Engaging with schools and increasing primary school students' interest in science: an intersectoral collaboration.

Willsher, Kerre ; Penman, Joy

INTRODUCTION

One of the challenges of living in regional/ rural areas relates to limited exposure to science activities, laboratories and experts. Whyalla, the geographic location where an innovative science initiative called 'Scientists in Schools' was conducted, is located in the Upper Spencer Gulf Region of South Australia (See Figure 1.). It is the second largest regional city in South Australia with a population of approximately 23,000 residents (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2010). There are seven government primary schools in Whyalla offering education from Reception to Year 7 (and a government junior primary school with Reception to Year 2 classes, and a special school) and three non-government primary schools (City of Whyalla, n.d.). Generally speaking, there are limited science opportunities for school children in Whyalla; this relates to distance, access and equity issues for regional, rural and remote areas of Australia.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Late in 2009, representatives of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO Australia) visited the Centre for Regional Engagement, University of South Australia at Whyalla to introduce its 'Scientists in Schools' program. They discussed many of the issues in engaging and teaching children science. CSIRO Education conducted a needs analysis with the schools, highlighting that several teachers were concerned that they had very little experience in teaching science. Several of them had not taught science before and were keen to receive support. Thus, an opportunity to provide mentorship by consulting with the teachers and acting as role models and supporters was created for the university staff (Wellington & Ireson, 2008; Snowber, 2005). Both the university and CSIRO acknowledge that the teacher's self-efficacy is an important determinant in the academic success of their students (Cone, 2009; CSIRO Snapshot, 2008) and that the quality of teachers is the greatest single factor that determines students' academic performance (Almy & Theokas, 2010; Hattie, 2003).

Two academics, one with both a Nursing and Public Health background and the other with both a Nursing and Pharmacy background, decided to become involved in the CSIRO project by partnering with local primary school teachers and assuming the scientist role. An innovative intersectoral approach developed, enabling a broad range of academics and teachers to collaborate in generating contextual and relevant scientific knowledge to teach and enhance the scientific critical thinking skills of the children (Huzzard, Ahlberg & Ekman, 2010). This method of knowledge generation and teaching has been found to be extremely effective, according to Huzzard, Ahlberg and Ekman (2010).

The outcome of the partnership between the primary schools and the academic staff was a science program that focused on introducing a group of Year 4 and 7 students to the study of some specific aspects of sciences and to the university environment. The objectives of our local program were to:

1) raise awareness and interest in the study of sciences;

2) teach some concepts of science that the children could find relevant to everyday life;

3) follow up and build upon what the children had already been taught in school;

4) introduce the children to the university and what it can offer;

5) provide opportunities to interact with academic staff; and

6) help build connections between schools and the local university campus.

These objectives effectively link to the primary school's Mission Statement of enhancing the physical, social and emotional wellbeing of children through the development of programs that enhance children's ability to understand, analyse and critically respond in a variety of situations (Nicolson Avenue Primary School, 2008). The Mission Statement matches the Graduate Qualities of the University of South Australia in regard to 'body of knowledge', life-long learning', problem solving, working alone and collaboratively, 'ethical action and social responsibility' and effective communication (University of South Australia, 2009). The CSIRO (2008) objectives of the effective use of resources, delivering relevant, high impact results in areas of importance and providing economic, social and environmental benefits rely upon the facilitation of access to science, delivering quality science education, teacher support and building and maintaining partnerships. Partnership approaches are more likely to succeed if the goals of each partner align closely with each other (Abernethy, Baldwin, Egan & Roberts, 2005).

BACKGROUND

There is declining interest and recruitment in science worldwide because of difficulties in demonstrating the relevance of science to everyday life and social values (Peplow, 2004; Lemke, 2001; Latour, 1999). Many children perceive science to be difficult or have a distorted view of the complexities of science, the role of scientists and the relevance to their own identities. Goodrum and Rennie (2007) and maintain that children need to be made aware of the opportunities that science creates and to be engaged in deep, meaningful scientific learning in an appropriate environment to trigger interest in pursuing science careers. This view is confirmed by Wellington and Ireson (2008), Cohen, Garcia, Apfel and Master (2006) and Hattie (2003).

