<?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%">Jože Brecl</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kordigel Aberšek, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Borut Čampelj</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andrej Flogie</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">STEAM LEARNING AS A BASE FOR DEVELOPING COMMUNICATION SKILLS IN INCLUSIVE SCHOOLS</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%">collaboration-based learning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">communication skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">game-based learning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">inclusive school</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">innovative learning environment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">special educational needs (SEN)</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October/2024</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2023/987-1729494083.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">23</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%">This research addresses the problem of how to tackle STEM education and its transformation into STEAM education in an inclusive school. It highlights the need for communication competence in collaborative teaching supported by problem-based (PBL), project-based (PrBL) and game-based (GBL) learning. At the same time, it is necessary to highlight the importance of arts in all the listed innovative forms of learning and teaching, as teamwork and cooperation between the members of these teams are extremely important. The key competence of this participation in the mentioned forms of knowledge is communication competence, which is manifested in students' self-confidence/lack of self-confidence, in their level of well-being, collaboration, motivation, their active role and awareness.
The empirical research was conducted on a sample of eleven classes from six Slovenian-inclusive schools, with at least one student with SEN in each class. The research focused on the differences between students with and without SEN regarding their perception of STEAM lessons supported by gamification elements. The results showed that using innovative teaching methods can connect and positively affect STEAM, which, with the help of technology, engineering and art, consequently, improves a deeper understanding of the field of Science and Mathematics (S-tea-M).
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">854-866</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%">Oleg Popov</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sergey Bogdanov</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">THE COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PROSPECTIVE SCIENCE TEACHERS’ SKILLS OF WRITTEN EXPLANATION</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%">communication skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">comparative study</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science teacher education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">sociocultural context</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">March/2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2016/987-1481049750.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A comparative study of prospective teachers’ pedagogical skills of written communication in science is presented. Russian and Swedish students were asked to give detailed explanations of two simple physical phenomena (how and why the shadow from a tree appears and why the bulb lights in a torch) to a hypothetical Grade 7 pupil. The results of the questionnaire revealed the evident gap between the students’ knowledge per se and their abilities to express didactically their knowledge in written form and in pictures. Undoubtedly this is one of the challenges to teacher educators. The study also revealed the differences between forms and qualities of explanations given by Russian and Swedish students as the result of different pedagogical traditions and communication cultures. 
    The analysis of the findings from this study shows that the Russian prospective teachers had more problems with seeing themselves in the role of teacher than did the Swedish students. Russian participants of the study tended to answer the questions just as if they were students on a science course. Their explanations tended to be more academic and formalised than is appropriate for a Grade 7 pupil. In our opinion, this reflects the strict and formal style of teaching / learning which still dominates in Russian teacher education. For Russian students and teacher trainers, a correct answer is valued more highly than a good pedagogical form of presentation. Apparently, the skills of reworking knowledge and communication at the appropriate for children level are not systematically practiced in Russian teacher education.
     In contrast, in Swedish teacher education, students frequently work in small groups, often practising presentations at the children’s level. They generally feel quite comfortable in acting out different social roles and responsibilities. This reflects the conviction of Swedish teacher educators that learning about science should reflect a participatory and collaborative knowledge generating process. Thus, science education in Sweden is seen as a participatory activity in which teachers and learners share responsibility for learning. </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%">40-50</style></section></record></records></xml>