This may be the author’s version of a work that was submitted/acceptedfor publication in the following source:

Thomas, Bibi & Watters, Jim(2015)Perspectives on Australian, Indian and Malaysian approaches to STEMeducation.International Journal of Educational Development, 45, pp. 42-53.

This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/89486/

c© Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters

This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under aCreative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use andthat permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the docu-ment is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then referto the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recog-nise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe thatthis work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au

License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No DerivativeWorks 2.5

Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record(i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub-mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) canbe identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear-ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2015.08.002

Page 1 of 23

Perspectives on Australian, Indian and Malaysian approaches to STEM education

Bibi Thomas, and James J. Watters

Faculty of Education QUT, Victoria Park Rd

Kelvin Grove, Brisbane Australia

Abstract

STEM education faces an interesting conundrum. Western countries have implemented constructivist inspired student centred practices which are argued to be more engaging and relevant to student learning than the traditional, didactic approaches. However, student interest in pursuing careers in STEM have fallen or stagnated. In contrast, students in many developing countries in which teaching is still somewhat didactic and teacher centred are more disposed to STEM related careers than their western counterparts. Clearly, factors are at work which impact the way students value science and mathematics. This review draws on three components that act as determinants of science education in three different countries – Australia, India and Malaysia. We explore how national priorities and educational philosophy impacts educational practices as well as teacher beliefs and the need for suitable professional development. Socio-economic conditions for science education that are fundamental for developing countries in adopting constructivist educational models are analysed. It is identified that in order to reduce structural dissimilarities among countries that cause fragmentation of scientific knowledge, for Malaysia constructivist science education through English medium without losing the spirit of Malaysian culture and Malay language is essential while India need to adopt constructivist quality indicators in education. While adopting international English education, and reducing dominance of impact evaluation, India and Malaysia need to prevent losing their cultural and social capital vigour. Furthermore the paper argues that Australia might need to question the efficacy of current models that fail to engage students’ long term interest in STEM related careers. Australian and Malaysian science teachers must be capable of changing the personal biographies of learners for developing scientific conceptual information. In addition both Malaysia and Australia need to provide opportunities for access to different curricular programmes of knowledge based constructivist learning for different levels of learner competencies.

Keywords

STEM education; Constructivism; Educational philosophy; Educational practices; Teacher beliefs; Professional development; Culture; Australian education; Indian education; Malaysian education.

Draft Paper submitted to International Journal of Educational Development (Accepted August 2015)

Page 2 of 23

Introduction

In an age when major social and environmental problems are threatening human survival, high quality science and mathematics education is central to ecological sustainability and economic prosperity (The Royal Society, 2010 and UNESCO, 1999). Global problems such as climate change, overpopulation, resource management, agricultural production, health, biodiversity, declining energy and water sources among other issues put even more pressure on developing science and technology and require an international approach to resolving these issues. Science is seen as a powerful way of thinking and understanding the basis of these problems. However, numerous studies have noted a declining level interest towards science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) both in terms of enrolment (Ali and Shubra, 2010 and Sjoberg and Schreiner, 2005) and student motivation towards science learning (Elias, 2009 and Osborne et al., 2003) especially in many western countries and powerhouse economies of Asia. In contrast, various studies suggest a greater interest among school aged children in developing countries such as India and Malaysia towards STEM than Western counterparts (Shukla, 2005 and Sjoberg and Schreiner, 2005). The high level of interest in non-developed countries is desirable given the Declaration of Budapest (UNESCO, 1999) which argued that:

As scientific knowledge has become a crucial factor in the production of wealth, so its distribution has become more inequitable. What distinguishes the poor (be it people or countries) from the rich is not only that they have fewer assets, but also that they are largely excluded from the creation and the benefits of scientific knowledge. (p. 463)

As recently as December 2011, the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2012) has committed action on global climate change with major implications for countries such as India and China to develop or adopt technological solutions to pollution. In particular, STEM education is an essential element of the global response to climate change or any of the other technological issues facing contemporary society. In this paper we explore the educational challenges faced by India, Malaysia and Australia in terms of priorities, philosophy and practices. All three countries have strong historical and economic relationships but different priorities for their future development. Australia has provided educational training for students from both India and Malaysia since the 1950s and many scientific leaders in both India and Malaysia have experienced their professional training in Australia. Common to all three is the role English has played in education and governance. But also common is the philosophical heritage given the influence of Islamic science and contributions of Indian science and mathematics on western science. The question we ask is what lessons can be learned from science education practices across three that can inform and guide future directions for each.

Background

Extensive research on how students learn science particularly in North America, Europe and Australasia has led to the advocacy of constructivist philosophies of learning (Mintzes et al., 2005). In response, various jurisdictions have adopted curricula that promote student-centred learning, outcomes-based educational practices (Jones and Brader-Araje, 2002) and inquiry-learning approaches (YouthLearn Initiative (US), 2009). These approaches are also being explored in India and Malaysia to varying degrees. For instance the series of conferences hosted by the Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education since 2004 has featured research on educational issues related to science, mathematics and technology which draw on contemporary educational doctrines. Similarly, in Malaysia constructivist inspired student-centred approaches have been actively advocated although it is reported that teaching is mostly didactic (Zin, 2003).

Page 3 of 23

However, the OECD's (2009) Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) which provided the first internationally comparative perspective of the practices of secondary teachers and concluded that in northwest Europe, Scandinavia, Australia and Korea teachers are more inclined to regard students as active participants in the process of acquiring knowledge than to see the teacher's main role as the transmission of information and demonstration of “correct solutions”. The report noted that the “strength of preference” in Malaysian teachers was the smallest compared to the majority of countries. India was not a participant of the TALIS study.

This review sets out to analyse some of these challenges faced by STEM educators in three countries, India, Malaysia and Australia and draws on understanding of three components that influence STEM education in these countries – national priorities, educational philosophies and educational practices. We begin this review by examining the tensions that exist between national priorities, approaches to STEM teaching and educational outcomes in Australia, India and Malaysia. We focus on the relationships and coherence between stated educational policy and priorities, the philosophical perspectives adopted to implement policy, and documented practices within schools.

Methodology

Broadly, a descriptive case study approach was adopted that compares research literature, policy documents and educational philosophies of three countries. Literature includes contemporary publications emanating from each of the countries as well as material published by international agencies. The literature themes were complemented with data acquired through participant observation of educational practices in each of the countries. Author 1 has taught in all three countries (tertiary/secondary/primary) and author 2 has firsthand experience of educational policy and practices in Malaysia and Australia. We present our interpretation case by case addressing in turn the themes that emerge in relation to the national priorities, educational goals and teaching practices.

Perspectives

Australia

Significant changes have occurred in Australian science education in the past five years. The Australian Government has, after over 20 years of negotiation with the state governments who control education, mandated a national curriculum in science and mathematics have been prioritised (ACARA, 2010). The national curriculum in science is organised around three strands the three strands namely, Science Understanding, Science Inquiry Skills and Science as a Human Endeavour. The rationale behind the curriculum is to enable students to develop “the scientific knowledge, understandings and skills to make informed decisions about local, national and global issues and to participate, if they so wish, in science-related careers”. The curriculum aligns science education with the Australian Government's national priorities.

National priorities

The following section highlights the main national priorities in Australian STEM education such as the need to promote inquiry-based learning and teacher qualities as well as the cultural and historical approaches that support these priorities. Like many other Western nations, student enrolments in the Australian post-compulsory schooling as well as in tertiary STEM-related courses have been declining consistently and consequent skills shortages have been increasing (Goodrum and Rennie, 2008). Seventy-six percent of Australian industries have acknowledged a serious skills shortage in areas related to STEM (Baker, 2009) in a context where Australia faces

Page 4 of 23

substantial competition as a result of increasing investment in its major Asian trading partners in research and higher education (Ranck et al., 2006).

