programme of the course and all instructor and participant activities and assignments. After that, we implemented and evaluated the course with 40 physics/chemistry student teachers spread over four sequential cycles. Among these four cycles,
Cycles 1 and 2 were for fine-tuning of the course scenario. The course evaluation
(Questions A and B) and experiences with the course in Cycle 1 (incl. What did
work, what did not work, and why) suggested revisions of the initial scenario. These
revisions were aimed at more faithful implementation of the course in Cycle 2 and
with respect to many factors such as diversity of participants’ background and
ability; school schedules; and curriculum time for ICT in IBSE tryouts. Likewise,
the Cycle 2 evaluation was guided by the objectives and pedagogical principles and
resulted in further optimisation of the course scenario. We achieved faithful implementation of the four principles in Cycle 3. Consequently, in this cycle, the summative effects of the Dutch version of the ICT in IBSE course were evaluated, and
only minor suggestions were made for further optimisation. The robustness of the
course design and the ecological validity of the pedagogical principles were tested in
Cycle 4 under routine implementation conditions without the extra support of the
researcher.
The new understanding of how the course was developed and why it was
effective (Dutch context) together with the basic course design (including course
objectives, pedagogical principles and support materials) enabled the tailoring of
local versions of the ICT in IBSE course in different contexts. The ICT in IBSE
course was adapted and tested in (a) two cycles with 66 physics/biology/chemistry
teachers with diverse teaching experience (1–33 years of teaching) in Slovakia. The
two cycles of the Slovak course were already in routine implementation conditions
without the direct participation of the researcher. The ICT in IBSE course was
adapted and tested in one cycle in Vietnam with 22 master students in physics
education, who either had taught for 2–9 years or came straight from a Bachelor
teacher-education programme. Evaluations of the three local versions of the course
enabled us to draw conclusions about (a) the extent to which the four objectives can
be attained, (b) the validity and generalisability of pedagogical principles, (c) the
transferability of the course design, and d) the practical relevance of the course.
These evaluations led us to new understanding of the extent to which the pedagogical principles can guide the fine-tuning of the basic design of the ICT in IBSE
course to varying boundary conditions.
12.6.3 Findings, Discussion and Conclusions
The Dutch case study resulted in an improved and successful course scenario in
which the Dutch participants achieved the course objectives also when the course
was taught under routine conditions (Cycle 4). A typical reaction of one of the
participants was:
152
T. Ellermeijer and T.-B. Tran
Cycles 1 and 2 were for fine-tuning of the course scenario. The course evaluation
(Questions A and B) and experiences with the course in Cycle 1 (incl. What did
work, what did not work, and why) suggested revisions of the initial scenario. These
revisions were aimed at more faithful implementation of the course in Cycle 2 and
with respect to many factors such as diversity of participants’ background and
ability; school schedules; and curriculum time for ICT in IBSE tryouts. Likewise,
the Cycle 2 evaluation was guided by the objectives and pedagogical principles and
resulted in further optimisation of the course scenario. We achieved faithful implementation of the four principles in Cycle 3. Consequently, in this cycle, the summative effects of the Dutch version of the ICT in IBSE course were evaluated, and
only minor suggestions were made for further optimisation. The robustness of the
course design and the ecological validity of the pedagogical principles were tested in
Cycle 4 under routine implementation conditions without the extra support of the
researcher.
The new understanding of how the course was developed and why it was
effective (Dutch context) together with the basic course design (including course
objectives, pedagogical principles and support materials) enabled the tailoring of
local versions of the ICT in IBSE course in different contexts. The ICT in IBSE
course was adapted and tested in (a) two cycles with 66 physics/biology/chemistry
teachers with diverse teaching experience (1–33 years of teaching) in Slovakia. The
two cycles of the Slovak course were already in routine implementation conditions
without the direct participation of the researcher. The ICT in IBSE course was
adapted and tested in one cycle in Vietnam with 22 master students in physics
education, who either had taught for 2–9 years or came straight from a Bachelor
teacher-education programme. Evaluations of the three local versions of the course
enabled us to draw conclusions about (a) the extent to which the four objectives can
be attained, (b) the validity and generalisability of pedagogical principles, (c) the
transferability of the course design, and d) the practical relevance of the course.
These evaluations led us to new understanding of the extent to which the pedagogical principles can guide the fine-tuning of the basic design of the ICT in IBSE
course to varying boundary conditions.
12.6.3 Findings, Discussion and Conclusions
The Dutch case study resulted in an improved and successful course scenario in
which the Dutch participants achieved the course objectives also when the course
was taught under routine conditions (Cycle 4). A typical reaction of one of the
participants was:
152
T. Ellermeijer and T.-B. Tran