1. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FOUR LIFE SCIENCES PROJECTS IN 2006 EXPO COMPETITION with special reference to process skills and Learning Outcomes By MOLEFE, Leonard ‘Musetsi

2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE  Overview of the study  Three–parts focus research question  Definition of key concepts  Research design  Data analysis  Pilot studies: preliminary evidence and analysis  Acknowledgements

3. OVERVIEW The current research study:  Presents Cape Town Science Expo participants’ attainment of process skills (PSs) and Learning Outcomes (LOs) of NCS Life Sciences (2003) in their novel in–depth investigations in science:  My focus: accuracy, quality, complexity and levels of attainment of PSs and Life Sciences knowledge.  My special interests: English second language learners.

4.  Theory: Students are expected to be able to use and develop skills within the context of an expanding framework of scientific knowledge (NCS Life Sciences 2003: 10). And many skill– type performances depend upon knowing and understanding the relevant content (So, 2003).  Analyses content and presentation of the investigative projects within the national curriculum context.

5. FOCUS RESEARCH QUESTION  In analyses of exhibits and presentations of 4 participants in the annual Cape Town Expo for young scientists, what consistent and stable evidence emerges for the attainment of PSs and LOs?  What insights can be gained from these analyses that might inform our current theoretical understanding of the nature of PSs and LOs in the context of high school science curriculum pedagogy?

6.  Can each of the four case studies be perceived as an icon or exemplar of a particular theoretical model of school science learning in action, e.g.,  constructivism (Driver, 1988; Yager, 1991; Driver & Scott, 1996; and Fetherston, 1997);  socio–affective competences in the South African science curricula (Green & Naidoo, 2006);  project–based learning (Thomas, 2000 and Diffily, 2002);  project–based science (Marx et al., 1997);  authentic assessment framework in the South African curricula (Kotzé, 2002); etc?

7. Medal–winning Exemplar: Expo project 1 – Boats

8. Medal–winning Exemplar: Expo Project 2 – Seaweeds

9. Definition of key concepts  Science fair/exposition/competition  Science process skills  Learning outcome  Scientific knowledge  Investigation  Scientific inquiry  Critical thinking

10. RESEARCH DESIGN Overall goal  To assess Expo students’ abilities to  plan, conduct and present their investigations and their scientific knowledge; and  to interpret, apply and/or construct that knowledge in their investigations (RNCS 2002: 7) in Life Sciences.

11. Data collection  Quantitative  Scores from my rating scales and checklists for the participants reports  Qualitative  Expo participants’ written investigative reports  Video–recorded interviews material  Participants’ coded questionnaire schedule, etc., to collect consistent and stable evidence for the acquisition of PS1–PS11.  The participants’ investigative reports: also evidence on acquisition of LO1–LO3.

12. Research method  Triangulation research methodology:  Written investigative projects reports  Case study individual interviews  Limited surveys involving checklists and rating scales  Coded questionnaire schedule  Recorded video material

13. Sampling strategy  All Life Sciences participants in 2006 ESKOM Expo competition held in August at University of Cape Town – select four as follows:  Rationale for the selection:  The researcher specialisation  Ethical and access reasons  Methodological reasons  Personal benefits for the Expo participants

14. DATA ANALYSIS  Future analyses:  Of quantitative data: quality of PSs and LOs in each case study.  Of qualitative data: emerging themes, issues and trends, categories and indicators

15. TWO PILOT STUDIES: preliminary evidence:  The study outcomes are:  Expo students’ proficiency in scientific PSs  Their systematic and logical inquiries and experimental work.  Successful attainment of LOs (particularly LO1 and LO2)

16. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  Professor Kevin Rochford, his supervisor, for his guidance, support, useful suggestions, constructive criticism and sacrificed unreserved availability.  The Spencer Doctoral Fellowship for the generous financial assistance.  The National Manpower Development Secretariat for granting him a scholarship.  Mrs Olga Peel, the Chairperson of the ESKOM Cape Town for young scientists, for granting me permission to use two medal–winning 2005 projects for the preliminary feasibility study.  The two 2005 gifted Expo students with whom I used their reports for the feasibility study.  The principals of the schools of the two students that participated in the feasibility study.