notj ; include any relevant information (n = 9) or their field of study was too S S marginal (n = 4}, As a result, 9 of published studies were included in I I the analysis as well as 8 other studies that were not included in the 1 j database (as they were published in monographs) but werej | considered relevant, he relevant studies were reviewed comparatively. We analysed 3 | research methods and selected results from the perspective of the j I cognitive level of tasks and questions. We divided the task and! i question analysis into two parts, depending on the source of tasks or j J questions: (a) studies analysing Science Instruction and (b) studies | Findings & Conclusions There is an obvious lack of empirical research dealing with academic task in the 90's. It could be interpreted that reasons are | connected to the consequences of social-political changes following the Velvet revolution. During the examined period there is an obvious move from quantitative descriptive research to qualitative analyses. Analysis of particular teaching situations are more frequent than analysis of whole lessons. Video-studies are becoming a | more and more frequent tool for investigating instruction (seethe Figure 1a). Research on cognitive level of tasks and questions still being uses categorical systems based on the Tollingeris taxonomy of 8 educational objectives in the cognitive domain (a Czech alternative to Bloom's taxonomy) which has undoubtedly been the! most influential in research on questioning In the Czech Republic in the last 25 years (see the Figure 1 b). Quite a lot of information about using tasks in the Czech Science instruction comes from international comparative studies j TIMSS and PISA. Result suggest that teachers prefer questions with lower cognitive level as they expect these to result in quick and correct 1 answers from pupils. This does not seem to have changed in the last 25 years, This, however, can be interpreted as rather | negative as the development of key competencies requires tasks based on higher cognitive processes. It appears that there have been no essential changes in the types of questions teachers pose in Czech Science instruction. I Instruction is highly social-culturally dependent and this may be the reason why we did not find any changes in the cognitive I level of researched tasks (questions) despite the new concept of competencies which has been introduced into the Czechs curricula. i Pstružlnovs (1992) l TIMSS 1999 I (Rometal.,2006) i Bitová 4 Ctpičkova I (2005) ! TIMSS 2007 ! (Martin, Mullis, £ Foy. 2008) | Vaculová (21)06) Vaculová, Trna S Janík j (2008) I HUbelová (2009) Knecht etat (2010) ; TIMSS 2011 I (Marlin, Mulis, Foy, 8. I Slanco,2012) ! PISA 2012 í (OECD, 2014) ! Janiketat(2013) j Lokajíčková (2013) A descriptive analysis of the pedagogical-psychological aspects and frequency of questions lhal teacher asks Video study, questionnaire for pupils, parents, teachers and national research coordinator Questionnaires using unfinished sentences and observation sheets aith five grades scales Didactic lest, pupils', teachers', school principals' and national research coordinators' questionnaire Didactic test, video study - video analysis Video study - video analysis of the function of task in the process of Physics instruction Video study - video analysis ol the role of didactic media and aids, organisational forms and phases of the instruction Vkfeo-study, microanalysis Didactic lest, questionnaire for pupils, parents, teachers and national research coordinator Didactic test and pupil's and school printipals' questionnaire 3A methodology (qualitative analysis based on video-study - annotation, analysis, alteration) Video study - video analysis from the perspective of cognitive level of tasks, participants and processes Quantitative content analysis according to Wingers taxonomy' (frequency, formulation, operation and sequence analysis) Cognitive level analysis according to Tollinger's taxonomy Cognitive level analysis according to Tollinger's taxonomy I Vránovi (2005) j Čížková & Lusticová j (2009) I Knecht & Lokajíčková Content analysis comparing the I (2013) requirements for expected outcomes of operations Simlk (2013) Descriptive analysis according lo Tollinger's lexonomy 1 Tollinger's taxonomy divides 27 types df tasks into 5 categories I according lo the cognitive level - laaka requiring: 11. memory reproduction erf knowledge. 2. simple menial operaltons I with knowledge, 3. complex menial operations with knowledge, | 4. communication of knowledge and 5. creative thinking. I Contact I institute lor Research in School Education i Faculty el education Masaryk University I Podel 31. 603 DO Brno, Czech Republic I EmaE: Tereza Ceskove@gmail.com, veronikalokakckova@allas cz. I janko@ped miinl.cz I Poster was supported Py ihe acholershlp lund of the Faculty orE I Masaryk university end by project GA CR GPP4O7yi2/P059 I Pfileiitosli k rpzvljeni Competence k resent problemu v jcednicicn a ve tnfcJV "kvy íha naP -scan: urva-z la Jane Evaneafcity Puitp* RefarinoK (WrT.4 Cipttkmi. I (2P051 >Stf^f*tv«ev^^fnjezvftfTÍ»wpS»virtŕ)*j Caftan, k i ttSSS] Cum< Ovaillcrw^ Parevan from . rntpyj'^scryjctvnYni.eenv1*WtOSi6^ c V, 4Lustroví, V .7>* isecmpnle 37-01 S Lokajkkertl. V. ;Z3IS> ucntaa jamy jakp artahUai k rcryí.*nl a Mvk»M kpn*>Manpa k rate-ľ a'^yani orokVyurytli vyyCip. analyze cny, ecadilc a PVP ZV. "ríay^v-a. vybrané v, vr-a, f.-ea.in T. ,vt Mayan, MO.hfe.ea. kVJa. A Ray. P. [iOnej. PiaSS 5007 vucnuacM' SVr/c* Ttancvl PktPvpa fenm krAV. Panataat ixr^nry-iEyktn;', c*,,,