Ainley, Kos and Nicholas (2008) found that the percentage of students studying science drops after year eight. The table below depicts the dramatic decline in enrolment in science subjects amongst Year 12 students from 1976, 1991 to 2007 (Ainley, Kos & Nicholas, 2008).

The same authors are concerned that increasing numbers of Australian children complete the compulsory science education components without developing the scientific literacy required to enable them to participate in the workforce.

Interest in science is due to multiple interacting factors, such as role modelling, gender stereotypes, relevance to everyday life, teacher self-efficacy, student self-efficacy, the school environment, support for learning and inquiry, race, cultural beliefs and the role of the media (Wellington & Ireson, 2008; Cohen, Garcia, Apfel & Master, 2006; Peplow, 2004). The traditional approach to science education, with its rigid body of facts, theories and rules, is partly responsible for discouraging students from pursuing science fields as these rules often discourage the consideration of social contexts leading to concepts that are irrelevant to many social groups (Cone, 2009; Dresner & Worley, 2006; Lemke, 2001; Latour, 1999; Darling-Hammond, 1996; Kyle & Abell, 1992). Consequently, there is a worldwide decline of science students and science teachers (Peplow, 2004). There is also a shortage of science experts who might mentor science students and teachers (Wang & Lin, 2008). Forbes and McCloughan (2010) and Peplow (2004) add that very few primary school science teachers have been appropriately educated to teach science. Freire (1993) and Cone (2009) argue for the development of the capacity to critically examine social contexts and to identify strategies for remediation and empowerment using praxis (reflection and action), thereby enhancing teacher and student efficacy.

Teachers and researchers have suggested various approaches to teaching sciences and these have been discussed at length in science education journals. One approach is teaching inquiry-driven science, that means the use of the inquiry process in the science classroom (Dresner & Worley, 2006). The approach requires creating meaningful, real-world research activities for classes and working closely with professional scientists. A similar approach is being developed nationwide in the Australian education curriculum (Goodrum & Rennie, 2007). This inquiry-based science curriculum for primary schools requires that school teachers and scientists have the appropriate knowledge of scientific concepts and the ability to teach science confidently (Forbes & McCloughan, 2010; Dresner & Worley, 2006).

Successful science teaching not only requires teachers' knowledge and skills in science concepts and scientific research, but also the recognition that the education of school children encompasses the broader scientific community of which teaching forms a part and to which it contributes (Pressick-Kilborn, 2009). The scientists, on the other hand, can serve as role models demonstrating how science is used in the community (Peplow, 2004) and assist in enhancing the teacher's cognitive understanding and skills (Dresner & Worley, 2006). Intersectoral, collaborative and culturally sensitive approaches are essential to building understanding of scientific concepts, enabling critical analysis, overcoming a worldwide shortage of science teachers and ensuring continued success in scientific research (Pressick-Kilborn, 2009; Peplow, 2004).

The Centre for Regional Engagement, the University of South Australia' administrative unit that focuses on its regional programs has a long involvement in education, research and community engagement. The Centre has been delivering science courses to nursing students since 1990. It engages with the community by conducting various outreach projects and the CSIRO 'Scientists in Schools' is one such community engagement undertaken by university staff holding the necessary qualifications and experience. This initiative had three potential positive outcomes: increased interest in sciences, increased awareness about the university and what it can offer future students, and opportunities for professional growth and development for school teachers and academics that implemented the science sessions.

The first potential outcome is increased interest in sciences. This is important because of the increasing shortages of students pursuing science careers and becoming scientists. One way of addressing this decline is to engage female students, as gender appears to play an important role in the uptake of science careers (Wellington & Ireson, 2008; Leonard, 2001). The lack of opportunities for early familiarisation with science in the home and scholastic environment is another factor differentiating boys from girls (Papastergiou, 2008). Furthermore, in order to increase the number of students who pursue science and technical programs, students must be introduced to these as early as their primary school days, according to Oppliger, Oppliger, Raber and Warrington (2007). Cultural exposure to science programs is profitable because there are links between cultural participation (e.g. childhood experience of science events and visits to science museums) and adult interest and attendance later in life (McMellon & Elsley, 2010).

