Only Lower-order Thinking Skills are contained in the Current

The first and most popular thought about thinking skills in the textbook, on which almost all teachers and supervisors agreed, is that the current science textbook consists only of remembering and understanding skills, which are in the lower order of Bloom‟s Taxonomy. T6 (14 years in teaching), explained:

―The current curriculum consists of reading and memorizing only, and there are no activities that make the pupil think at a high level.‖

Another teacher‟s (T8) explanation clearly supports T6‟s opinion. He gave a comparison between the current situation in the textbook in Saudi Arabia and another country that has a similar culture. He stated:

―We notice that these skills are very weak and do not deal with the topics. For example, in Bahrain we find that they have the same topics that are in our school books and the same programme, but they have inserted thinking skills and topics that are more useful for the pupils.‖

Several teachers and supervisors pointed out an important element: that the questions are easy to answer and the information is easy to acquire without any searching or in-depth thinking, which is not satisfactory for either normal or gifted

students. A number of interviewees, such as T1, T2, T5, S6 and S1, mentioned that the use of the textbook might be harmful to students‟ abilities and skills. For example, S1 stated: “Unfortunately, the higher level thinking skills do not exist. There are attempts

but they are slow and not encouraging”

One supervisor (S10) expressed the same view when he said:

―The curriculum is far from covering these skills and there are only the skills of memorization, understanding and applying‖.

Another supervisor S5 (19 years‟ experience) explained as follows:

―Students should know that memorization is important, but it is not everything. We want them to make use of the information and add to it, not just to memorize it.‖

Most the interviewees showed their concern at the level of skills in the current textbook; however, the majority of them mentioned that the textbook had been

improved in two ways. The first is the layout of the book, and the second is the addition of applications in some lessons and the updating of information. For example, T3 expressed that:

―The book looks beautiful and is designed in an excellent way. It attracts the student from outside, and it contains drawings and pictures. But once the student starts to read from the book, he doesn‘t find anything new‖.

S10‟s description is similar to T3‟s but with more detail:

―The current curriculum is better than before to some extent. It contains intellectual and practical activities, but still it remains very simple and closed, and this is a problem because knowledge is renewable and changing. So we can't limit knowledge in a closed circle. Renewable and changing knowledge means changing the content of the subject. So, if you add a new topic or activity to the subject, that means you add knowledge, but the teacher is not allowed to do so‖

The teachers‟ and supervisors‟ responses reflect an important issue, which is the dated nature of the science textbook. This point reflects teachers‟ concern about the possibility of developing the science textbook for the 21st century.

Teachers‟ and supervisors‟ responses were varied as they described their concerns about the textbook‟s failure to provide basic skills such as analysis, synthesis and

evaluation and creativity. Some teachers and supervisors were surprised about the absence of these basic skills in the science textbook. Some of the supervisors believed that the current science curriculum contains some higher-level skills, but not enough.

For instance, S6 expressed his idea:

―Some skills, such as synthesis, don‘t exist. The teacher does the experiment and the student rarely does it. If the situation is like this, the teacher can‘t measure the student‘s creativity because the student just observes the teacher.‖

The same person talked more about other skills:

―In fact, we should concentrate on the skill of analysis, because it leads the student to learn other skills such as synthesis and evaluation.‖

This is confirmed by the following comment from another interviewee (T1):

―We always believe that the goal set by the teachers should surpass the primary skills in the classification of Bloom‘s Scale, such as memorization, recalling and remembering, to the skills of deduction and synthesis. These are the high levels of thinking skills that stimulate and interest the students. If we direct our goals to these skills, we are on the right track‖.

This point reflects the limitations of the current textbook in addressing these higher skills, so the teacher went further:

―I don‘t consider myself as a curriculum expert, but some lessons encourage high level thinking skills. The problem is that it is only theoretical and there are no applications to reach the skills of deduction, analysis and evaluation.‖

S9 went beyond this and mentioned the top level of thinking skills:

―In the science curriculum, creativity is a must. The teacher‘s main concern is to enter the class and present his subject, and then leave the class. However, if they had some teaching aids, they might be creative.‖

5.8.2 Research Skills are Weak, Unsuitable for Normal or Gifted Students