Two significant documents present competing perspectives. Goodrum and Rennie (2008) proposed a national plan for science education which was presented to the Australian Government. They argued the fundamental purpose of science education is to develop scientific literacy. Scientific literacy was seen to be a fundamental attribute of every citizen enabling them to “understand more about science and its processes, recognise its place in our culture and society, and be able to use it in their daily lives” (p. 3). Three areas for action were called for: reforming curriculum, improving the quality of teachers and engaging with the community. Arguably the area of action that has received significant funding is curriculum reform with the development of a National Curriculum. However, Tytler (2007) in his report to the Australian Council of Educational Research went further arguing for a “significant re-imaging of science education” in response to the “crisis” in science, namely the diminishing interests of contemporary youth in pursuing science (or STEM) related careers. STEM education is also facing another crisis, namely that of a shortage of quality teachers who can improve student inquiry and interest. There is widespread belief that students’ loss of interest especially in the enabling sciences including mathematics can be attributed to the quality of teaching (Tytler et al., 2011) but also general social and cultural conditions have made other career options more appealing. A report by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER, 2005) found that 43% of secondary principals were confronted with staff teaching outside their field of expertise (McKenzie et al., 2008).

However, a key aspect of the Australian STEM education is that its features in general resemble the ‘life-world example’ (Gilbert et al., 2011, p. 833) of context-based education. This approach, according to Gilbert et al. has been revolving round the issue of learning of concepts as scientific mental maps from a life-world mental map. The study by Tytler et al. (2011) identified 16 innovative projects with the objective of developing curricular solutions for the decline in student interest in school science or mathematics. These projects had successfully incorporated strategies that applied disciplinary knowledge and practices in STEM to societal applications.

Australia's goals towards sustainable STEM education for economic development can only be attained if it produces something that will be of economic value rather than a population of scientists and educators who can contribute to national awareness of knowledge, practices and applications. The current demand for solving economic issues through technological and policy developments shows that STEM education must actively engage learners with these issues, which means STEM education in schools must integrate the disciplines of science and mathematics with the active processes of science and mathematics and connect these to the solution of economic and social issues. A closer look at the science education reform in other western countries such as the US and UK which were called the ‘Science for All’ and the ‘Public Understanding of Science’ respectively (Duschl, 2008) would seem to represent similar goals. It is important to point out that any attempt to actively engage learners with the active processes of science must also explore the reasons why learners choose to study science, what motivates them to learn science and what pedagogical practices in schools enable them to be included in these goal-oriented learning activities. These questions could perhaps be addressed through referring the Australian educational philosophy in which we can review our pedagogical priorities.

Educational philosophy

We now address the philosophical foundations that underlie Australian school education. STEM education policy has been strongly influenced by principles of constructivism (Piaget, Vygotsky), progressive education (Dewey) and a recognition that the diverse and changing needs of students are shaped by their individual abilities, cultural backgrounds and socio-economic circumstances

Page 5 of 23

(ACARA, 2010). It is beyond the scope of this review to explore the dimensions and variations of constructivism but to note the widely accepted view that constructivist inspired teaching purports to be student centred and inquiry oriented. Constructivist strategies involve students investigating real problems, discussing findings, thinking meta-cognitively and negotiating meaning with peers and teachers. The emerging Australian national curriculum, building on over twenty years of previous state curricula, has reinforced a stronger move towards student-centred learning and the development of scientific literacy. Constructivism has been accepted in Australian schooling mainly because it has been generally recognised that the constructionist learning process is beneficial where learners construct knowledge based on their experiences instead of just absorbing knowledge (Von Glasersfeld, 1996) in classrooms. However, it is also important to recognise that the constructivist approach is not without its problems (Matthews, 2004 and Taber, 2006). It can be argued that there has been a tendency to develop benchmarks for curricular design and development using the existing constructivist educational models in an effort to address the need for scientific literacy. It is widely believed by educators that such a literacy development will be necessary if citizens can contribute effectively to discussion of scientific issues involving climate change, exploitation of natural resources and many other issues (Goodrum and Rennie, 2008). However, focusing on benchmarking alone rather than on adequately developing and integrating theories of social class reproduction, human capital production, and national economic development into educational systems, can bring undesirable educational outcomes (Baker et al., 2002). A position supported for instance by Taylor et al. (1994) when they stated ‘in terms of teacher and learner beliefs about teaching and learning, modes of knowing science, the influence of peers and the teacher on learning, within class and school influences, and gender, social class and ethnicity as factors associated with learning science’ (p. 7).

Educational practices

In the 1980s and 1990s a number of professional development programmes were implemented nationally that placed a heavy emphasis on constructivist ideas (Appleton et al., 2000). Some of these projects have endured successfully for many years and been highly effective in changing teaching practices and enhancing student learning (Mitchell and Mitchell, 2009). While state education curricula generally promoted constructivist ideals, the Australian Academy of Science embarked on a range of curriculum development initiatives that provided practical guidelines and resources generally adopting instructional models conceived by US curriculum developers. For instance, since 1995, the Academy has sponsored the development of both primary and secondary teaching programmes intended to support the implementation of practices that develop scientific literacy. These national programmes (Primary Connections, Science by Doing) draw on the 5Es teaching and learning model that was developed by Roger Bybee in the US (Hackling and Prain, 2005) and have been influential in impacting classroom practices especially in the primary years. Other various national, state and local multimillion dollar action programmes including the Australian School Innovation in Science, Technology and Mathematics [ASISTM] project and the National Science Week have been implemented to encourage innovative STEM teaching. Many of these initiatives placed pressure on teachers to engage in more open-ended pedagogical practices where students were actively engaged in exploring phenomena. The architecture of many science classrooms was redesigned to enable more social engagement and student autonomy in the process of learning especially science.

The quality of teaching in supporting learning and learner motivation is paramount (Alton-Lee, 2006, Darling-Hammond and Bransford, 2005, Hattie, 2003, Monk, 1994 and Rivkin et al., 2005). If the quality of teaching in Australia was not already being criticised (e.g. Hackling et al., 2001), these reforms brought new challenges. More open ended curricula highlighted the need for science teachers with interdisciplinary capabilities, and capable of adopting modern teaching and

Page 6 of 23

learning approaches. The Australian Science Teachers’ Association recognising the challenge of quality teaching devised a set of professional standards. These acknowledge that accomplished teachers have broad knowledge of science and science curriculum and are cognisant of the contextual factors such as culture, gender and development on student learning. In alignment with the philosophical approach to science education accomplished teachers “engage students in generating, constructing and testing scientific knowledge by collecting, analysing and evaluating evidence” (Wright, 2002). In parallel the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers developed the AAMT Standards for Excellence in Teaching Mathematics in Australian Schools which emphasised the importance of teaching mathematics in dynamic and meaningful ways to ensure that students become autonomous and self-directed learners who enjoy mathematics.

Teacher beliefs and professional development

Teacher beliefs are important when it comes to understanding teacher practice. In addition, as Richardson (1996) pointed out professional development programmes can have a great effect on changing beliefs of even experienced teachers. For instance, teacher beliefs can positively influence their actions in classroom (Kang and Wallace, 2004) and constructivist behaviours could result from constructivist beliefs (Hashweh, 1996). In addition, it may be difficult to uproot centralised beliefs (Kagan, 1992). Australian teacher beliefs related to reforms are not very well documented. However, Cornu and Peters (2005) in a study on primary teachers in Adelaide, argued that in order for teachers to make educational reforms like constructivism, it is important they are given enough support in their own learning. Brownlee (2003) conducted a study focusing on epistemological beliefs of 11 pre-service teachers in Australia over a three-year period. The student teachers were interviewed at the beginning and conclusion of the teaching programme as well as in their third year of teaching. Qualitative data analysis showed that seven participants had positively developed beliefs towards constructivist learning, however two maintained the same beliefs, and two had less constructivist beliefs

India

National priorities

We now consider the national priorities of Indian education. Since independence from Britain, India has had to confront a number of key challenges such as improving general literacy rates which are among the world's lowest and access to education for many of its population (Kingdon, 2007). Nevertheless, the government has prioritised STEM education (Government of India, 1998) to fuel the economic future of India Successive governments have channelled substantial resources into STEM education since the 1950s as science and mathematics education is seen as a factor vital to national development and economic prosperity. The outcome of this investment is a vast science and technology infrastructure which has positioned India as a potential knowledge superpower at the beginning of this millennium.