The second potential outcome of the local 'Scientists in Schools' program relates to increasing the awareness about university. Rural under-representation in higher education is a continuing pattern despite many efforts to improve this (Callaghan, 2002). Success will come only if rural students see higher education as a realistic option (Penman, 2010). It is therefore important that school teachers and careers advisers make students aware of these opportunities in time for them to make decisions about their future careers and select appropriate subjects, so that they do not limit their options (Alexander & Fraser, 2001). Creating partnerships with primary and secondary teachers and students is a strategy by which the goal of increasing participation in science and related programs may be achieved. Decisions about post-secondary education have been made before Year 10, according to Alfonso (2010). This alerts the university to consider engaging students earlier than Year 10 in such programs, perhaps as early as Year 7.

The third likely outcome is enhancing opportunities for personal and professional growth and development for school teachers and university staff that were involved in the initiative. In implementing the 'Scientists in Schools' program locally, many valuable benefits may be gained including networking of teachers and lecturers (or the scientists), increase in knowledge and skills and the creation and extension of school-university partnerships. Similar science programs conducted elsewhere have been shown to enhance the teachers' capacity to provide science-related experiences for their students, strengthen their confidence in conducting science projects and impact on teachers' teaching style and method (Dresner & Worley, 2006). The academic staff members at the Centre for Regional Engagement, Whyalla are women engaged in teaching and research and can serve as good role models (Peplow, 2004; Bastable, 2003).

THE 'SCIENTISTS IN SCHOOLS' PROGRAM: WHYALLA VERSION

Following the CSIRO visit, the 'Scientists in Schools' coordinator received expressions of interest from school teachers and university lecturers. The coordinator matched the school teachers with academics who volunteered to act as scientists. The matching was based on predetermined criteria such as distance and interests of teachers and lecturers. Contact between teachers and scientists was made, and the science topics and suitable dates and times were determined. Materials were developed, engaging activities designed and the practical laboratories set up. The sessions varied in content depending on the age and developmental level of the children, what they had already covered in class or had been requested by the children and teachers and the resources available on campus. Though the content of each session changed, the aims of the program remained the same; these were to expand upon the children's knowledge of science, generate interest, foster inquiry and demonstrate the relevance of science to everyday life (Forbes & McCloughan, 2010).

The program was offered over the entire year, with pupils attending the Whyalla university campus for 3.5 hours per session. None of the program conducted was based at the school but there are plans to conduct further components of the program at the school and to extend the program to benefit school children in smaller country towns on the Eyre Peninsula. The interactive student-centred program typically included an orientation, followed by 'hands-on' sessions on aspects of physics, chemistry, nutrition, medicine and/or nursing. A summary and evaluation were undertaken at the conclusion of the program. The participating local students were accompanied on campus by their teacher/s.

METHODOLOGY

To determine the impact of the program on school students, one teacher and two academics, qualitative data were collected via survey and critical reflection.

Critical reflexivity is essential in teaching and learning. Mezirow's (2003) critical reflection was used to examine the impact of this intersectoral collaborative approach to teaching science. The school teacher and academics engaged in critical reflection to evaluate the science programs they delivered. Reflection has been used extensively in nursing and education. Mezirow (1995) defines reflection as assessing one's actions, while critical reflection involves deliberating on the nature and consequences of one's actions, including related circumstances that instigated them. Critical reflection is a process of internally examining and exploring an issue which creates and clarifies meaning and results in a changed conceptual perspective and frame of reference (Lebak & Tinsley, 2010; Williams, 2001; Mezirow, 1998).

Mezirow distinguishes three types of reflection--content, process and premise reflection (Kitchenham, 2008). These types of reflection impact on transforming the meaning schemes, defined as the "concept, belief, judgement, and feeling which shapes a particular interpretation", and perspectives, defined as the "structure of cultural and psychological assumptions within which our past experience assimilates and transforms new experience" (Kitchenham, 2008, p. 109). All three types were used in this study to assess, interpret and give meaning to the experience of participating in the 'Scientists in Schools' program. Content reflection involves thinking back to what was done before, while process reflection challenges the person to consider the cause of actions. Premise reflection requires the person to see the bigger picture of what is operating within his/her value system. These reflections can transform meaning schemes and perspectives (Kitchenham, 2008). Put simply, content, process and premise reflection ask the 'what', 'how', and 'why' questions, respectively, about the science program (Williams, 2001).

