The Development of Science Competency for Teachers with Non - Science Degrees in Small-Sized Schools at Chaiyaphum Province

Abstract

   This research study for the development of science competency for teachers with non-science degrees in small sized schools at Chaiyaphum Province aims to: 1. determine the current situation, problems and needs of science teachers who do not hold degrees in science, and 2. develop a training curriculum to enhance science competency for those teachers in small sized schools at Chaiyaphum Province. The samples were 50 non-science major science teachers under the Chaiyaphum Primary Educational Service Area Offices 1 to 3, selected through purposive sampling. The research instruments included: 1) a document and related research analysis form; 2) an interview form; 3) a questionnaire; 4) Manual of a training curriculum for enhancing science competency for non-science degree teachers; 5) an evaluation form assessing the effectiveness of the training curriculum. Data were analyzed employing mean, standard deviation and content analysis.

   The results revealed that: 1. the teachers’ ability to identify scientific problems was rated with a high mean score ( = 4.58, S.D. = 0.95), and the integration of students’ real-life contexts also showed a high mean score ( = 4.52, S.D. = 0.25). However, the teachers were found to lack scientific experimentation skills, with a lower mean score ( = 3.38, S.D. = 0.57); 2. the results from the development of the science competency training curriculum were as follows: the curriculum had six key components: 1) principles and rationale; 2) objectives of the curriculum; 3) learning contents; 4) learning activities; 5) instructional materials, media and learning resources, and 6) assessment and evaluation, and the curriculum evaluation showed that, in overall, the curriculum was rated at a high level ( = 4.32, S.D. = 0.12). The highest-rated aspect was an alignment between the curriculum and principles and objectives ( = 4.48, S.D. = 0.15), followed by feasibility of implementation ( = 4.40, S.D. = 0.14). The lowest-rated aspect was assessment and evaluation ( = 4.20, S.D. = 0.24).