METHODOLOGY AND EVALUATION

Description and Guidelines

S-TEAM Work Package 6
The objective of WP6 is to incorporate state-of-the-art knowledge about inquiry-based
methods in science into effective professional development programmes for teachers. The
overall goal is to develop professional development course with a view to improve attitudes,
motivation and career choice disposition towards science for pupils in the partner countries
and elsewhere. In order to achieve this, WP6 partners have committed to each develop one
research-informed training package/module.
Based on our agreed breakdown of the work in WP6, during September – December 2009
each partner developing a training module will prepare two important documents: the
Methodology and the Evaluation. These documents will describe each partner’s procedural
plans for (a) data collection and analysis relating to the Case Study materials 1, and (b) the
evaluation of the effectiveness of the training package that will be delivered and the write-up
of the subsequent Case Study Report2.
Below we describe in some detail the framework guidelines for each of these two
documents. Please note that, in comparison to the initial WP6 work plan, there are small
changes to some of the deadlines which are proposed with the intent to accommodate
holidays or other delays that have been brought to our attention.
As a guideline of the length of the documents to be prepared, we anticipate that each
document will comprise of minimum 3,500 words.
1. Methodology Document
To develop the Case Study materials, each partner preparing a training package will collect
classroom data which will then be analysed and used in ways the partners believe will
support the development of the training package on their chosen area of science education.
Among others, this data might, for example, investigate current needs of the local science
education community and the findings can then be used as guidance for the development of
the training approach and content. Alternatively, the data collected could provide examples
of practices in teaching IBST/E which will then be used as part of the training module to
guide teacher thinking and discussions during the training.
Partners need to ensure that during their planning they take into consideration the time
required for the evaluation and remedial action which will logically follow the
implementation of their training package.
It is possible that some partners will develop their training package based on already
collected data that will be analyzed for the purposes of their S-TEAM contribution. In this
case, we anticipate that the Methodology document will simply describe the methods used
to collect the data and describe the analysis they will carry out with these existing data.
Please note that this only applies to the Methodology and not the Evaluation document.

1
We expect that the methodology document will describe how each partner plans and later
carries out the collection and analysis of these data. Thus, when partners prepare their
methodology, the following points should be considered:
 What are the research questions/theoretical paradigm underpinning the data
collection and which needs are the data addressing?
 How will this data and its subsequent analysis guide and support the design of the
training package and how will this data be used, if at all, in the training package
itself?
 How will the data be analyzed – what analyses approaches will be utilized?
 What is the relationship among (a) the area that the training package will be focused
on, (b) the data that will be collected and analyzed, (c) the particular local needs of
the science education community and (d) what the international research
community has already developed as established knowledge with respect to this
issue?

This methodology (and its subsequent application) will ensure that the training package and
its development will be based upon collected and analyzed data that will address the local
needs for each partner as they were identified through the literature review that has already
been submitted as a separate document. Data that will be collected and analyzed through
this methodology design will constitute the Case Study Materials.
Submission deadline to WP6 leader:
First Draft - 16th October, 2009
Final Draft - 27th November, 2009 (after feedback)

2. Evaluation Document
During the second year of the project, each partner will develop and implement a training
package related to a specific area of science education. Upon implementation of the training
package, each partner will produce a Case Study report 1 that will document substantial
aspects of the design, development, implementation and validation of that training package.
Each CSr will draw on the more detailed information that will be collected during the
implementations of the training package. The Evaluation document will describe the process
of collecting and analyzing data that will be used to develop the CSr. For this reason, the
Evaluation document should include some of the following (although this is not an exclusive
catalogue of possibilities):
 A brief description of the environment and personnel where the training
package will be implemented
 The procedures and the conditions of the development and implementation of
the training package as well as the possible preparation of the engaged teachers
 The procedures and methods (data collection and analysis) that will be applied
to the study of students’ learning and the tools to be employed, depending on
1
The Case Study report (CSr) refers to a research-oriented report which describes and documents
substantial aspects of the design, development, implementation and validation of a training package
or its transfer from one educational setting to another
2
 the evaluation procedure chosen by the partners (e.g pre –post comparisons,
description of student activities and learning trajectories, video / discourse
analysis, artefact analysis, etc)
 The research methods (data collection and analysis) that will be applied to study
the influence/impact of the training module to the teachers’ professional life,
and the tools employed, depending on the evaluation procedure chosen by the
partners (e.g., pre –post comparisons, description of student activities and
learning trajectories, video / discourse analysis, artefact analysis, etc)
 The detailed plan of iterative refinement(s) of the content of the module and
how these will be related to the procedures and outcomes of the evaluation
process. This should also include a description of the planned evaluation
process.
Submission deadline to WP6 leader:
First Draft - 16th December, 2009
Final Draft – 6th January, 2010 (after feedback)

3. In parallel to the international workshop (WP3) in early January 2010, we hope to

schedule a WP6 Committee meeting. The purpose of that meeting is to exchange knowledge
among the participating partners regarding professional development in science and
perceptions of scientific inquiry established through existing research findings. Additionally,
we would like to ensure that there is a consistent framework and cohesion between the
diverse topics and sub packages which constitute WP6.

For this reason, during that meeting each partner will have 30 minutes at her/his disposal in
order to outline their literature review in addition to the methodology and evaluation design
of their Training Package. More information about the agenda of the meeting will be
circulated before the end of 2009.