India's national education policy states that science and mathematics must be an integral part of the curriculum throughout the school education (Government of India, 1998). The national curriculum framework also recognises that under the Minimum Levels of Learning (MLL) curriculum concept, primary level students within their first five years of primary schooling must be mastering, the mother tongue, mathematics, social science and science. As a result ‘there is a growing sense among India's policy and scientific communities as well among as business leaders and entrepreneurs’ that the country has to further build its strength in the field of science and technology (India Rising, 2010). The establishment of the Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education in Mumbai has placed contemporary STEM education centre stage and is further recognition of the priority placed on educational research and reform.

Page 7 of 23

Further, throughout the last decade Indian school education and policies have been shaped by the open recognition and emphasis that the indispensable value of English as a common world language can generate access to a vast number of opportunities in national and international job markets (Government of India, 1998 and Mallikarjun, 2001). Consequently like many other developing countries (Sulaiman et al., 2009) the Indian society in general and the affluent middle and upper classes in particular have recognised and accepted English as the language of industrialisation, modernisation and globalisation (Mallikarjun, 2001). Access to the resources and bodies of scientific knowledge captured in English language literature are also influential in promoting the use of English. Fuelled by these beliefs the Indian education has seen a significant paradigm shift from a system formally adopting English as the official language and the three language formula proposed by the national Curriculum framework (Meganathan, 2009) towards a system that deliberately implementing English as the medium of instruction in public and private schools countrywide (Mallikarjun, 2001). Although the capacity of educational system to meet these demands has been limited, it has not affected the enrolment of learners in science courses, which has increased from 28% of all enrolments at the graduate level in 1995–1996 to 31% in 2004 (Shukla, 2005).

Educational philosophies

We now discuss the educational philosophies adopted by Indian education. Indian researchers have emphasised the need for transforming teacher-centred classrooms into learner-interactive environments (Sikdar and Bhojwani, 2010) especially by providing ICT tools for constructivist learning. The education policy (Government of India, 1998) has already stressed the need to adopt student-centred and activity-based teaching along with supplementary and remedial instruction especially at the primary stage of education. The national curriculum framework highlights the need to implement constructivism as a referent for teaching. During the past few years, successful attempts have been made to re-orient the educational content to current development and demands of both society and the different disciplines. However, this initiative has not been accompanied by a major corresponding change in the modes of curriculum transaction, which remains predominantly one of verbal exposition by the teacher. The expository style of teaching, involving mostly one-way communication, puts the learner in the role of a passive recipient and this situation is not conducive to the development of creative, critical and analytical thinking by students.

The policy also underlines that an approach of student centredness and a policy of non-detention at the primary stage of education will empower the child to be able to reach the cognitive goals of education. Unfortunately the Indian STEM education has not yet properly recognised constructivist contribution to the learning process that enables learners to self-construct knowledge based on their experiences (Von Glasersfeld, 1996) or attempted to implement a radical shift from the behaviourist model of education. What has been currently practised in the Indian classrooms is, but a different conception of the best way of transmitting factual knowledge to the learner followed by assessments to determine its effectiveness. A suitable explanation might be as Jones and Brader-Araje (2002) have argued, that Indian classrooms attempt to prevent learners from falling into one of the major pitfalls of constructivism, constructing unwanted knowledge. The main aspect for education here is the Indian society's inherent belief that knowledge is power.

Educational practices

This section discusses the educational practices adopted by the Indian STEM education. It is impossible to reach any general conclusion on the educational practices of Indian teachers let alone those in STEM. On one hand, the quality of schooling is reported to be in crisis typified by high levels of teacher absenteeism and poor facilities (Kingdon, 2007). All the processes of education

Page 8 of 23

should be child-centred, with the teacher playing the role of a facilitator during the process of learning (National Council of Educational Research and Training, 2005). There is a growing concern among the Indian population for the heavy mass of knowledge that must be tackled in the classrooms and in order to facilitate this, classroom interaction has to be initially controlled by the teacher followed by the learners where the learners have many opportunities for interacting with the teacher for expressing their ideas and queries. However, for learners enrolled in English medium schools, thinking in a way that allows them to express and recapitulate scientific facts and concepts in a second language has been different than what is widely observed in classrooms in Australia. What is important to Indian STEM educators and learners is just accepting the various ways through which science knowledge can be constructed adopting the world scientific views as realities rather than learner self-creating and constructing knowledge at the school level – realities that have been practised and tested by most of the developed nations.

Similar to what Hellermann et al. (2001) contend, Indian teachers in spite of not adopting the constructive pedagogies, can handle individual learner differences in acquiring conceptual information provided in the classrooms so that the personal biographies of learners can be influenced and at the same time a huge amount of knowledge can be transferred to the learner, compared to using constructivist activities. For instance, the study by Hellermann et al. (2001) analysed two linguistically and culturally diverse science classrooms and found that the teacher always used the first person ‘I’ to introduce conceptual information, ‘we/us’ for encouraging learners in difficult situations of thinking and the second person singular or plural for supporting learner responsibilities of learning so that these uses encouraged learners to adapt to socialised ways of learning in the classroom, and to understand their roles as learners.

Thus the rationale for the better perceptions towards science learning is the Indian society's and in particular the Indian families’ inherent and deeply rooted motivation for acquiring knowledge that represents this personal biography within which learning is yet another function of cultural beliefs (Robottom and Norhaidah, 2009). In addition, though the Indian school learners’ opportunities for self-reflection are minimal in classrooms, reflection that indirectly arises out of the personal biographies supplemented by science perceptions and motivations turn out to be equally productive that ultimately lead to higher meta cognition and knowledge integration processes; and as a result, given a chance they effectively plan scientific activities and differentiate scientific knowledge, facts and procedures. This evidence comes from Davis (2003) who has observed that learners capable of planning certain activities or finding out ways of differentiating things can successfully integrate knowledge through metacognition. Whatever it may be, the evidence of an increasing population of science learners are presented in the India science report by Shukla (2005). This seminal report released by the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) reported a continuing interest among students in pursuing a STEM related career. Of note is the statistic that over 66% of students who pursued a science career said they did so because they were interested in science and not because of job opportunities. It is reported that there has been a significant increase in the population with a 10th level and 12th level education from 69.7 million in 1991 to 246.9 million in 2004 (Shukla, 2005). Shukla however also noted that one constraining factor identified by students who were disinterested in science was class size. With some reservations, international comparisons of student performance can be drawn from the PISA 2009+ study (Walker, 2011). PISA is an international comparative survey of 15-year-olds’ knowledge and skills in reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. India performance was assessed in two states: Tamil Nadu and Himachal Pradesh. Himachal Pradesh students attained an average score on the mathematical literacy scale statistically the same as observed in Tamil Nadu with only 12% of students proficient in mathematics. The performance on scientific literacy around 11% well below OECD averages. However, Indian states differ very much in the literacy and numeracy levels. For example, Kerala has 100% literacy levels. While the attempt by PISA

Page 9 of 23

investigators was commendable, these two states alone do not really represent the whole of India. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that in response to the public release of India's PISA findings commentators were united in the assertion that Indian education is dominated by low literacy levels and “strongly oriented to rote-learning of facts and specific processes, with little emphasis on self-assured opinion formation and linguistic skills to communicate” (Dhar, 2012). Existing practices are not enabling students to demonstrate the science competencies necessary for them to participate actively in life situations requiring knowledge of STEM.

