Graduate Teaching Assistants’ Knowledge Development for Teaching a Novel Physics Curriculum
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Matter and Interactions (M&I) has recently been adopted as a novel introductory physics course that focuses on the application of a small number of fundamental physical principles to the atomic and molecular nature of matter. This study investigated how five physics teaching assistants (TAs) developed professional knowledge for teaching from their teaching experiences. Specifically, we explored what experiences influenced their knowledge development for teaching the innovative introductory physics course, M&I. Through a qualitative, multiple case study research design, data was collected from multiple sources: non-participant observations, digitally recorded video, semistructured interviews, TAs’ written reflections, and researchers’ field notes. As TA’s progressed through the semester, two experiences emerged as having a significant role in their development of knowledge for teaching M&I: (1) setting teaching, learning, and curriculum goals for their classes; and (2) encountering dilemmas of teaching and learning. The results of this study will contribute to future preparation of the innovative introductory physics course as well as other college level science courses.
Supplementary Material (0)
- Abell, S. K., & Bryan, L. A. (1997). Reconceptualizing the elementary science methods course using a reflection orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 153–166. CrossRef
- Abell, S. K., Bryan, L. A., & Anderson, M. A. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media casebased instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Education, 82, 491–509. CrossRef
- American Association of Physics Teachers. (2003, November). Proceedings of the 2003 Introductory Calculus-Based Physics Course Conference. Arlington, VA.
- American Institute of Physics Statistical Research Center (2005). Enrollment and degrees report. Retrieved November 18, 2005 from http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/undergradtrends.html.
- Barnes, D. (1992). The significance of teachers’ frames for teaching. In T. Russell & H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 9–32). New York: Falmer.
- Bloom, J. (1969). Videotape and the vitalization of teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 20, 311–315. doi:10.1177/002248716902000307. CrossRef
- Bryan, L. A., & Abell, S. K. (1999). Development of professional knowledge in learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 121–139. CrossRef
- Bryan, L. A., & Recesso, A. (2006). Promoting reflection among science student teachers using a Web-based video analysis tool. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23, 31–39.
- Bryan, L., Recesso, A., & Seung, E. (2008). An evidential reasoning approach to analysis of science teaching practices using a web-based video analysis tool. In L. Yew-Jin & T. Aik-Ling (Eds.), Science Education at the nexus of theory and practice (pp. 159–180). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
- Calderhead, J. (1988). The development of knowledge structures in learning to teach. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Teachers’ professional learning (pp. 51–64). London: Falmer.
- Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291–310). New York: Macmillan.
- Chabay, R., & Sherwood, B. (2006a). Matter and interactions: Vol 1. Modern mechanics. Hoboken: Wiley.
- Chabay, R., & Sherwood, B. (2006b). Matter and interactions: Vol 2. Electric and magnetic interactions. Hoboken: Wiley.
- Chabay, R., & Sherwood, B. (2007, March). Matter & interactions. In E. F. Redish, & J. Cooney (Eds.), Research-based reform of university physics (Issue 1). Retrieved May 17, 2007 from http://www.compadre.org/per/per_reviews/media/volume1/MatterandInteractions-2007.pdf.
- Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Clermont, C. P., Borko, H., & Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Comparative study of the pedagogical content knowledge of experienced and novice chemical demonstrators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 419–441. doi:10.1002/tea.3660310409. CrossRef
- Cochran, K. F., & Jones, L. L. (1998). The subject matter knowledge of preservice science teachers. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 707–718). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
- Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowledge: an integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263–272. doi:10.1177/0022487193044004004. CrossRef
- Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge and the modes of knowing: Relevance for teaching and learning. In E. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and teaching the ways of knowing (pp. 174–198). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory. Mill Valley: Sociology.
- Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teacher College.
- Grossman, P. L. (1995). Teachers’ knowledge. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 20–24). Kidlington: Elsevier.
- Grove, R. W. (1988). An analysis of the constant comparative method. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 1, 273–279.
- Kelsay, K.L. (1992, April). A qualitative study of reflective teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
- Koballa, T., Upson, L., Minchew, C., Parlo, A., & Inyega, J. (2005, January). Using technology to support evidence-based science teaching and mentoring. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers of Science, Colorado Springs, CO.
- LeCompte, M. D. (2000). Analyzing qualitative data. Theory into Practice, 39, 146–154. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3903_5. CrossRef
- LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (Eds.) (1993). Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data. In Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed., pp. 234–278). San Diego: Academic.
- Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.
- Llinares, S. (2002). Participation and reification in learning to teach: The role of knowledge and beliefs. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen & G. Torner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 195–209). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
- Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 370–391. doi:10.1002/tea.20007. CrossRef
- McIntyre, D. (1993). Theory, theorizing and reflection in initial teacher education. In J. Calderhead & P. Gates (Eds.), Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development (pp. 39–52). Washington: Falmer.
- Mellado, V. (1998). The classroom practice of preservice teachers and their conceptions of teaching and learning science. Science Education, 82, 197–214. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199804)82:2<197::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-9. CrossRef
- Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (2005). Growing the tree of teacher knowledge: ten years of learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 767–790. doi:10.1002/tea.20073. CrossRef
- Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Teachers’ knowledge and how it develops. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington: American Educational Research Association.
- Pea, R., & Hoffert, E. (2007). Video workflow in the learning sciences: Prospects of emerging technologies for augmenting work practices. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron & S. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 427–460). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
- Recesso, A., & Hannafin. (2003). Evidence-based technology enhanced alternative curriculum in higher education (ETEACH). Proposal submitted to the US Department of Education Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology. Award, P342, A030009.
- Recesso, A., Hannafin, M. J., Wang, F., Deaton, B., Shepherd, C., & Rich, P. (2009). Direct evidence and the continuous evolution of teacher practice. In P. Adamy, & N. Milman (Eds.), Evaluating electronic portfolios in teacher education (pp. 23-47). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
- Ross, D. D., Johnson, M., & Smith, W. (1992). Developing a PROfessional TEACHer at the University of Florida. In L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education: Case and critiques (pp. 24–39). Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Russell, T., & Munby, H. (1991). Reframing: The role of experience in developing teachers’ professional knowledge. In D. A. Schön (Ed.), The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice (pp. 164–187). New York: Teachers College.
- Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 769–802). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
- Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475–491.
- Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.
- Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.
- Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 99–110. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(88)90011-X. CrossRef
- Tobin, K., & LaMaster, S. (1995). Relationships between metaphors, beliefs, and actions in a context of science curriculum change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 225–242. doi:10.1002/tea.3660320304. CrossRef
- Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: the role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 137–158. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2<137::AID-TEA1001>3.0.CO;2-U. CrossRef
- Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86, 572–590. doi:10.1002/sce.10010. CrossRef
- van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretation of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571–596.
- Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, E. R. (1987). ‘150 different ways’ of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 104–124). New York: Taylor and Francis.
- Winn, W. (1974). Videotaping teaching practice: strengths and weaknesses. Audiovisual Instruction, 19, 18–20.
- Yerrick, R., Ross, D., & Molebash, P. (2005). Too close for comfort: real-time science teaching reflections via digital video editing. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15, 351–375. doi:10.1007/s10972-005-1105-3. CrossRef
About this Article
- Graduate Teaching Assistants’ Knowledge Development for Teaching a Novel Physics Curriculum
Research in Science Education
Volume 40, Issue 5 , pp 675-698
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Knowledge for teaching
- Knowledge development
- Physics teaching assistant
- Matter and interactions
- Class goal