<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Moonika Teppo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Regina Soobard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Miia Rannikmäe</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">GRADE 6 &amp; 9 STUDENT AND TEACHER PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING AND LEARNING APPROACHES IN RELATION TO STUDENT PERCEIVED INTEREST/ENJOYMENT TOWARDS SCIENCE LEARNING</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">exploratory structural equation modelling</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">regression analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">social constructivism</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">student interest/enjoyment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">teaching-learning approaches</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">February/2021</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2021/987-1611649035.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">20</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Student perceptions of science teaching could be expected to differ in grade 6 compared with teaching in grade 9, as could student interest in science learning. To compare Estonian grades 6 and 9, lower secondary school student and science teacher perceptions of teaching/learning approaches as well as student perceived interests/enjoyment on science learning, an instrument was developed taken into account 18 different teaching approaches that could take place in science lessons. An analytical, exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) approach supported 4-factor models differentiating between teacher-centred and constructivist approaches for both teachers and students, each having acceptable model fits. Based on outcomes, a regression model was developed associating student interest to learn science with the frequency of teaching and learning approaches explored. Results indicated that approaches associated with teacher-centred approaches were those most frequently undertaken in science classes when compared with those seen as social constructivist and student-centred, both among science teachers and students. Regression analysis showed that there was a relationship between student interest/enjoyment towards science subjects and the frequency, in which different teaching and learning approaches took place in the classroom. </style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">119-133</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Moonika Teppo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Miia Rannikmäe</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">INCREASING THE RELEVANCE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION – STUDENT PREFERENCES FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF TEACHING SCENARIOS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">issue-based teaching</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">relevance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">STL teaching scenarios</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">March/2003</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2017/987-1503928836.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The goal of this study was to determine which issues were relevant to students and the reasons for this. Issues were presented in the form of scenarios – as a story that leads students into learning science by considering the wider goals of education. Three different categories of scenarios were defined: subject oriented, social issue-based focused on student personal experience and social issue-based, focused on global societal problems. All scenarios were developed by science teachers during a STL training course.

Two hundred and seventy two grade seven to nine students from two schools (suburban town and city) were asked to choose and evaluate the three most interesting scenarios from nine. The results of the study showed gender based differences. Girls were interested in issues that were connected with their health and outlook. Boys liked to study more about the things, which happen in society.

If we use the scenario as a “model” for relevance of science education for students, the following conclusions can be highlighted: 

·        Boys and girls see the relevance of science education differently and this depends also on age group. It is important to consider gender differences and students age group in designing teaching scenarios for the classroom. For making teaching more relevant for students, teachers should create various types of scenarios. Girls like to study more about things, which are connected with them (with their health and how they look). Boys are more eager to learn about problems that happen in the society (economical and environmental problems);

·        Students’ and teacher’s opinions on relevance differ. 1/3 of teacher created scenarios, were irrelevant in the eyes of students.  The outcomes show that the most uninteresting scenarios belong to the subject-oriented category (54% of students who answered this question didn’t like the subject oriented scenarios);

·        Students free reasoning helps to develop frames for creating relevant scenarios for teaching.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">49 - 61</style></section></record></records></xml>