The teacher and academics carefully considered the learning that transpired using Mezirow's framework. The academics' content, process, and premise reflections were guided by the following questions:

* What did I achieve through participating in 'Scientists in Schools'?

* What were the positives and negatives in undertaking 'Scientists in Schools' that will assist me in future planning for the science programs for primary school students?

* Why is participating in 'Scientists in Schools' important to me at this time?

In addition to critical reflection, a class survey was conducted to evaluate the activities at the conclusion of the program. The school children visiting the university for the science program provided feedback via a variation of the Harvard one minute evaluation (Light, 2006). The evaluation covered the most important information gained in participating in the science program, the best aspects of the program, suggestions for additions to the program for future visits, and any other comments.

In seeking the perceptions of the children about the program, the academics and teacher allowed the children to be active participants in their learning, to enhance their own learning and evaluate the degree of learning and engagement that had taken place (Bailey, 2010). Primary school aged children are at a developmental stage where they are motivated to understand the world and its effects upon them (Hesselgrave, 2009; Bastable, 2003; Piaget (1976) cited in Griggs, 2009; Piaget, 1970).

This period referred to as concrete operations is where logical thought, the ability to reason, understand cause and effect and mastery of concepts develop (Merriam, 2004). The program could facilitate this period of learning through its content and activities.

FINDINGS

Following critical reflection, the school teacher and academics wrote about their experiences guided by Mezirow's content, process and premise reflection.

Academic/Scientist 1: The achievement in implementing the 'Scientists in Schools' program was the teaching of the science of simple machines, nutrition, physics in a way that engaged the children. Another achievement was gaining new ideas from other lecturers, the teachers and the children. I developed sets of PowerPoint slides and learned skills in managing staff (and children). The positives in undertaking the program include gaining more skills and assisting teachers and vice versa. The children enjoyed the programs and showed evidence of learning. They asked or answered questions. I thought they did more critical thinking. Children's misbehaviour at times (usually Year 7 boys) was a negative. I need to be more knowledgeable of teaching strategies appropriate for various development stages. Also, often, we did not have enough space to take large classes. Numerous small sessions affected availability of staff. It is important to undertake this program because people often do not know the role of the University and what it offers. The university needs to be relevant to the community. There is the chance to partner with other lecturers, the schools and the CSIRO, share resources, collaborate and increase the likelihood of achieving the aims and objectives. Whyalla is an industrial town with low levels of education and this could be a chance to increase community participation or emancipatory knowledge. Services for children can be hard to access and teachers and academics need to also support one another. There is the need to develop "seamless" services that link to one another.

Academic/Scientist 2: Participating in the 'Scientists in Schools' program helped increase children's awareness and interest in science and build partnerships with children, teachers and schools. This program, conducted regularly, has the potential to affect children's developmental outcomes in relation to self-construct, social relationships, skill building, and identifying needs for learning. The positives include the creation and extension of connections and linkages with local schools, as well as the potential to raise interest in university studies. Best of all is that it was an opportunity for students to see how a scientist thinks and acts which may motivate them for a career choice. Time and workload constrain my full participation in the program. My involvement in 'Scientists in Schools' is important to me at this time because part of being an academic is engaging with communities including local schools. I would like to demonstrate the many learning opportunities afforded by the university. I wish to support the school teachers and challenge the students, debunk the myths surrounding science and present science as something enjoyable and fun. It is important for the children to witness my passion about science!

School teacher: I had not taught science before 2010 and do not feel confident teaching science. I am very pleased with the 'Scientists in Schools' program and love the support the Uni provides. It does not matter what you show the children, they love coming to the Uni. They keep talking in class about what they did at the Uni and things link up. The topic on Mars was very interesting and I have followed up in class about loss of bone density due to long-term lack of exercise and weightlessness. The children kept asking about this one. It appears to be an issue that needs more research. I think there is a space simulation going on, I think it is in Russia and we could follow this up. We could also cover this in health and phys ed. A possible negative is that a particular group of boys often misbehave and I have found that splitting them up and providing one on one seems to overcome the issue. The main thing is we have loved coming and it is good that we can link the science theory to everyday activities. I am happy with the program, I gained self-efficacy.

