International Journal of Educational

Science and Research (IJESR)

ISSN(P): 2249-6947; ISSN(E): 2249-8052
Vol. 6, Issue 2, Apr 2016, 25-34
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR EFFECTIVE DELIVERY OF

PRACTICALS IN SCIENCE TEACHING IN THE STATE OF QATAR
ZIAD SAID
College of the North Atlantic, Doha, Qatar
ABSTRACT
The current paper aims to present a suggested, and currently implemented, plan to develop a framework that
can integrate practical science activities within the teaching and learning process of school science. The final objective
is to extend students knowledge toward understanding of natural world, main concepts, ideas and scientific theories by
introducing an effective system for practicing these activities that are designed to be both hands on and mind on.
The plan is based on training in the first stage (pilot) a group of 24 science teachers from randomly selected 8
schools (8 teachers from each discipline-Biology, chemistry and Physics) over a period of academic years (80-90
hours). In year II the same numbers of teachers are selected from primary and preparatory schools. Evaluation of the
program is based on both teachers and students performances before and after training, compared also with students
and teachers from four schools who are identified as being average in students achievement in the national
standardized examinations
KEYWORDS: Science Practicals, Teachers, Practical Delivery, Training, Inquiry-Based

Received: Jan 13, 2016; Accepted: Mar 04, 2016; Published: Mar 11, 2016; Paper Id.: IJESRAPR20164

INTRODUCTION

teaching and learning. It is an effective way to enhance students motivation and extend their knowledge in
understanding theories and ideas about natural world. It is also a well-known fact that students prefer practical
work to any other learning activities. However, students do not always learn from a practical task the things their
teachers want them to learn. According to Millar and Abrahams (2009) A few weeks after carrying out a practical
task most students recall only specific surface details of the task and many are unable to say what they learned

Original Article

There is no doubt that practical work in science at schools is widely accepted as a vital component of

from it, or what they were doing it for (p. 59). Practical work is essential only when it is used effectively. The
above authors considered the effective practical as the one that is designed to link the objectives of what students
are intended to learn and what they are intended to do; to what students actually learn and what they actually do in
a process that involves both learning and assessment (p.60).
Definition of Practical Work
In an extensive review of research on practical work in school science, undertaken by Dillon (Dilon 2008)
the author indicated that researchers and educators, give different meanings for practical work in science and uses a
variety of terms to describe science practical.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

26

Ziad Said

Of these commonly used terms practical and enquiry skills, practical and investigative activities,
independent enquiry and experimental work. Dillon selected an inclusive definition to clarify the confusion learning
experiences in which students interact with materials or with secondary sources of data to observe and understand the
natural world(p.5)
Millar stated that he used the term practical work to refer to any teaching and learning activity which at some
point involves the students in observing or manipulating the objects and materials they are studying. He preferred the
term practical work rather than laboratory work because location is not a critical feature in characterizing this kind of
activity. The observation or manipulation of objects might take place in a school laboratory, but could also occur in an
out-of-school setting, such as the students home or in the field (e.g. when studying aspects of biology or Earth science)
(Millar 2004 p.2)
The British Science Community Representing Education (a collaboration of leading science organizations)
SCORE has very recently (SCORE 2013) defined practical work in science education as learning activities in which
students observe, investigate and develop an understanding of the world around them, through direct, often hands-on,
experience of phenomena(p.2).
In an earlier report (2008) SCORE has divided practical activities into three broader categories:
Core activities, directly related activities and complementary activities. Core activities include Investigations,
laboratory procedures and techniques, and fieldwork. Directly related activities include: Designing and planning
investigations, data analysis using ICT, Analyzing results, teacher demonstrations and experiencing phenomena.
Complementary activities include:
Science-related visits, surveys, presentations and role play, simulations including use of ICT models and
modeling, group discussion, and group text-based activities.
Science Education in Qatar - Preliminary Data
Qatar has made major improvements in the Education and Training Sector, yet there is still a need for continued
development. According to a released document by the supreme education council, SEC (supreme Education Council
2012) An analysis of the current situation of the education system shows that Qatar still faces challenges affecting both
supply and demand for education and training and linkage to the labor market. The challenges include: (1) the
underachievement of Qatari students in math, science and English language at all levels; (2) weaknesses in educational
administration and the preparation and development of teachers (p.8).
Teachers in Qatari schools pay little attention to practical activities although the curriculum standards recommend
that 25-35% of the evaluation should be devoted to inquiry based processes (Supreme education council 2005). However,
practical activities are supervised and directed by teachers in some schools based on the availability of time and rarely
planned on a regular basis, and when carried out they mostly follow recipes available in manuals or taken from the
internet. Recently (during academic year 2014-2015) the supreme education council has directed all primary and
preparatory schools to follow supplementary materials in a form of manuals, published originally in English by McGraw
Hill/Macmillan companies and translated to Arabic. Each manual covers lab experiments related to some topics from a
grade. Several important features and ideas are lost in a word to word translation. The experiments are mostly recipes
with little emphasis on major ideas or principles. However, many of the experiments in the primary and preparatory
Impact Factor (JCC): 4.3912

