Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proposing an Operational Definition of Science Teacher Beliefs

  • Published:
Journal of Science Teacher Education

Abstract

Much research has shown that a science teacher’s beliefs are related to their teaching practice. This line of research has often defined “belief” epistemologically. That is, beliefs are often defined relative to other mental constructs, such as knowledge, dispositions, or attitudes. Left unspecified is the role beliefs play in cognition and how they come to influence science teachers’ classroom practice. As such, researchers and science teacher educators have relied on an (at times, implicit) assumption that there is a direct causal relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practice. In this paper, we propose an operational, as opposed to epistemological, definition of belief. That is, we are explicit about the role a belief plays in science teachers’ cognition and how that leads to classroom practice. We define a belief as a mental representation that influences the practice of a teacher if and only if the belief is active in cognition. We then turn our attention to two limitations in the literature on that have arisen via previous definitions and assumptions regarding science teacher beliefs, showing how defining beliefs operationally helps think about these issues in new ways. The two limitations surround: (1) the difficulty in precisely delineating belief from knowledge; and (2) the interconnectedness of beliefs such that they draw meaning from one another. We then show how our definition of beliefs is congruent with other models of teacher cognition reported in the literature. Finally, we provide implications arising from this definition of belief for both science teacher educators and those who conduct research on the beliefs of both preservice and in-service science teachers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1991). Is human cognition adaptive? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 471–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belo, N. A. H., Van Driel, J. H., van Veen, K., & Verloop, N. (2014). Beyond the dichotomy of teacher- versus student-focused education: A survey study on physics teachers’ beliefs about the goals and pedagogy of education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 39, 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. (1973). Considerations of some problems of comprehension. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 383–438). New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. A. (1991). Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence, 47, 139–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, L. A., & Atwater, M. M. (2002). Teacher beliefs and cultural models: A challenge for science teacher preparation programs. Science Education, 86, 821–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cobern, W. W. (2000). The nature of science and the role of knowledge and belief. Science & Education, 9, 219–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E. (2006). Framing the problem of reading instruction: Using frame analysis to uncover the microprocesses of policy implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 343–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2009). Hugging the middle: How teachers teach in an era of testing and accountability. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Relationship between teacher beliefs and science education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7, 247–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Kleer, J. (1986). An assumption-based TMS. Artificial Intelligence, 28, 127–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. C. (1989). The intentional stance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eitam, B., & Higgins, E. T. (2010). Motivation in mental accessibility: Relevance of a representation (ROAR) as a new framework. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enderle, P., Dentzau, M., Roseler, K., Southerland, S., Granger, E., Hughes, R.,… Saka, Y. (2014). Examining the influence of RETs on science teacher beliefs and practice. Science Education, 98, 1077–1108.

  • Feldon, D. F. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). Chapter 1: The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of Research in Education, 20, 3–56. doi:10.3102/0091732X020001003

  • Fodor, J. A., & Lepore, E. (1992). Holism: A shopper’s guide. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Fonseca, M. J., Costa, P., Lencastre, L., & Tavares, F. (2012). Disclosing biology teacher’s beliefs about biotechnology and biotechnology education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 28, 361–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 51–94). Boston, MA: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, M. G., & Hoffman, B. (2009). Shared planning time: A novel context for studying teachers’ discourse and beliefs about learning and instruction. Teachers College Record, 111, 1242–1273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregoire, M. (2003). Is it a challenge or a threat? A dual-process model of teachers’ cognition and appraisal process during conceptual change. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 147–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J. J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers’ beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutner, T. L. (2015). Examining the goal systems of student teachers. Retrieved from The University of Texas at Austin's Electronic Dissertations and Theses Collection. OCLC Number 921999067.

  • Hutner, T. L., & Markman, A. B. (2016). Department-level representations: A new approach to the study of science teacher cognition. Science Education, 100(1), 30–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., & Carter, G. (2007). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1067–1104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., & Leagon, M. (2014). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 830–847). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joram, E., & Gabriele, A. J. (1998). Preservice teachers’ prior beliefs: Transforming obstacles into opportunities. Teaching & Teacher Education, 14, 175–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. M. (2010). Attribution error and the quest for teacher quality. Educational Researcher, 39(8), 591–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 631–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleickmann, T., Richter, D., Kunter, M., Elsner, J., Besser, M., Krauss, S., et al. (2013). Teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: The role of structural differences in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 90–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landsman, J. (2004). Confronting the racism of low expectations. Educational Leadership, 62(3), 28–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebak, K. (2015). Unpacking the complex relationship between beliefs, practice, and change related to inquiry-based instruction of one science teacher. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26, 695–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. C. (2002). Schoolteacher (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, G. F. (2000). Two kinds of representation. In E. Dietrich & A. B. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive dynamics (pp. 79–88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B. (1999). Knowledge representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Markman, A. B. (2012). Knowledge representation. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 36–51). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B., & Dietrich, E. (2000). In defense of representation. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 138–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marr, D. (1982). Vision. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miranda, R. M., & Damico, J. B. (2013). Science teachers’ beliefs about the influence of their summer research experiences on their pedagogical practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 1241–1261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munby, H. (1982). The place of teachers’ beliefs on teacher thinking and decision making, and an alternative methodology. Instructional Science, 11, 201–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, S. E. (1978). Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 259–303). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, J. L. (1987). Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science, 11, 481–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1980). Computation and cognition: Issues in the foundations of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 111–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1984). Computation and cognition: Toward a foundation for cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, R. E., Sinatra, G. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1996). Views of knowledge acquisition and representation: A continuum from experience centered to mind centered. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V. (2003). Preservice teachers’ beliefs. In J. Raths & A. C. McAnninch (Eds.), Teacher beliefs and classroom performance: The impact of teacher education (pp. 1–22). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozelle, J. J., & Wilson, S. M. (2012). Opening the black box of field experiences: How cooperating teachers’ beliefs and practices shape student teachers’ beliefs and practices. Teaching & Teacher Education, 28, 1196–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settlage, J., Southerland, S. A., Smith, L. K., & Ceglie, R. (2009). Constructing a doubt-free teaching self: Self efficacy, teacher identity, and science instruction within diverse settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 102–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational review, 57, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southerland, S. A., Sinatra, G. M., & Matthews, M. R. (2001). Belief, knowledge, and science education. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 325–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., & Callahan, K. A. (2000). Implementing state standards for science education: What district policy makers make of the hoopla. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 410–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72, 387–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Lin, E., Spalding, E., Klecka, C. L., & Odell, S. J. (2011). Editorial: Quality teaching and teacher education: A kaleidoscope of notions. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 331–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C. S. (1990). Prospective elementary teachers’ beliefs about teaching: Implications for teacher education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 6, 279–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2009). The beginner’s repertoire: Proposing a core set of instructional practices for teacher preparation. Report prepared for DR K-12 meeting at the National Science Foundation, November.

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96, 878–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, S. S., & Luft, J. A. (2015). Secondary science teachers’ beliefs and persistence: A longitudinal mixed-methods study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26, 619–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodbury, S., & Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). Overcoming the paradox of change without difference: A model of change in the arena of fundamental school reform. Educational Policy, 16(5), 763–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Center for STEM Education, The University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, Stop D5500, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Todd L. Hutner

  2. Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, 108 E. Dean Keeton, Stop A8000, Austin, TX, 78712-1043, USA

    Arthur B. Markman

Authors
  1. Todd L. Hutner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arthur B. Markman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd L. Hutner.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hutner, T.L., Markman, A.B. Proposing an Operational Definition of Science Teacher Beliefs. J Sci Teacher Educ 27, 675–691 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9480-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9480-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation