Implementing Research-Based Science Activities in a Rural ESL Classroom: Usability, Pupil Learning and Instructional Value

Su Shiang Wong; Pik Kuong Ling

doi:10.70148/rise.v3i6.2

Authors

Su Shiang Wong Open University Malaysia Author https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7278-5492
Pik Kuong Ling Faculty of Education, Open University, Selangor, Malaysia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70148/rise.v3i6.2

Keywords:

Action Research, ESL classroom, primary Science education, research-based Science activities, rural school

Abstract

This study examined the implementation of a researcher-designed Science Research-Based Activity (SRA) sequence in a rural Year 5 ESL classroom in Sarawak with limited infrastructure and teaching materials. The sequence organised Survey, Case Study, and Experimental Science Activities as a connected progression. Using Action Research supported by the Successive Approximation Model, 23 pupils completed nine cycles from 24 November to 11 December 2025, with 595 minutes (9 hours 55 minutes) of planned instructional time. Data included written pupil responses, classroom observations, semi-structured interviews with the teacher-researcher, reflection records, field notes, pupil artefacts, activity outputs, and cycle-level classroom-performance ratings. Engagement and activity-specific Learning Outcomes were summarised descriptively, while qualitative data were analysed thematically. Engagement increased broadly from M = 5.17 (SD = 1.37) out of 8 in Cycle 1 to M = 7.43 (SD = 0.79) in Cycle 9. Learning Outcomes varied with task demands, ranging from M = 5.35 (SD = 1.58) to M = 7.57 (SD = 1.70) out of 12, and generally improved within phases. High engagement did not always coincide with strong scientific explanation, particularly during hands-on work. The SRA sequence was workable when clear stages, adaptive scaffolding, accessible materials, language support, and teacher adjustment were used. Findings are specific to this classroom and do not establish causal effectiveness.

References

Aidoo, B. (2024). A reflective study on adopting inquiry-based science teaching methods. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 6, Article 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-024-00119-3

Alake-Tuenter, E., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Wals, A. E. J., Oosterheert, I., & Mulder, M. (2012). Inquiry-based science education competencies of primary school teachers: A literature study and critical review of the American National Science Education Standards. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2609–2640. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.669076

Aldea, K. Q., & Dayawon, M. A. (2025). Rural science education during and beyond COVID-19: Teachers’ strategies and prospects from a Philippine perspective. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 14(4), 2846–2856. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v14i4.30446

Allen, M. W., & Sites, R. (2012). Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An agile model for developing the best learning experiences. ASTD Press.

Bennett, J. M., Dunlop, L., Atkinson, L., Compton, S., Glasspoole-Bird, H., Lubben, F., Reiss, M. J., & Turkenburg-van Diepen, M. (2023). A systematic review of approaches to primary science teaching. Education Endowment Foundation. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/evidence-reviews/primary-science

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Cabello, V. M., Moreira, P. M., & Griñó Morales, P. (2021). Elementary students’ reasoning in drawn explanations based on a scientific theory. Education Sciences, 11(10), Article 581. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100581

Greenwood, R., Austin, S., Bacon, K., & Pike, S. (2022). Enquiry-based learning in the primary classroom: Student teachers’ perceptions. Education 3-13, 50(3), 404–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2020.1853788

Iturbe-Sarunic, C., Merino, C., & Miller, B. G. (2026). A systematic review of rural science education: Key ideas for designing teaching and learning sequences. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 16(1), 47–67. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.3156

Kamarudin, M. Z., & Mat Noor, M. S. A. (2024). What do we know about the selection of action research methodologies in primary science education? A systematic literature review. Educational Action Research, 32(5), 825–847. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2261502

Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.

Mat Noor, M. S. A. (2022). An insight into primary science education in Malaysia. ASE International, 16, 34–41. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/208367/

McCrory, A. (2018). Scientific enquiry and engaging primary-aged children in science lessons (Part 2): Why teach science via enquiry? Journal of Emergent Science, 14, 28–39.

Ogegbo, A. A., Upahi, J. E., Ramnarain, U., & Wu, H.-K. (2025). A systematic review on assessment in inquiry-based science education. International Journal of Research in STEM Education, 7(1), 71–91. https://doi.org/10.33830/ijrse.v7i1.1744

Oguz-Unver, A., & Yurumezoglu, K. (2014). Primary science students’ approaches to inquiry-based learning. International Online Journal of Primary Education, 3(2), 76–84.

Ölçer, S. (2025). Inquiry-based science teaching in primary school. Journal of Child Development and Education, 1(1), 55–66.

Rupiwin, F., & Shah, P. M. (2021). Malaysian rural primary school students’ perceptions of experiences towards second language learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(9), 68–96. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i9/10675

Uluçınar, U. (2023). The effect of problem-based learning in science education on academic achievement: A meta-analytical study. Science Education International, 34(2), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i2.1

van Driel, S., Slot, E., & Bakker, A. (2018). A primary teacher learning to use scaffolding strategies to support pupils’ scientific language development. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(2), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/3115

van Eijck, T., Bredeweg, B., Holt, J., Pijls, M., Bouwer, A., Hotze, A., Louman, E., Ouchchahd, A., & Sprinkhuizen, M. (2025). Combining hands-on and minds-on learning with interactive diagrams in primary science education. International Journal of Science Education, 47(18), 2413–2433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2387225

Yunus, M. M., & Jong, S. C. (2016). Teachers’ perspective on the reading behaviour of primary ESL learners in SJKC Chung Hua Semera Sarawak. Proceedings of the ICECRS, 1(1), 493–498. https://doi.org/10.21070/picecrs.v1i1.518

Zhou, Y., Jantharajit, N., & Srikhao, S. (2025). Integrating inquiry-based and project-based learning: A new model to enhance students’ teamwork, skills, and critical thinking. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 12(2), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.22555/joeed.v12i2.1340