NAAS Rating: 2.72

Developing a Framework for Effective Delivery of Practicals in Science Teaching in the State of Qatar

27

manuals are well constructed, but to what extent teachers implement the tasks in these experiments? And if they do, how
effective their implementations are reflected on developing students knowledge and understanding of ideas and theories,
or acquiring practical skills and/or understanding inquiry investigations?.
Existing Published Data
In its 2008 report The Road not Traveled - Education in the Middle East and North Africa, the World Bank
indicated that only 20% of university students in most Arab countries are enrolled in science and engineering versus about
70% in social sciences and humanities; in Qatar, 19.1% are enrolled, primarily in engineering fields (World Bank, 2008).
Qatar Universitys statistical summary substantiates the World Bank finding, indicating that over recent years less than
12% of students are annually enrolled in science and engineering programs (Qatar University, 2008, 2009, 2012).
Unfortunately, as is established with supporting empirical evidence below, the current state of affairs as far as
school graduates who opt to enroll in scientific disciplines at the University of Qatar is rather disconcerting, to say the
least: It is not at all clear how a nation can hope to build and later sustain scientific R&D activities when its sole national
university offering science programs cannot claim a single student graduate majoring in the fields of physics or geology
and only 5 biology and 6 chemistry majors in the 20011-2012 academic year compared with 99, 91, 77, and 71 in history,
finance, accounting and Arabic language respectively (figure 1).

Figure 1: 2011-2012 Qatar University Graduates from Chemistry and Biology Undergraduate
Programs Compared With Those From Some Humanities and Business Programs. Physics and
Geology Programs are not offered since 2007
Source: figure generated from data published in Qatar University fact book (2012)
Figure 2, generated from data in tables published by Qatar University, office of strategic planning, shows a steady
decline in the number of students enrolments in science programs over a period of 13 years at the university (the only
national university that offers natural science programs) despite a steady increase in total number of university students.
This decline has led to nearly suspension of science programs at the university with no existence of similar programs in
other international universities which have opened campuses in the country during the last decade although there are
programs in engineering and medical disciplines at these universities. However, Biology department at Qatar University
(changed name to Biological and Environmental studies) has attracted some students in the last two year to study biology
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

28

Ziad Said

and environmental science. According to QU statistics (2013) the number of students enrolled this academic year is 54
students at all levels including some postgraduate students. The department staff attributed the enrolment of this modest
number to the opening of postgraduate program the only program in science, among other factors.

Figure 2: Enrolment in Science and Math Programs at Qatar University (1998-2011)

Based on numerical data Source: Qatar University statistics of different years (Qatar university statistics 2008,
2009 and 2012) -. Number corresponding to each year represents all registered students at all levels (1st - 4th year) for
example in chemistry there were 30 students in total but no new registered student
Since science and technology are often perceived as fundamental forces behind economic growth of developed
countries, the Qatar National Vision 2030 (General Secretariat of Development Planning, 2010) stated that Qatar to
become a developed nation and move towards a knowledge-based economy, requires considering science, mathematics
(and consequently technology) as important subjects to excel in. Further, the labor market strategy report prepared by the
world Bank for the state of Qatar states that to achieve that goal, the real solution rests on Qataris acquiring the right
education, skills and motivation that would enable them to engage in high productivity jobs (World Bank, 2009).
Qatar has made major improvements in the Education and Training Sector, yet there is still a need for continued
development. According to the previously mentioned document (supreme education council 2012) An analysis of the
current situation of the education system shows that Qatar still faces challenges affecting both supply and demand for
education and training and linkage to the labor market. The challenges include: (1) the underachievement of Qatari
students in math, science and English language at all levels; (2) weaknesses in educational administration and the
preparation and development of teachers (p.8). The first point is evidenced by the weak performances of Qatari
students in international tests such as PISA and TIMMS that indicate low performance of Qatari students in all cycles in
which they participated (Table 1).
Table 1: Percentage of Students at Each Proficiency Level on the Science Scale (PISA 2006, 2009 & 2012)
Year
2006
2009
2012

Mean*
Score
349
379
384

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.3912

Below
Level 1**
47.6
36.4
34.6

Level-1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5

Level 6

31.5
28.8
28.0

13.9
18.8
19.6

5.0
9.0
11.2

1.6
4.8
5.1

0.3
1.3
1.3

0.0
0.1
0.0
NAAS Rating: 2.72

Developing a Framework for Effective Delivery of Practicals in Science Teaching in the State of Qatar