Year 4 and Year 7 Students' Evaluations

There were a total of seventy (n=70) Year 4 and Year 7 students that participated in the program, with approximately an equal number of female and male students.

The most important information gained during their visit was as follows: Bacteria are pretty cunning and can fool us. ... That nurses used physics and chemistry to help people. The heart is a good pump and partners with the brain to get blood around the body. I would need good food and an exercise routine to be healthy when I arrive back from Mars. We need to look after one another. It is a long trip to Mars in a small craft and we will need to work together as a team. Exercise charges our batteries.

The best aspects of the program according to the school children included: Measuring the sugar in food was pretty cool. Loved the glo-germ about hand washing. Launching the rocket as we all needed to work together as a team.

Though the majority of the students were satisfied with the program, saying 'I liked everything', suggestions for future visits were noted: Smaller groups of kids. Can we have more about the pulse and running around? What about other planets in the solar system?

DISCUSSION

Rural and regional communities often suffer from limited resources, isolation and difficulty in accessing services with teaching professionals often receiving little support (Van Hofwegen, Kirkham & Harwood, 2005). However, these issues can be overcome to a large extent by the development of strategic and innovative partnerships (Hattie, 2003) leading to enhanced educational opportunities for local students. All stakeholders need to be involved in providing appropriate solutions to inequalities in educational opportunities brought about by distance and access issues (Huzzard, Ahlberg & Ekman, 2010).

The qualitative data gathered in the survey echo that collected by CSIRO Education (2010), where teachers and scientists alike felt valued for their contributions to students' learning. Many teachers had expressed lack of confidence in teaching science, but felt that their sense of self-efficacy and ability to engage in scientific enquiry had improved considerably since becoming involved with the program. The children expressed immense satisfaction in engaging with the scientists. Our program has many achievements and positives as can be discerned from the feedback.

Achievements in undertaking 'Scientists in Schools'

The school children were introduced to various aspects of science theory and practice relevant to everyday life. In using the available equipment and facilities, the students learnt about simple machines (for example, wheel chairs, intravenous lines, skin traction, canes), learnt new skills (for example, bandaging, guiding the blind, hand washing), taught about good nutrition, exercise and prevention of infection. The physics involved in launching a rocket ship, the amount of sugar in various foods, and preparing healthy meals were demonstrated with the children gaining first-hand experience. The discussions provided opportunities to practise critical thinking skills. For example, there was extensive debate on whether Coca Cola should be taken on the 'trip to Mars' (United States Department of Agriculture Blast off Game, n.d.). One student argued, 'It could be a source of caffeine for when astronauts need to stay awake and provide energy.' Another countered, 'But on the other hand very little energy would be used due to weightlessness.' 'Coke could be a source of enjoyment while cooped up in the spacecraft,' reasoned another student. This scenario showed that the students were examining arguments and thinking critically.

The most significant achievement of this program was that it was inquiry-based in approach, in accordance with the national curriculum, adopting a hands-on approach where the children could engage in meaningful real-life activities with a professional scientist. This approach promoted active learning. Building a child's comprehension involves some principles including linking activities to the wider environment, providing diverse exposures to text and image, offering varied ways for students to respond to the texts, offering opportunities for building skills and opportunities for questioning (Cairney, 2010). The program addressed most of these principles by: providing resources on a given topic which uses multimedia and different forms of knowledge; stimulating reasoning, critical thinking, meaning making and imagination; using discussions, answering questions and physical movement; building skills and strategies that may be reapplied in new contexts; and questioning about the world that moves beyond recall of facts.

The 'Scientists in Schools' project was an ideal example of praxis as it examined the needs of the teachers and the developmental needs of the children leading to an innovative program (Freire, 1993). In addition, the nursing curriculum has an extensive science base, but there are very few examples in the literature of nurse academics teaching children science, so this is another achievement.