Teacher beliefs and professional development

Teacher beliefs on reforms could support (Hashweh, 1996) or even block reforms (Block and Hazelip, 1995). Overall, the available body of evidence that underpins the aspect of Indian teachers’ beliefs in constructivist education is moderate. However a few Indian educators have attempted to either express their beliefs or to analyse the use and impact of constructivism in their classrooms. Banerjee (2012) noted that constructivist science learning encompasses active processes rather than a search for truth. Rout and Behera (2014) believe that teachers’ beliefs and experiences must be investigated prior to implementing professional development. The authors also argued that reforms should be compatible with practical experiences since this could strongly influence their attitude towards educational change. These findings remain consistent with Kumari and Kulshrestha (2013) who reported that a test of randomised groups for inquiry based learning techniques in Grade 8 Science produced statistically significant effect as compared to traditional teaching method. A study that included ICT in the pre-service teacher education programme also showed that teachers liked the tool as it helped students to understand English better and adopt a better creative writing (Kharade and Thakkar, 2012). Tyagi and Verma (2013) investigated influence of constructivist learning for a period of 56 days on a sample of 75 grade IV students including experimental and a control groups that was taught on traditional methods. The result showed that the experimental group performed better than the control group. As such areas of policy and practice could fruitfully combine professional development for teachers as it is essential for teachers themselves to understand and experiment their new roles while they develop their techniques of implementing new reforms in classrooms (Komba and Nkumbi, 2008 and Zakaria and Daud, 2009). Hence as a pathway to implementing the National Curriculum Framework, professional development programmes could be strengthened by these principles ranging from active engagement of learners to inquiry based learning proposed by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT, 2005). Capturing the beliefs of teachers may thus pave way for understanding their views on teaching and learning and help to realise their needs for enacting constructivist pedagogy. Despite a lack of enough findings on constructivist oriented professional development programmes for Indian teachers, we argue that any ventures in teacher development are to be compounded with an evidence-based stock of pedagogical skills and practices.

Malaysia

National priorities

The main national priorities of Malaysia's STEM education with special reference to its view towards English as medium of learning have been presented in this section. Like India, Malaysia was colonised by England and subsequently exposed to English hegemonic practices particularly through the use of English language in education. The Federation of Malay achieved independence from England in 1957 which subsequently became known as Malaysia in 1963. However, Malaysia is a multi-ethnic community framed by a complex history in which the ethnic Malay population constitute only marginally more than 50% of the population. The other dominant ethnic groups

Page 10 of 23

include Chinese of various origins (35%) with indigenous, Indian and other minorities constituting the balance of the population.

Driving policy implementation is the Malaysian Government's Vision 2020. The goal is to educate Malaysian children for the world of the future and to instil those skills they will need to acquire to become productive citizens (Lee, 1999). A priority in the 2020 vision is education which has been perceived as the means of promoting national unity, social equality, and economic development. The education policies promote a common language, common curriculum, and common public examination policies as vital in order to achieve the 2020 vision and to maintain unity among the three major ethnic groups. The education system is structured to provide 6 years of primary education, 3 years of lower secondary education, and 2 years of upper secondary education. Primary school education is based on a standardised curriculum having core subjects and with a duration of six years. The Primary School Achievement Test (Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah) (UPSR) at the end of primary education assesses student aptitude in the core subjects. Secondary school education is normally for five years with yearly general examinations. In addition two national examinations are conducted by the Malaysian Examination Syndicate, one at the end of third year (Form Three) of secondary schooling (Lower Secondary Assessment or Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) and the other at the end of secondary education (Form Five; the Malaysia Certificate of Education; Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM). However after form five students may opt for a form six (The Malaysia Higher School Certificate or Sijil Tinggi Penilaian Malaysia) (STPM) or can continue tertiary studies (Malaysia Government's Official Portal, 2011).

Malaysia since independence from England has upheld its national identity prompted by the assumption that nurturing national language was superior to adopting and adapting to English language education for reaching out to the world. Thus the main medium of instruction in schools was the national Malay language (Bahasa Malaysia). Consequently the dominance of Malay education severely limited the country's attempts to effectively train students in English language which is essential for dissemination of the country's scientific achievements and ideas to the world scientific community. These issues always cached the attention of national and international media. As a result in recent years the nation has felt it necessary to implement the teaching of science and mathematics in English, the international language, with an aim to upgrade English language skills, personal development and competency of learners as well as to prepare them to reach an international audience ready to face the challenges of globalisation. It is necessary to take into consideration the various levels and varieties of the “daughter-lect” of the “mother-lect” British English, and the country's efforts and achievements in the implementation of the so called ‘adopted and adapted’ language (Baskaran, 2002).

Consequently in the year 2003 the Ministry of Education implemented the teaching of science and mathematics in English for Year 1, Form 1 and Form 6 learners (Sulaiman et al., 2009). However, contrary to what has been observed in the Indian education, it can be argued that the native Malay speaking teachers trained in a setting where the official language is Malay, must have been at a disadvantage to implement effective bilingual pedagogy and this situation must have caused the failure of STEM education in English.

Analyses of communication processes have been paramount in the determination of the efficacy of pedagogy and learning and would further support Baskaran’ s (2002) findings that educational system that incorporates effective bilingual education would definitely supplement the learners. This is because communication plays a vital role in teaching and learning and authors contend that effective communication conveys information and even feelings and expressions across individuals and learning occurs as the individuals’ behaviours get influenced and modified by conveying information and listening (Osakwe, 2009). Thus effective use of language in the process of teaching science whether native or other, and the socio cultural background of learners

Page 11 of 23

can have an impact on how learners receive the information from the teacher (Osakwe, 2009 and Sulaiman et al., 2009) for the purpose of influencing and modifying their prior experiences and knowledge. This would in turn facilitate a modification of their behaviour towards better learning. It is there for needful to understand these processes and roles of language as a medium of communication in the science education. Baskaran (2002) argues that a bilingual learner has advantage over a monolingual learner in the same manner as dexterity in two hands for playing musical instruments differs from dexterity in one hand.

While acknowledging this argument the need for upgrading English language and communication skills in Malaysian classrooms will have to be considered. The other side of the issue would be in deciding how prepared the learners from diverse social and cultural backgrounds will be in accepting the English language. For example, there can be groups who willingly and comfortably adopt the language, while others, especially from rural areas who are neither confident to communicate nor believe that they would benefit from the teaching in English medium (Sulaiman et al., 2009). Sulaiman et al.’s study in fact indicates that when using English as a medium of teaching and learning, there can be significant differences between science process skills between Year 1 learners in the rural and urban area. Thus, unlike the Indian society’ s perceptions towards English education, to a certain extent the adoption of English is considered as a threat to national identity, especially by many of the native Malay speaking ethnic group. On the other hand an interest towards English language skills among a fraction of Malaysians could influence the formation of the so called ‘discourse community’ (Rollnick, 2000, p. 97) within the Malaysian societies. Which means mastery of those particular genres even though different from the genres used by native English speaking communities would be possible depending upon the willingness to adopt and adapt to particular genres of the language. There is also the issue that the interest in studying science and mathematics in English differs across ethnic groups with non-ethnic Malays more predisposed to the prospect of attaining English competency that enable them to construct world class knowledge and to face the challenge of succeeding in the job market. In contrast the Indian education benefits from its tri-lingual education system that firmly believes that linking economic growth with the fundamental value of English can provide remarkable results in science and technology.

