Does Practical Work Really Work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science

By I. Abrahams, R. Millar. 2008

716 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/12747823c0346f027da877a0d98509f6984fee2c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. J. Bennett
2. Gillian Hampden-Thompson
3. Bronwyn Bevan
4. Andrew McConney
5. R. Mamlok-Naaman
6. A. Woods-McConney
7. I. Abrahams
8. Janine Wilson

In Education

1. J. Bennett
2. Gillian Hampden-Thompson
3. P. Kind
4. R. Mamlok-Naaman
5. Avi Hofstein
6. Bronwyn Bevan
7. Dvora Katchevich
8. Andrew McConney

In Social Psychology

1. Gillian Hampden-Thompson
2. J. Bennett
3. Bronwyn Bevan
4. A. Woods-McConney
5. I. Abrahams
6. P. Kind

Citations in the corpus

• Science Teaching and Learning Activities and Students' Engagement in Science (2013, background): “For example, Abrahams and Millar (2008) suggested that much practical work in science classrooms seems to be preoccupied with pupils being able to ‘produce the intended phenomenon’ (p.”
• The promise and the promises of Making in science education (2017, background): “Despite the emphasis on the doing of science, Abrahams and Millar (2008) find that most practical work is usually focused on concepts and not on practices or the nature of scientific inquiry.”
• Argumentation in the Chemistry Laboratory: Inquiry and Confirmatory Experiments (2013, background): “Some researchers argue that in their laboratory activities, students spend much time gathering data, and as a result, their cognitive skills are less emphasized (Abrahams and Millar 2008; Kind et al. 2010; Watson et al. 2004).”
• Inquiry, Engagement, and Literacy in Science: A Retrospective, Cross-National Analysis Using PISA 2006 (2014, background): “Linking the two domains of ‘practical work’ and ‘ideas’ in science, Abrahams and Millar (2008) argued that “one does not simply ‘emerge’ from the other” (p. 1966) and that teachers’ skills at scaffolding enables better learning.”
• Does Practical Work Really Motivate? A study of the affective value of practical work in secondary school science (2009, background): “This study has also found (Abrahams & Miller, 2007 ) that practical tasks that formed memorable episodes (White, 1991 ) also shared these same characteristics.”
• Peer Argumentation in the School Science Laboratory—Exploring effects of task features (2011, background): “Abrahams and Millar (2008) observed 25 randomly selected laboratory lessons and found that teaching seemed well-functioning on the surface, as students gathered data and conducted activities as their teacher expected. However, students rarely reflected on their findings and methodology. Unsurprising”