Positives and negatives in undertaking 'Scientists in Schools'

The university and the school, through the staff, developed a partnership and built a network of schools and scientists, so important for science learning and teaching. Partnerships between universities, communities and schools have been utilised with success previously (Kilner, Conboy & Black, 2010; Eschenbach, Virnoche, Grafman, Stamper, Atkins, Raymond & Mills, 2009). The academics in consultation with the teacher determined the developmental needs of the children. They had not taught science to children previously and so took the opportunity to extend their own knowledge base in order to successfully facilitate deep learning and allow the children to explore in depth the various scientific concepts (Pressick-Kilborn, 2009). PowerPoint presentations were developed, pitched to suit school children's cognitive level and linked to the practical laboratory that was set up. The program did provide intrinsic rewards for the academics. This provided the scientists with opportunities to develop as good teachers of school-age children. On the other hand, the teacher gained more confidence in teaching science as she felt supported, and this impacted on her self-efficacy.

The misbehaviour of a cohort of Year 7 boys on one occasion was a negative aspect of the program. Specific strategies used to address this issue were consulting with the teacher, giving the boys some one-on-one teaching, delegating tasks and conducting further research on the developmental needs of the particular age group. The role of the teacher could not be overemphasised in these academic visits, but the lecturers would profit from learning how to manage unruly school students. This situation could also improve with the involvement of a male scientist role model. On the other hand, the time demanded deters some academics from participating fully in the program. These programs should be carefully scheduled so that they fall in study periods that are not as hectic.

The importance of undertaking 'Scientists in Schools'

The scientists were able to build upon what the children already knew at their level and the teacher followed this up further in the classroom. Previous badge work conducted with a group of Girl Guides on campus demonstrated a pragmatic approach that could be generalised to this teaching situation (Willsher, 2009). The program provided the opportunity for the children, teacher and university staff to develop an awareness of concerns within the community, the role science played and how they themselves could solve problems as responsible citizens (Willsher, 2010; Pressick-Kilborn, 2009). The program taught them important life skills, such as team work.

The program demonstrated that learning sciences could be fun and practical. The children enjoyed all of the sessions, in particular the ones involving interactive activities. This program addressed many of the stereotypes of science, in particular, that science is difficult and boring and that only men did science (Peplow, 2004). Our version of the 'Scientists in Schools' demonstrated the career opportunities that science can provide. Most significant is the motivation, enthusiasm and excitement for science conveyed by the academics that might influence the school students in their decisions about post-secondary studies and career paths.

The local program was quite successful; however, some aspects could be developed. Future directions may include the involvement of university undergraduate students who might serve also as role models and promote the program to other regional schools in South Australia. Another recommendation is that children might like to develop their own science program under supervision after being presented with a problem (Lebak & Tinsley,

2010; Pressick-Kilborn, 2009). Also, the CSIRO, University of South Australia and other scientific organisations have extensive online teaching resources which may be incorporated in future programs. There is also the opportunity to engage male scientist role models and scientists from other cultures as this has become available at the campus. There are plans to conduct further science activities at the school, involve other schools in Whyalla and to conduct outreach programs at other rural and remote schools on the Eyre Peninsula. The program is flexible and amenable to change depending on the needs of the school students and teachers.

CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS

The objectives of the program were met satisfactorily, based on the student, teacher and academic staff feedback. Short-term programs, conducted on an ongoing basis, can be valuable in increasing the interest and awareness of school students about sciences and contribute to enhancing interest about university studies. The program can assist students in planning for their future by focusing on post-secondary pathways and extend their networks to connect them to individuals and groups within the regional university campus who can assist them in making decisions about science career options. It is rare for nurse academics to teach children science; nurse academics providing role models were a unique feature of this program.

The overwhelmingly positive feedback about the program was due to the well-planned and implemented activities. The program was informative, beneficial and enjoyable. Students were given the opportunity to understand the applications of science and experience the university through different learning formats such as PowerPoint presentations, experiments and practicals, tutorials and hands-on interactive activities. The program enhanced learning and critical thinking and facilitated the acquisition of some skills. Another benefit the students derived from participating in the program was boosting their science literacy through university academic experience.

The school students were not the only ones benefited. The teacher was enriched as a result of being part of the program. The academics had the opportunity to identify theoretical deficits and develop teaching resources. In addition, the school-university relationship has been further extended through the science program. Our version of the 'Scientists in Schools' program is student-centred, inquiry-based, locally developed and regionally focused. It is inexpensive, effective, enjoyable, flexible and amenable to change depending on the needs of the school students and teachers. Hence, it is worth pursuing on a regular basis.

