Systematic Review: The Impact of Pedagogy on Equity in Science Education in Rural Schools
- 1 Faculty of Education, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
- 2 Faculty of Education, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
Abstract
The pedagogical impact on equity in science education is an interesting issue to be studied because it gives an overview of the delivery of science education to the community. The concept of equity in science education requires people to have equal rights for quality science education regardless of their geographical location, gender, and socio-economic factors. Systematic review was used to gather empirical studies on pedagogical issues related to science education. Systematic reading was done via databases such as Google Scholar, ERIC and SAGE. The articles were then filtered using PRISMA 2009 Flow Diagram before they went through another filtering process using the six elements in research that adapted from McDermott et al . (2004) . Systematic research has found that teacher pedagogy influences the concept of equity in science education in rural schools. The previous studies found there is still a gap in rural school science education to meet science education standards. However, teachers and students are still positive in science learning because the effectiveness of science education depends on the wisdom of teachers in choosing teaching strategies.
- Agbo, F. O., & Isa, A. A. M. (2017). Scientific Skills and Concept Learning by Rural Women for Personal and National Development. Science Education International, 28, 128-135.
- Alabdulkareem, S. A. (2016). The Impact of Science Teachers’ Beliefs on Teaching Science: The Case of Saudi Science Teachers. Journal of Education and Learning, 5, 233-249. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n2p233
- Avery, L. M., & Kassam, K. A. (2011). Phronesis: Children’s Local Rural Knowledge of Science and Engineering. Journal of Research in Rural Education (Online), 26, 1.
- Blatchford, P., Baines, E., Rubie-Davies, C., Bassett, P., & Chowne, A. (2006). The Effect of a New Approach to Group Work on Pupil-Pupil and Teacher-Pupil Interactions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 750. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.750
- Caleon, I. S., & Subramaniam, R. (2008). Attitudes towards Science of Intellectually Gifted and Mainstream Upper Primary Students in Singapore. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45, 940-954. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20250
- Cooper, M. M. (2015). Why Ask Why? Journal of Chemical Education, 92, 1273-1279. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00203
- Dewan, B. P. (2005). Kamus Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Edisi ke empat. Kuala Lumpur.
- Dublin, R., Sigman, M., Anderson, A., Barnhardt, R., & Topkok, S. A. (2014). COSEE-AK Ocean Science Fairs: A Science Fair Model That Grounds Student Projects in Both Western Science and Traditional Native Knowledge. Journal of Geoscience Education, 62, 166-176. https://doi.org/10.5408/12-411.1
- Good, T. L., & Lavigne, A. L. (2017). Looking in Classrooms. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315627519
- Holbrook, J. (2010). Education through Science as a Motivational Innovation for Science Education for All. Science Education International, 21, 80-91.
- Holubova, R. (2008). Effective Teaching Methods—Project-Based Learning in Physics. Online Submission, 5, 27-36. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf
- Kalonde, G. (2017). Rural School Math and Science Teachers’ Technology Integration Familiarization. International Journal of Educational Technology, 4, 17-25.
- Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (2015). Panduan Pengurusan Mata Pelajaran Sains, Jemaah Nazir dan Jaminan Kualiti. Aras 3-6, Blok E15, Putrajaya: Kompleks Kerajaan Parcel EPusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan.