Innovative Teaching Strategies in Secondary Science Education: A Systematic Review
Keywords:
innovative teaching strategies, secondary science education, learning assessment, administrative supportAbstract
This systematic review delves into the landscape of innovative teaching strategies in secondary science education, exploring diverse approaches, learning assessment innovations, administrative support, and stakeholder perceptions. The study synthesizes findings from a range of scholarly sources, highlighting the creativity and adaptability of educators in designing pedagogical approaches that engage students and enhance learning experiences. While innovative teaching strategies abound, the review identifies a relative lack of emphasis on innovations in learning assessment methods, signaling a need for further exploration in this area. Administrative support emerges as a critical factor influencing the successful implementation of innovative teaching strategies, with varying degrees of support observed across schools. Stakeholder perceptions, particularly those of teachers and students, reflect positivity towards innovative approaches, underscoring their potential to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes. Overall, this study underscores the importance of fostering a culture of innovation in science education, advocating for continuous exploration and development of pedagogical approaches that meet the evolving needs of students and educators alike.
References
Abulnour, R. (2016). How do Ontario Secondary School Science teachers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the area of constructivist learning theory enact assessment and evaluation?.
Alghamdi, A. K., & Hamed Alanazi, F. (2019). Creating scientific dialogue through social media: exploration of Saudi pre-service science teachers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 37(4), 471-491.
Bakhoda, I., & Shabani, K. (2019). Enhancing L2 learners’ ZPD modification through computerized-group dynamic assessment of reading comprehension. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 31-44.
Barakzai, Q. (2004). Transition from traditional to innovative teaching in and beyond pharmacology at Ziauddin Medical University. Acta Pharmacol Sin, 25(9), 1220-1232.
Brinthaupt, T. M., Cruz, L., Otto, S., & Pinter, M. (2019). A framework for the strategic leveraging of outside resources to enhance CTL effectiveness. To Improve the Academy, 38(1), 82-94.
Bugtai, G., Batilaran, J., & Kilag, O. K. (2024). Enhancing Science Education in Middle Schools: A Systematic Review. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Research for Innovation, Sustainability, and Excellence (IMJRISE), 1(2), 7-13.
Carvalho, C., Freire, S., CONBOY, J., Baptista, M., Freire, A., Azevedo, M., & Oliveira, T. (2011). Student perceptions of secondary science teachers’ practices following curricular change. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8(1), 29-41.
Chang, C. C., & Wang, C. M. (2008). Factors affecting the integration of information technology into teaching by teachers of vocational high schools in Taipei. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 21(1), 97-132.
Chen, K. D., & Chen, P. K. (2017). Research on the relation the characteristics of the faculty and the commitment to continuous improvement of motivations and student study processes. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(4), 439-449.
Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2018). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press.
Corwin, R. G. (1975). Innovation in organizations: The case of schools. Sociology of education, 1-37.
Crosby, M. E., Stelovsky, J., & Ashworth, D. (1996). Predicting language proficiency based on the use of multimedia interfaces for transcription tasks. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 9(2-3), 251-262.
Groenewald, E., Kilag, O. K., Unabia, R., Manubag, M., Zamora, M., & Repuela, D. (2023). The Dynamics of Problem-Based Learning: A Study on its Impact on Social Science Learning Outcomes and Student Interest. Excellencia: International Multi-disciplinary Journal of Education (2994-9521), 1(6), 303-313.
Hall, L. W., & Zierler, B. K. (2015). Interprofessional education and practice guide no. 1: developing faculty to effectively facilitate interprofessional education. Journal of interprofessional care, 29(1), 3-7.
Hursen, C., & Bas, C. (2019). Use of gamification applications in science education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (Online), 14(1), 4.
Kornhaber, M. L., Barkauskas, N. J., & Griffith, K. M. (2016). Smart Money? Philanthropic and Federal Funding for the Common Core. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(93), n93.
Lisao, C., Kilag, O. K., Tamayo, J. M., Abella, J., Cañete, N., & Abendan, C. F. (2023). Reimagining Science Education in the Philippines: A Systematic Analysis of the 7E Learning Cycle Model's Efficacy. Excellencia: International Multi-disciplinary Journal of Education (2994-9521), 1(5), 100-111.
Ma, X., Wu, X., Yuan, J., & Luo, X. (2018). Students, classrooms, teachers, and schools: Competing effects on science achievement. Teachers College Record, 120(11), 1-48.
Moyle, K. (2010). Building innovation: Learning with technologies.
Naz, F., & Murad, H. S. (2017). Innovative teaching has a positive impact on the performance of diverse students. Sage Open, 7(4), 2158244017734022.
Niemiec, R., & Walberg, H. J. (1987). Comparative effects of computer-assisted instruction: A synthesis of reviews. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3(1), 19-37.
Ocariza, E., Kilag, O. K., Olasiman, J., & Abendan, C. F. (2023). Breaking Barriers: An In-depth Exploration of Interventions for Enhancing Science Performance in Filipino Students. Excellencia: International Multi-disciplinary Journal of Education (2994-9521), 1(5), 268-278.
Osborne, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: Promise, problems and future directions.
Schleicher, A. (2012). Preparing teachers and developing school leaders for the 21st century: Lessons from around the world. OECD Publishing. 2, rue Andre Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.
Schneider, M., & Stern, E. (2010). The cognitive perspective on learning: Ten cornerstone findings (pp. 69-90). The nature of learning: using research to inspire practice.
Serdyukov, P. (2021). Formalism in online education. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 14(2), 118-132.
Singh, C. K. S., Muhammad, M. M., Mostafa, N. A., Yunus, M. M., Noordin, N., & Darm, R. (2022). Exploring ESL teachers' alternative assessment strategies and practices in the classroom. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 18(1), 411-426.
Taping, M. L., Kilag, O. K., Caballero, J., Zamora, R. M., Paras, J., & Moscoso, J. (2023). Bridging the Gap: A Systematic Review of Senior High School Graduates' Preparedness for the Bachelor of Science in Accountancy Program. Excellencia: International Multi-disciplinary Journal of Education (2994-9521), 1(4), 143-155.
Yeter, I. H., Tan, V. S. Q., & Le Ferrand, H. (2023). Conceptualization of biomimicry in engineering context among undergraduate and high school students: An international interdisciplinary exploration. Biomimetics, 8(1), 125.
Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching up or leading the way: American education in the age of globalization. ASCD.