Educational philosophy

This section highlights the main philosophical doctrine that manages Malaysian science education. Though there is little empirical evidence that investigates Malaysian schools’ pedagogical approaches for creating a positive attitude towards STEM learning, Robottom and Norhaidah (2009) have reported that Islamic science learners construct meaning of what they learn, taking into consideration of two factors namely, culture and religion and that they might need a proper conceptual (epistemological) frame for meaningfully integrating the western science concepts. Similar to the Indian classrooms, Malaysian schools adopt the direct prompt techniques for teaching and learning as well as learner reflection to some extent. However, direct prompt techniques compared to the generic prompt fail to develop more coherent understanding of scientific concepts taught in the classrooms, leading to poor reflections (Davis, 2003). In addition, the issues in understanding the information taught in English language further hinder Malaysian learners’ attention and interpretation of the knowledge received (Sulaiman et al., 2009). In terms of pedagogical practices however, the country's schools systems can be compared to the Indian classrooms where teachers affirm learner responses and explore learner understanding as basis for better learner outcomes (Rojas-Drummond, 2000).

Page 12 of 23

Educational practices

We now consider the educational practices that are in line with Malaysian educational philosophy. Similar to the Indian pedagogical settings Malaysian school pedagogy is a didactic one with dominance of whole class teaching and pupils engaging in the same pre-designed activity. Class sizes are generally large (40–50 students) and poorly furnished. Darling-Hammond (1996) emphasised that changes in classroom practices are inseparable from closer interactions between teachers and students. This argument is relevant since in Malaysia there are few opportunities for independent inquiry. Prior to Form Four students attend the lower Secondary Assessment and are then streamed into special subjects such as arts, science, technical, vocational or religious studies. It is noteworthy that science stream is weighted over the arts stream and students who attain high grades in mathematics and science in the Lower Secondary Assessment examination are eligible to choose the science stream. Some of the major problems that negatively impact the pedagogical practices are incompetency, quality and a lack of interest among English language teachers which shows that science education in English can have a negative impact. Moreover students with excellent English language abilities and skills either select careers that fetch them better pay or move abroad to continue education (Kabilan, 2007). In Malaysia, teaching of science starts in primary, however opportunities for inquiry as in a pure constructivist model, are limited. Teachers adopt a guided approach following the Bonnstetter's model to inquiry (Yunus et al., 2004).

Malaysia, like India, participated in the PISA 2009+ study (Walker, 2011). Malaysia's performance indicated that 57% of students were proficient in scientific literacy and 41% in mathematical literacy to a “baseline level at which they begin to demonstrates the kind of skills that enable them to use science (or mathematics) in ways that are considered fundamental for their future development.

Teacher beliefs and professional development

It is important to explore Malaysian teacher beliefs in support of constructivist or traditional learning behaviour. At least one study indicated that though the Curriculum Development Center of the Ministry of Education had adopted many attempts towards changing teacher beliefs about learning including implementing a more constructivist oriented mathematics curriculum, many teachers possessed traditional beliefs (Zanzali, 2004). Chong (2005) claimed that learning science in Malaysian classrooms is aligned with a study of factual knowledge where students do not understand the nature of science. Yunus et al. (2004) argued that for many teachers, the practical adoption of constructivist teaching and learning is either difficult or they use it with modifications to suit their understanding, mainly due to lack of enough progressive training in the approach. This claim is consistent with Luan et al.’s (2010) investigation of 209 Malaysian Science teachers’ perceptions of their pedagogical role using constructivist science laboratory sessions with computers. Analysis indicated that their perceptions were positively aligned with student-centeredness while it was revealed that their readiness to adopt the approach was moderate. DeWitt and Siraj (2010) also agreed that in Malaysian schools the learning of science should be in accordance with the nature of science. The authors used collaborative mLearning modules designed with the use of text messaging and discussion forums and found that such collaborative instructional modules could address this issue. We consider that Malaysia too must review and understand the beliefs of teachers so that professional development programmes can be developed to have an effective impact on their teachers. As the government understands more and more about such beliefs they can then design and implement programmes that are favourable to the best development of teachers.

Page 13 of 23

Paradoxes

This section explores the main paradoxes that could limit the effect of STEM education in these three countries. We posed the question “what lessons can be learned from science education practices across three countries that can inform and guide future directions for each.” This paper however does not explore into the cultural liberation that might have an impact on science education, especially through providing career mobility, which the ROSE project suggests is a significant factor in low scoring systems. As Alexander (2001) argued such cultural indicators of quality may be specific yet non-measureable through objective measurements.

We see clearly different policy priorities across the three countries. Indian education policy prioritises STEM knowledge as major contributor to economic growth and power. As a nation surpassed only by its near neighbour China in population it has the human resources to assume international leadership in the generation of scientific and technological knowledge. In contrast with China and its centralised control, India is a democracy and so relies on cooperation and persuasion in achieving its goals. A similar policy imperative exists in Malaysia where economic growth and the achievement of developed economy are grounded in science and technology. In contrast, while Australia acknowledges a critical skills shortage, the goals for education are more socially oriented with a focus in the case of STEM on developing general citizenry competence. India confronts substantial issues in reforming education without introducing western malaise that typifies STEM education in Australia. In both countries there are bright spots in the education of students in STEM but Australia outperforms India on most international comparisons of student performance. Indeed, the PISA study of 74 countries has ranked India virtually at the bottom in performance in mathematical literacy and scientific literacy (see Table 1). A difficulty in focussing on specifics is the lack of substantial data on the practices and experiences of students in science and mathematics. While Australian education is well researched and critiqued more data needed to provide richer insights into the diversity of educational practices in India and Malaysia, suffice to say that educational practices in Australia are far more influenced by constructivist philosophies than in India or Malaysia. The ROSE study findings (Sjøberg and Schreiner, 2005) provide the enigma. On one hand where curricula promote open-ended activities and teacher education over 20 years have promoted constructivism, students shun science and mathematics related studies yet perform at the top of the league tables. In India and Malaysia students appear to enjoy science but perform relatively poorly on the PISA type assessments. Do constructivist inspired approaches impose too high a demand on students? In systems where rote learning dominates at least there is some certainty and definable outcomes that students can target even if low level. There is a trade off – more open-ended constructivist approaches might improve the quality of learning but at the same time screen students thus identifying those truly committed to STEM.

Page 14 of 23

Table 1: Mean performance of 15-year-old students on PISA 2009/2009+.

Country Mathematical literacya

Scientific literacya

ROSE study, percent who agreed with “I like science”b

Shanghai, China 600 575 Australia 514 527 OECD average 496 501 Malaysia 404 422 51% Tamil Nadu,

India 351 348

Himachal Pradesh, India

338 325

Mumbai 70% Gujarat 72% a Data from Walker (2011). b Data from Sjøberg and Schreiner (2005).

What is clear is that all three countries acknowledge and strive to develop what has generally been termed western science. Western science is accepted at both government and community level as the key to economic prosperity and future survival. The question then arises is whether practices broadly defined in terms of using constructivism as a referent for STEM education is viable in the different cultural settings. Gough (2007) has challenged the privileging of western science as truth arguing that knowledge is socially and culturally constructed. While this position is acknowledged in policy across the three countries each has accepted western science as canon. Thus teachers, policy makers and the community while possibly willing to acknowledge cultural beliefs in everyday life, are firmly located in western science in the context of schooling. Constructivism as a philosophy to understand the learning process would appear equally relevant in all three countries. Didactic teaching in which information is presented but rarely assimilated can appear to be successful if the assessment strategies are aligned. Students are generally good at rote learning. However, ultimately they are caught out when asked to explain or apply their knowledge. Constructivism at least in terms of strategies designed to achieve conceptual change lead students to deeper understanding and reflection on their knowledge. Whilst there is a place for rote learning, creativity and innovation are dependent on opportunities for students to explore the boundaries of their knowledge by application. A pathway forward for India and Malaysia is to capitalise on the interest in STEM within the community to attract and build a teaching profession that has strong understanding of contemporary pedagogical practices coupled with a curriculum that affords opportunities for students to engage more meaningfully with natural phenomena. Indeed the role of the family and community in valuing scientific and technological knowledge and the importance of acquiring this knowledge is a critical attribute of Indian culture.