REFERENCES

Abernethy, P., Baldwin, L., Egan, H. & Roberts, L. (2005). Forming, managing and sustaining alliances for health promotion. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 16(2), 138-143.

Ainley, J., Kos, J., & Nicholas, M. (2008). ACER Monograph No. 63: Participation in Science, Mathematics and Technology in Australian Education. Melbourne: The Australian Council of Educational Research.

Alexander, C., Fraser, J. (2001). The promotion of health careers to high school students in the New England Health Area: The views of high school careers advisers. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 9(4): 145-149.

Alfonso, C. (2010, October 3). Students decide early about higher education. University World News, 142. Retrieved 5 October 2010, from www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20101002075037247

Almy, S. & Theokas C. (2010) Not prepared for class: High-poverty schools continue to have fewer in-field teachers. The Education Trust, November, 1-6. Retrieved 24 February 2011, from http:// www.edtrust.org/ sites/edtrust.org/files / publications / files / Not%20 Prepared%20for%20Class.pdf

Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2010). National Regional Profile: Whyalla (C) (Local Government Area). Retrieved 12 February 2011, from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@nrp.nsf/Latestproducts/LGA4854 0Main%20Features12005 2009?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=LGA48540&issue=20052009&num=&view

Bailey, N. (2010). Towards 2015: Collaborative education beyond the classroom. Teacher: The National Education Magazine, 217, 40-45.

Bastable, S. (2003). Nurse as educator: Principles of teaching and learning for nursing practice. London: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Cairney, T. (2010). Developing comprehension: learning to make meaning. e:update, 13. Retrieved 24 February 2011 from http:// www.curriculum.edu.au/leader/abstracts,58.html?issueID=12352

Callaghan, V. (2002). Participation rates of rural students in post-secondary education. Submission 54 to the Higher Education 'Crossroads' Review. Warrnambool: Deakin University. Retrieved 9 April, 2006, from: www.backingaustraliasfuture.gov.au/submissions/crossroads/pdf/54.pdf

City of Whyalla. (n.d.) Education. Retrieved 12 February 2011 from http://www.whyalla.com/site/page.cfm?u=112

Cohen, G., Garcia, J., Apfel, N. & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological intervention. Science, 313, 1307-1310.

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. (2008) CSIRO Snapshot. Retrieved 15 February 2011, from www.csiro.au/files/files/p6ul.pdf

CSIRO Education (2010). Scientists in Schools. EMPHASiS, 1, 1-4. Retrieved 12 January 2011, from http://www.scientistsinschools.edu.au/ downloads/newsletter/EMPHASiS %20Issue%2001%20May%202010.pdf

Cone, N. (2009). A bridge to developing efficacious science teachers of all students: Community-based service-learning supplemented with explicit discussions and activities about diversity. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 365-383.

Eschenbach, E., Virnoche, M., Grafman, L., Stamper, F., Atkins, L., Raymond, R. & Mills, K. (2009). Improving early interest and confidence in engineering: Creating partnerships between universities, K-12 teachers, their students and engineers. In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings. Austin, TX, June 14-17, 2009. Retrieved 15 April 15 2010, from http://soa.asee.org/paper/conference/paper-view.cfm?id=11070

Forbes, A. & McCloughan, G. (2010). Increasing student participation in science investigations in primary schools: The MyScience initiative. Teaching Science, 56(2). Retrieved 13 February 2011, from http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-230780497.html

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Melbourne: Penguin.

Goodrum, D. & Rennie, L. (2007). Australian School Science Education National Action Plan 2008-2012, Volume 1 The National Action Plan. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Griggs, R. (2009). Psychology: A concise introduction. New York: Worth Publishers.

Hattie, J. (2003). Distinguishing Expert Teachers from Novice and Experienced Teachers. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Hesselgrave, J. (2009). Developmental influences on child health promotion. In M. Hockenberry & D. Wilson (Eds), Essentials of pediatric nursing (pp. 71-96). St Louis: Mosby-Elsevier.

Huzzard, T., Ahlberg, B. & Ekman, M. (2010). Constructing interorganizational collaboration: The action researcher as boundary subject. Action Research, 8(3), 293-314.

Kilner, J., Conboy, M. & Black, R. (2010). Connecting to the worlds of work. Primary and Middle Years Educator, 8(3), 23-28.