29

* The OECD average is 500-501 over the three cycles

** At Level 1, students have such a limited scientific knowledge that it can only be applied to a few, familiar
situations. They can present scientific explanations that are obvious and follow explicitly from given evidence
(Source: OECD PISA 2006 executive summary p. 20-2;, 2009, pp209,225) and (OECD 2009 p. 147) for 2012,
from http://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?primaryCountry=QAT&treshold=10&topic=PI Retrieved November 12,
2014.)
Prior to this current project the author has carried out a research project that gauged students interest in, and
attitude toward, science. One major factor for the declining interest in science courses uptake, among others, was found to
be the passive traditional modalities in science teaching that is still teacher centered with text books are the main resources
with a lack of hands-on activities despite the availability of well-equipped laboratories (Said & Friesen 2014, Said et al.
2014, Abd El Khalick et al. 2015).

OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSED PLAN

The objectives of this proposal are:

To explore the current use of science practical activities in science classes at independent schools in Qatar;

To identify factors that encourage the delivery of good quality practical work in school science and the barriers
that may inhibit it;

To develop a framework to encourage and support the effective use of practical work in school science in Qatar,
aligned to the national curriculum standards of science, and propose a strategy for its implementation.

METHOD APPLIED TO DEVELOP THE PLAN

The developed plan is part of a research project on developing a frame work for effective delivery of practicals in
science in alignment with K-12 curriculum standards of science subjects of independent schools in Qatar.
Research Questions

What are the barriers against implementing effective practical activities in science classes at precollege
independent schools in Qatar?

What academic and administrative issues and aspects are needed to be addressed to improve the quality and scope
of practical work across the grades?

How practical activities, recommended by the curriculum standards, are delivered in science classes at K-12
independent schools in Qatar (scope and quality)?

How will science teachers improve their practices, to make practical more effective, by participation in handson training programs linked to science curriculum standards? And how will their students benefit from their
teachers participation in these programs?

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

30

Ziad Said

METHODS
To answer questions 1 and 2, data are collected from a representative national probability sample of Qatari
independent school science teachers of grades 4, 8 and 11 accompanied by semi constructed interviews with a random
sample of teachers from various levels (Table 2).
To answer questions 3 and 4, the Method to be followed in this study is based on adopting a framework based on
a model, originally developed by Abrahams and Miller (2008). The model suggests processes of design and evaluation of
the practical tasks. It considers the effectiveness of the specific practical tasks at two interrelated levels that combine both
learning and doing. It is based on the belief that the fundamental purpose of practical work in school science is to help
students make links between the real world of objects, materials and events, and the abstract world of thought and ideas (
p.1948). The model is illustrated in figure 3.

Figure 3: Model of the Process of Design and Evaluation of a Practical Task (from Abraham and Millar 2008)
However, despite these interdependencies, the teacher aim plays the role in directing the main focus of the activity
(p.1949). This argument may lead to the conclusion that the degree of this interdependence, is dependent on what the
teacher focuses on. If the teachers aim is that students should develop their understanding of a scientific model or idea
then his assessment is based on what the students have learned (Level 2-Box D), if on the other hand the teacher focuses on
students ability to verify an observable phenomenon or process, then assessment is mainly based on students
understanding of how to deal with real data based on actual observation.
Schools and Teachers Selection: Sampling Procedure
The following procedure was followed in selecting schools and teachers. Table 2 shows the composition of the
first stage teachers and students involved.

Survey of about 500 science teachers from 72 schools selected randomly to include equal representation of the
three school levels (Primary, preparatory and secondary) from both genders at various geographical locations.

A randomly selected subsample of 40 teachers (10 primary, 10 preparatory and 20 secondary) will participate in
individual, semi-structured interviews aimed at eliciting their views on factors that they believe impact students
interest in, science and enhance their academic achievements; and their perceptions on practical activities barriers
and enablers.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.3912

NAAS Rating: 2.72

Developing a Framework for Effective Delivery of Practicals in Science Teaching in the State of Qatar

31

For practical class observations prior to teachers training, a sample consisting of 26 independent schools were
selected randomly; it includes equal representations from males and females schools. The target of these schools
are science teachers teaching grade 4 (for primary), grade 8 (for preparatory) and grade 11 for secondary. These
grades represent the middle grades at the three stages, students are selected from them in order to avoid
unfamiliarity of new students with school environment at early stage, while students in the final grade will
graduate and leave school which makes it difficult to follow up.