However it is important to analyse three factors that link constructivist approaches to learning with the economic outcomes. First, has the science curriculum and the science pedagogy succeeded to link constructivism and served the needs of preparing scientifically literate citizens for national development? Second, have teachers limited their teaching approaches to only implementing the pre-set constructivist curriculum? Third, have they failed to induce development of cognitive semantic linking of concepts in the learners’ brain and hence supported conceptual change in ways that align with deep understanding of science or mathematics? In addition, as Zanzali (2004) argued have educators consistently studied the effectiveness of curriculum implementation in the local context?. As some Malaysian educators argue is there a gap between students’ expectations related to learning and what teachers teach in terms of curriculum design and assessment? (Zain et al., 2012).

Page 15 of 23

Here emphasis must be on reshaping of curriculum and training the Australian and Malaysian Science teachers whose skills of delivering science lessons could play a major role in handling and developing scientific learners so that these learners can acquire conceptual information towards a dramatic change in their personal biographies. The limitations of innovative constructivist learning alone to support and promote STEM education and student interest comes from the study by Tytler et al. (2011). The findings of the study indicated quality of learning and quality of the learning environment happened in innovative constructivist based learning projects however, the researchers could not produce evidence for student outcomes.

Over the next 25 years there will be a need to reshape the current education systems giving relevance to the individual child, the school and the knowledge economy as the basic units of organisation of education giving emphasis to curriculum; community, the home and the principles of cross-institutional interactions towards development of workforce (Facer and Sandford, 2010). Individual science teachers will need to assume a greater responsibility in influencing the students’ awareness of careers in science by engaging student in authentic learning contexts and providing key information essential for students’ advanced career goals (Munro and Elsom, 2000).

Considering the attempts taken by developed and successful post-war economies like the European Union it is important that Indian and Malaysian school education systems adopt principles of constructivism in supporting quality benchmarking in education and knowledge societies in these countries in an effort to create such composite quality indicators in educational performance. Windschitl (2002) emphasised the positive link between progressive pedagogies and language of constructivism. Hashweh (1996) investigated 35 science teachers’ beliefs and teaching practice and found that their constructivist beliefs and constructivist behaviours had a connection. In order to compete with developed countries such as the US, UK, Australia and the European Union in the globalised labour market and internationalised economy, India and Malaysia have to strengthen their quality education adding all features of international English education, without losing their social capital vigour. That is, through recognising that ‘economic globalisation and cultural homogenisation and the commodification of cultural difference’ happen side by side (Gough, 2007). Changes in science learning approaches over years have been reviewed by Duschl (2008) who states that the nature of science as experimentation has changed to science as explanation and model building. Similarly individualistic processes in science have been changed to individual and social process. Above all science teaching no more focuses just on management of learners’ behaviours or on hands-on practices but to incorporation of learners’ ideas, their access to information, and learner interactions (Duschl, 2008). Based on these arguments adopting ideas and practices of Australian science education within the constructivist frameworks could be in line with the educational reforms of both the Indian and Malaysian science education so that the practices may enable these countries to address issues of meaningful learning as and quality of student assessment. In addition, attempts to implement reforms should be compounded by professional development programmes. As Luft and Roehrig (2007) noted, even experienced teachers as they undergo professional development programmes aimed at equipping them with new methods of teaching and learning, can develop reform based beliefs. However exploring teachers’ beliefs and practices are important for understanding their need for improvement.

Another such priority that has been identified by the Indian national curriculum framework (National Council of Educational Research and Training, 2005). is the dominance of impact evaluation in the current system that consists of annual examinations that measure skill development of learners whereas evaluation of affective domains has been given less importance. As such much attention has been drawn to developing curriculum and student assessment strategies that focus on student overall performance. As reported by the Melbourne Declaration of Education (2008), Australia currently possess a schooling system that is benchmarked as superior

Page 16 of 23

to other countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), with a ranking of among the top 10 countries across the three education domains assessed. However there is a need to address that the demand for ‘highly talented, well-educated science, technology and mathematics teachers’ (Ranck et al., 2006, p. 29) is adequately met by the school education system, in attempt to increase student interest towards STEM. A major challenge for Malaysian education would be to overcome the limitations in traditional teaching practice that involves lecture-based instruction and teacher-centred instruction (Zakaria and Iksan, 2006) and reforms can only be attained if the new reform is accepted by the learners and teachers in an internationally viable context. Such reforms are pertinent for Malaysian science education also so that they can continue to pave way for implementing science educational concepts and practices from Australia and India, and there is no need to delineate English education from the Vision 2020. What has been resolved from this argument is that various debates on the learning and usage of English language have happened among Malaysian academics who have predicted national prosperity through science education in English. Hence an important goal for Malaysian Science curriculum developers is to primarily develop the view that learners need to be English literate if they want to become part of the globalised scientifically literate community.

It is vital to look explore teacher beliefs about reforms as traditional beliefs can prevent teachers from enacting curricular reforms such as constructivism (Battista, 1994).

As Yates (2006) reported such beliefs could even be unrelated to teaching and learning. Orienting the teaching of STEM through learner centred approaches has been considered a key element that distinguishes the western model curriculum of Australian education from the teacher cantered educational approaches implemented in India and Malaysia. Czerniak (1990) reported that highly successful teachers are more likely to use constructivist methods like inquiry and student-centred teaching. However, teacher beliefs have been recognised as influencing factors on their teaching practices (Kagan, 1992, Pajares, 1992, Hashweh, 1996, Handal and Herrington, 2003 and Gilakjani et al., 2013).

Since the current Indian and Malaysian educational approaches are wanting in terms of student opportunities for constructing knowledge, STEM education policies in these countries must be shaped based on constructivist educational theories and incorporating restructuring of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment so that a deeper understanding of how and why learning processes in STEM take place as a useful way towards economic productivity can be attained. As Cochran-Smith (2003) suggested teachers in learning societies must adopt new knowledge and practices along with discarding old beliefs and practices that are not in alignment with their new knowledge.

For Australia on the other hand, the best practice will be to explore pedagogical practices in the Indian science education in order to develop a viable educational framework that can solve the issues of science learning and teaching and especially as Schulz (2009) suggested, to exploit the capacity of educated mind to coordinate with the aims of science education and cultural literacy. In other words, learning activities that promote scientific conversations including talk, activity structures, signs and symbol systems’, the so called ‘conversations’ (Duschl, 2008, p. 280) must be strong enough for enquiry and conceptual formation. Such scientific inquiry and scientific reasoning activities are discussed as facilitated by ‘epistemological, cultural, and technological factors’ (Duschl, 2008, p. 280). An alternative to a pure constructivist approach is curricular model with emphasis on knowledge and enquiry that enable meaningful scientific communication between teachers and learners.

It has to be pointed out that the goal of Indian STEM education is provision of different levels of curricula such as the state, CBSE and ICSE that enable students with various academic and

Page 17 of 23

intellectual competencies to opt the standard of school education that they want to and enter into competitive programmes of study and examinations; however Australia and Malaysia has not attempted this approach and the curriculum still remains just within the standardised constructivist domains without opportunities for access to different levels of knowledge based learning. Another expression that can be considered suitable for application and experimentation in Australian educational situations is the one by Cobern (1994) who argued, learners compartmentalise the scientific knowledge they learn in classrooms acknowledging that the knowledge can be dogmatic, may not be pragmatic or can be just useful for performing in examinations. In general irrespective of socio-economic backgrounds the Indian learners’ attainment of knowledge can be considered as example.

Further, the role of learner reflection that is inevitable for effective processes of knowledge integration, has been minimal in Indian school class rooms (Davis, 2003). However this is a unique setting that could be analysed and such an analysis could be useful in respect of handling individual differences and the effects of socio-economic backgrounds in motivation towards learning in the Australian classrooms. The Melbourne Declaration of Education (2008) has given accounts of how Australian school education has been compared to world class schooling systems, which is under representation of Australian students from low socioeconomic backgrounds in the high achievers group and over representation of low achievers from similar backgrounds.

There has been an exception at the Indian tertiary educational levels where the learner actually tests much of the previous knowledge gathered at the school level for constructing his or her knowledge. Cobern (1994) argued that such a worldview can influence the thoughts and behaviours of learners and that the learner would be able to construct knowledge about the world. Just as education is interdisciplinary (Duit, 2007), to a good learner, knowledge about the world is inseparable from the knowledge about the various scientific and technological processes of teaching and learning that happens in the world. The personal biographies of learners can in fact influence this knowledge acquisition at all levels (Robottom and Norhaidah, 2009). Robottom and Norhaidah (2009) have emphasised that an individual's learning could be affected by his or her personal biography which is beyond the control of constructivist domains or influences of teachers. Hellermann et al. (2001) moreover, argue how to handle diverse personal biographies, which is reflected in their research. Above all, international research suggests that science education should track and align with teacher beliefs throughout their practice (Luft and Roehrig, 2007).

Summary

Until now it is unclear for Australian educators if there is a real remedy for the decline of learner interest towards STEM educators that would lead to better outcomes. A conception of national priorities, post-colonial constraints, educational theories, educational practices as well as the role of educators and socio cultural factors that are relevant for learner attitudes and interest towards STEM education and enrolment has been presented in this paper towards offering science educators in India, Malaysia and Australia several implications to follow towards enhancing economic productivity. First, given that in international and globalised educational market that adopts bilingual or even trilingual education as practised in many Indian states, no differences in learners’ conceptualisation of scientific concepts is visible, these arguments indicate the need for a shift from strictly constructivist domains of education towards a system that is flexible enough to understand and adopt other features such as bilingual education, emphasis to knowledge and socio culturally strong foundations including the linking of family, society and social capital to education. It also mentions that Australian education needs to draw on a larger range of features such as broader competencies of educators and skills of maintaining scientific learning oriented communication in the class room rather than their English language skills and general communication capabilities. In particular greater emphasis must be given to teacher–learner

Page 18 of 23

interactions and learner home cultures in order to produce the best cultural processes for maximising constructivist learning in Australian classrooms. These discussions provide a background that enables Australian educators to bring issues of learner interest towards STEM learning and enrolment. Malaysia on the other hand needs to address curricular reforms taking into consideration of the broader issues of constructivist science education in English and without losing the spirit of Malaysian culture and Malay language. International Science education must focus on improving scientific learning with a combination of four domains – English language as medium of instruction, linking of cultural aspects for national economic benefits and presenting learners with meaningful constructivist learning opportunities, developing competency of teachers through professional development for influencing learner biographies.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge use of the services, funds and facilities of the Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.

REFERENCES

Appleton, K., Ginns, I. S., & Watters, J. J. (2000). The development of preservice elementary science teacher education in Australia In S. K. Abell (Ed.), Science teacher education: An international perspective (Vol. 10, pp. 9-29). Hingham, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2010). The shape of the Australian Curriculum, Version 2.0. Sydney. Retrieved February 04, 2011 from http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Shape_of_the_Australian_Curriculum.pdf

Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). (2005). Socioeconomic factors and school sector influence tertiary entrance scores. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from http://www.acer.edu.au/media/socioeconomic-factors-and-school-sector-influence-tertiary-entrance-scores/

Ali, A., & Shubra, C. (2010). Efforts to reverse the trend of enrolment decline in computer science programs: Issues in informing science and information. Technology, 7, 209-224.

Alton-Lee, A. (2006). How teaching influences learning: Implications for educational researchers, teachers, teacher educators and policy makers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(5), 612-626.

Baker, C. (2009). Australia’s workforce ‘skills gap’. Spring Hill, Qld: Australian Institute of Management.

Baker, D. P., Goesling, B. & Letendre, G. K. (2002). Socioeconomic status, school quality, and national economic development: A cross-national analysis of the ‘Heyneman-Loxley Effect’ on mathematics and science achievement. Comparative Education Review, 46(3), 291-312.

Baskaran, L. M. (2002). Whose English? Whose/What standard? The role of English in Malaysia. Paper published at International Conference IPBA 24-26 September 2002. Retrieved December 03, 2010, from apps.emoe.gov.my/ipba/rdipba/cd1/article131.pdf

Cazden, C. B. (n. d). The language of teaching and learning. Retrieved January 21, 2011, from http://www.wou.edu/~girodm/library/cazden.pdf

Cobern, W. W. (1994). Worldwide theory and conceptual change in science education. Science Education, 80(5), 579-610.

Page 19 of 23

Cloke, C, Sharif, S., & Ambotang, A. S. (2006). A qualitative study of pedagogical issues arising from the introduction of the Malaysian smart school initiative. Journal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, Jil. 21, 129-147.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG), (2008). http://www.coag.gov.au/coag_meeting_outcomes/2008-07-03/index.cfm

Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds) (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Davis, E.A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 91-142.

Dhar, A. (2012). Indian students fare poorly in international evaluation test, The Hindu. Retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2804134.ece

Duit, R. (2007). Science education research internationally: Conceptions, research methods, domains of research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(1), 3-15.

Duschl, R (2008). Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing, Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268-291.

Elías, C. (2009). The decline of natural sciences: Confronting diminishing interest, fewer scientists and poorer working conditions in western countries. A comparative analysis between Spain and the United Kingdom. Papers: Revista de Sociologia, 93, 69-79.

Facer, K., & Sandford, R. (2010). The next 25 years?: Future scenarios and future directions for education and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 74-93

Gilbert, J.K., Bulte, A.M.W & Pilot, A (2011). Concept development and transfer in context based Science education, International Journal of Science Education, 33 (6), 817-837.

Goodrum, D., & Rennie, L. J. (2008). Australian School Science Education National Action Plan 2008 -2012. Retrieved September 04, 2011 from http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/94684C4C-7997-4970-ACAC-5E46F87118D3/18317/Volume1final_28August2008.pdf

Gough, N (2007). All around the world science education, constructivism and globalisation, B. Atweh et al. (Eds.), Internationalisation and globalisation in Mathematics and Science Education, (pp. 39-55). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Government of India (1998). National policy on Education. Retrieved September 04, 2011 from http://education.nic.in/policy/npe86-mod92.pdf

Hackling, M. W., & Prain, V. (2005). Primary connections stage 2 trial: Research Report. Canberra, ACT: Australian Academy of Science. Retrieved February 6 2012 http://www.science.org.au/reports/documents/pcreport1.pdf

Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference, what is the research evidence? Paper presented at the Australian Council for Educational Research Conference, Building teacher quality: What does the research tell us?. Retrieved September 04, 2011 from http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2003/4

Hellermann, J., Cole, K. M., & Zuengler, J. (2001). Developing thinking communities through talk: Two case studies from science classes. (CELA Research Report). Albany, NY: National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement, University at Albany, State University of New York.