Kitchenham, A. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow's transformative learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104-123.

Kyle, W. & Abell, S. (1992). Toward a mature discipline of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(9), 1015-1018.

Latour, B. (1999). Pandora's hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. London: Harvard University Press.

Lebak, K. & Tinsley, R. (2010). Can inquiry and reflection be contagious? Science teachers, students and action research. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21 , 953-970.

Lemke, J. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296-316.

Leonard, D. (2001). A woman's guide to doctoral studies. London: Open University Press.

Light, R. (2006). Strengthening colleges and universities: The Harvard Assessment Seminars. In M. E. Devlin (Ed.), Aspen Symposium 2005: Exploring the future of higher education (pp. 3.1-2.18). Retrieved 22 February 2010, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0604.pdf

McMellon, C. & Elsley, S. (2010). Starting young? Links between childhood and adult participation in culture and science--A literature review. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Centre for Research on Families and Relationships. Retrieved 24 February 2011, from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/314482/0099915.pdf

Merriam, S. (2004). The role of cognitive development in Mezirow's transformational learning theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(60), 60-68.

Mezirow, J. (1995). Transformation theory of adult learning. In M. R. Welton (Ed.), In defense of the lifeworld. New York: State University of New York Press.

Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3), 185-198.

Nicolson Avenue Primary School. (2008). Mission statement. Whyalla Norrie: Nicolson Avenue Primary School.

Oppliger, D., Oppliger, S., Raber, M. & Warrington, R. (2007). Engineering enterprise alliance: A K-12 university and industry initiative to create a pathway to engineering and science careers. In ASEE Annual conference and Exposition Proceedings. (Honolulu, Hawaii, June 24-27, 2007). Retrieved 15 April 2010, from http://www.icee.usm.edu/ICEE/conferences/asee2007/papers/ 1695_ENGINEERING_ENTERPRISE_ALLIANCE_AK_12_.pdf

Papastergiou, M. (2008). Are computer science and information technology still masculine fields? High school students' perceptions and career choices. Computers and Education, 51(2), 594-608.

Penman, J. (2010). Creating stronger ties and engagements with secondary and primary schools: A way forward for regional universities. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 7(2), 28-41.

Peplow, M. (2004). Doing it for the kids. Nature, 430, 286-287.

Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. London: Longman.

Pressick-Kilborn, K. (2009). Steps to fostering a learning community in the primary science classroom. Teaching Science, 55(1), 27-29.

Snowber, C. (2005). The mentor as artist: A poetic exploration of listening, creating, and mentoring. Mentor & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 13(3), 345-353.

United States Department of Agriculture. (n.d.) Blast Off Game. Retrieved 12 January 2011, from http://teamnutrition.usda.gov/resources/game/BlastOffGame.html

University of South Australia. (2011). Graduate qualities. Retrieved 15 February 2011, from http://www.unisa.edu.au/gradquals/default.asp.

Van Hofwegen, L., Kirkham, S.I., & Harwood, C. (2005). The strength of rural nursing: implications for undergraduate nursing education. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2(1), 1-13.

Van Rooy, W. & Riley, J. (2007). Perceptions about health in primary school children. Teaching Science, 53(4), 32-35.

Wang, J. & Lin, S. (2008). Examining reflective thinking: a study of changes in methods students' conceptions and understandings of inquiry teaching.

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 459-479. Wellington, J. & Ireson, G. (2008). Social learning, science teaching. London: Routledge.

Williams, B. (2001). Developing critical reflection for professional practice through problem-based learning. Journal of Advanced Learning, 34(1), 27-34.

Willsher, K. (2009), Teaching Open University Australia nursing students: Primary school children contributing to undergraduate students' learning. Australasian Journal of Community Engagement, 3(2), 91-103.

Willsher, K. (2010). Overcoming mixed messages on alcohol consumption: A teaching strategy. Nurse Education in Practice, 10, 279-284.

Kerre Willsher and Joy Penman

Nursing and Rural Health Unit

Centre for Regional Engagement

University of South Australia Percentages of Year 12 Australian Students Enrolled in Sciences Subject 1976 1991 2007 Biology 55.3% 35.9% 24.7% Physics 28.6% 20.9% 14.6% Chemistry 28.6% 23.3% 18%