Many secondary school teachers teach more than one grade, and thus having the middle grade students moving to
the next grade with the same teacher will give more insight into the real teaching environment and assessment of
both students and teachers. Teachers and their students from 20 of these schools will be targeted as the treatment
group, while teachers and their students from other 6 schools will constitute the control group. Two teachers from
each school will be selected from each primary and preparatory school, and 3 teachers from each secondary
school, each representing one of the three science subjects (biology, chemistry and physics (table 2).

Program Evaluation

Laboratory class observations at the beginning and the end for each teacher

Assessing students perceptions and attitudes of science practical activities before and after teachers training
(comparing with control group)

Assessing Science Teachers perceptions and attitudes (self-report after training)

comparing results of teachers students in comprehensive national exam before and after training (comparing with
control group)
Table 2: Overview of the Target Teachers selected for Training and their Students
School Level
and (Grade)
Primary (4)
Preparatory (8)
Secondary (11)
Total

No. of Schools, Teachers and

Students (Treatment Group)
6 X 2 x 25
6 X 2 x 25
8 X 3 x 25
20 schools, 48 teachers and
1200 students.

No. of Schools, Teachers and

Students (Control Group)
2 X 2 x 25
2 X 2 x 25
2 X 3 x 25
6 schools, 14 teachers and
350 students

SUMMARY
A training program for science teachers is developed based on carefully designed plan that aims to integrate
practical activities within the process of teaching science at schools in alignment with curriculum standards..This program,
that is content focus and involves interactive and collective participation, offers an opportunity for science teachers to be
trained over a long training program to improve practical delivery part of the curriculum standards and enhance students
interests and skills.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to acknowledge and thank Qatar National Research Fund for supporting this research through the
National Priority Research Program (Grant no. NPRP 07-050-5-001).

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

32

Ziad Said

We are indebted to school teachers and science coordinators who participated in the survey and interviews, and to
the many principals, vice principals and science subject coordinators whose cooperation is essential to conduct this
research and implement the plan
REFERENCES
1.

Abd-El-Khalick, F., Summers, R., Said, Z., Wang, S., & Culbertson, M. (in press). Development and large-scale validation of
an instrument to assess Arabic speaking students attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education. DOI:
10.1080/09500693.2015.1098789

2.

Abrahams, I. and Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a
teaching and learning method in school science International Journal of Science Education, 30(14),1945-1969.

3.

Dillon, J. (2008). Review of the Research on Practical Work in School Science A review prepared for Science Community
Representing Education (SCORE).

4.

General Secretariat for Development Planning. (2008). Qatar national vision 2030. Doha: Qatar Millar, R. and Abraham, I.
(2009). Practical Work: making it more effective. Science School Research 91(334) 59-64.

5.

Millar, R.(2004). The Role of Practical work in the teaching and learning of sciencePaper presented for the meeting on
High School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC 3-4 June 2004.

6.

Qatar University. (2008). Qatar University Office of Institutional Planning & Development: Statistics fall 2008. Retrieved
from www.qu.edu.qa

7.

Qatar University. (2009). Qatar University Office of Institutional Planning & Development: Statistics fall 2009. Retrieved
from www.qu.edu.qa

8.

Qatar University (2012). Qatar University fact book. Office of Institutional Planning & Development Fact book. Retrieved
from www.qu.edu.qa

9.

Said, Z., and. Friesen.H. (2013)."The impact of educational reform on science and mathematics education in Qatar".
European Scientific Journal 9, 19 (2013).

10. Said, Z. Friesen, H., & Al-Ezzah, H. (July 2014) The Importance of Practical Activities in School Science: Perspectives of
Independent School Teachers in Qatari Schools. The 5th International Conference on Education and New Learning
Technologies EDULEARN13,

Barcelona, Spain. Proceedings, 4847-4856 ISBN: 978-84-617-0557-3. SCORE (2008).

Practical Work in Science: a report and proposal for a strategic Framework Accessed from http://www.scoreeducation.org/about-score
11. SCORE

(2013).

Resourcing

Practical

Science

at

Primary

Level

Accessed

from

http://score-

education.org/policy/curriculum/practical-work-in-science
12. Supreme Education council (2012) Education and Training Sector Strategy 2011-2016 Executive Summary (p.8) Available at
http://www.sec.gov.qa/En/about/Documents/Stratgy2012E.pdf
13. OECD(2007).

Science

Competencies

for

Tomorrows

World,

PISA

2006.

Retrieved

from

Retrieved

from

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/20/39704105.xls
14. OECD

(2007).

Science

Competencies

for

Tomorrows

World.

PISA

2006.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/20/39704105.xls

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.3912

NAAS Rating: 2.72

Developing a Framework for Effective Delivery of Practicals in Science Teaching in the State of Qatar

33

15. OECD (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and
Science (Volume I). Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en
16. The World Bank (2008). The Road Not Traveled: Education Reform in the Middle East and North Africa ISBN: 978-08213-7062-9, Washington, D. C.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org