Page 20 of 23

Irez, A. (2007). Reflection-oriented qualitative approach in beliefs research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(1), 17-27.

India rising, (2010). TWAS Newsletter, 22(3) 10-21, Available online at http://twas.ictp.it/publications/nl/2010-volume-22/twas-newsletter-vol-22-no-3

Jones, M. G., & Brader-Araje, L. (2002). The impact of constructivism on education: Language, discourse, and meaning. American Communication Journal, 5(3), 1-9.

Jones, M.G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84(2), 180-192.

Kabilan, M. K. (2007). English language teachers reflecting on reflections: A Malaysian experience. TESOL Quarterly, 41(4), 681-705.

Kingdon, G. G. (2007). The progress of school education in India. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(2), 168-195. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/grm015.

Lee, M. N. N. (1999). Education in Malaysia: Towards Vision 2020. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(1), 86-98.

Lyons, T. (2006). Different Countries, Same Science Classes: Students' experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591-613.

Malaysia Government’s official portal. (2011). National education system, Retrieved October 15, 2010, from http://www.malaysia.gov.my/EN/RelevantTopics/Education and Learning/NonCitizen/nTheNationalEducationSystem/Pages/NationalEducationSystem.aspx

Mallikarjun, B. (2001). Language(s) in the school curriculum: challenges of the new millennium, Language in India 1 (4). Retrieved September 05, 2011 from http://www.languageinindia.com/junjulaug2001/school.html

Matthews, M. R. (2004), The Impact of Idealist and Relativist Philosophies of Science on Contemporary Science Education Research. In Ramadas, J and Chunawala, S, Review talks delivered at epiSTEME-1, an international conference to review research on Science, Technology and Mathematics Education December 13-17, International Centre, Goa.

Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians, 2008. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs.

McKenzie, P., Kos, J., Walker, M., & Hong J. (2008). Staff in Australian schools. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations

Meganathan, R. (2009). English Language Education in Rural Schools of India: The Situation, the Policy and the Curriculum. Message posted to http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/blogs/rama-meganathan/english-language-education-rural-schools-india-situation-policy-curriculum.

National Council of Educational Research and Training (2005). Education policies and curriculum at the upper primary and secondary education levels. In D. B. Rao (Ed.) Globalization and living together. (pp. 149-163). Delhi, India: Discovery Publishing House.

Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., Novak, J. D. (2005). Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.

Mitchell, I., & Mitchell, J. (2009). The project for enhancing effective learning (PEEL): 22 years of praxis. In A. P. Samaras, A. R. Freese, C. Kosnik & C. Beck (Eds.), Learning communities in practice (pp. 7-18). Dordrich, Netherlands: Springer.

Page 21 of 23

Monk, D. H. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13(2), 125-145.

Munro, M. & David, E. (2000). Choosing science at 16: The influence of science teachers and career advisers on students’ decisions about science subjects and science and technology careers. NICEC briefing, Careers Research and Advisory Centre, Cambridge (England).

National Council of Educational Research and Training. (n. d). India: Education policies and curriculum at the upper primary and secondary education levels, Retrieved August 07, 2011 from http://india.mit.edu/~varun_ag/readinggroup/images/9/9c/Secondary_Education.pdf

OECD (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments first results from TALIS. Paris: Organisation for Economic and Cultural Development.

Osakwe, R. N. (2009). Dimensions of communication as predictors of effective classroom interaction. Stud Home Comm Sci, 3(1), 57-61.

Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079.

Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections, A Report to the Nuffield Foundation, p. 1-30. Retrieved July 11, 2011from http://www.pollen-europa.net/pollen_dev/Images_Editor/Nuffield%20report.pdf

Ranck, H., Clark, M., & Høj, P. (2006). Strengthening Australia’s position in the new world order: Report of the working group on Asia. Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering andInnovation Council (PMSEIC). Retrieved August 07, from http://www.innovation.gov.au/Science/PMSEIC/PMSEICMeetings/Documents/PMSEICWGonAsiaFinalReport.pdf

Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417-458.

Robottom, I., & Norhaidah, S. (2009), Western science and Islamic learners: When disciplines and culture intersect, Journal of Research in International Education, 7, 148 -163.

Rojas-Drummond, S. (2000). Guided participation, discourse and the construction of knowledge in Mexican classrooms, In H. Cowie and G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp.193-213). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

Rollnick, M. (2000). Current issues and perspectives on second language learning of science, Studies in Science Education 35, 93-122.

Roth, K., & Garnier, H. (2006). What science teaching looks like: An international perspective. Educational Leadership, 64(4), 16-23.

Roth, F. & Thum, A. (2010). The Key Role of Education in the Europe 2020 Strategy, CEPSWorking Document No. 338/October 2010, Retrieved 07 August 2011 from http://www.ceps.eu.

Schulz, R.M (2009), Reforming Science Education: Part I. The Search for a Philosophy of Science Education, Science & Education, 18, 225–249.

Shukla, R. (2005). India science report, science education, human resources and public attitude towards science and technology. p.137.

Page 22 of 23

Sikdar, M., & Bhojwani, L. (2010). Role of technology in constructionist classrooms, Retrieved June 17, 2011 from http://www.educationinindia.net/download/mandira-sikdar. pdf.

Sjøberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2005). How do learners in different cultures relate to Science and technology? Results and perspectives from the project ROSE (the Relevance of Science Education). APFSLT: Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 6(2), p.1.

Sulaiman, T., Hassan, A., & Baki, R. (2009). Readiness of year 1 students to learn Science process skills in English: A Malaysian experience. International Journal of Instruction (2)1, 17-26. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from http://www.eiji.net/dosyalar/iji_2009_1_2.pdf.

Taber, K. (2006). Constructivism’s new clothes: The trivial, the contingent, and a progressive research programme into the learning of science. Foundations of Chemistry, 8(2), 189-219.

Taylor, P. C. S., Tobin, K. G., & Cobern, W. W. (1994). The classroom as a sociocultural site: Toward more insightful understandings of ways of knowing and acting. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, CA.

The Royal Society. (2010). The Scientific Century: Securing our future prosperity. London: The Royal Society. Retrieved August 18, 2011 from http://royalsociety.org/the-scientific-century/

Tytler, R, Symington, D & Smith, C. (2011). A curriculum innovation framework for science, technology and mathematics education. Research in Science Education, 41 (1), 19-38.

Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Clark, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the Primary-Secondary school transition (Report to Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations). Melbourne: Deakin University.

UNESCO, (1999). Declaration on science and the use of scientific knowledge. In A. M.Cetto,. (Ed.) Science for the 21st Century, a new commitment: Proceedings of the World Conference on Science, Budapest (pp. 462-467). Paris: Retrieved August 16, 2011 from UNESCO.http://www.unesco.org/science/wcs/eng/declaration_e.htm

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2012). Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties. Retrieved 23 May 2013 from http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a01.pdf#page=2

Von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, New York: Teachers College Press.

Walker, M. (2011). Pisa 2009 Plus Results: Performance of 15-year-olds in reading, mathematics and science for 10 additional participants. Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Wright, J. (chair) (2002). National professional standards for highly accomplished teachers of science. Canberra, ACT: Australian Science Teachers Association.

YouthLearn Initiative (US). A guide to inquiry-based learning. [online]. Agora; v.44 n.1 p.4-11; 2009. Retrieved September 01, 2011 from http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=174497;res=AEIPT> ISSN: 0044-6726.

Zakaria, E. & Iksan, Z. (2006). Promoting Cooperative Learning in Science and Mathematics Education: A Malaysian Perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(1), 35-39.

Page 23 of 23

Zin, S. M. S. (2003). Reforming the science and technology curriculum: The smart school initiative in Malaysia. Prospects, 33(1), 39-50. DOI: 10:1023/A:1022608230500.