Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 23–52 | Cite as

Chemistry Teachers’ Emerging Expertise in Inquiry Teaching: The Effect of a Professional Development Model on Beliefs and Practice

  • Gregory T. Rushton
  • Christine Lotter
  • Jonathan Singer
Article

Abstract

This study investigates the beliefs and practices of seven high school chemistry teachers as a result of their participation in a year-long inquiry professional development (PD) project. An analysis of oral interviews, written reflections, and in-class observations were used to determine the extent to which the PD affected the teachers’ beliefs and practice. The data indicated that the teachers developed more complete conceptions of classroom inquiry, valued a “phenomena first” approach to scientific investigations, and viewed inquiry approaches as helpful for facilitating improved student thinking. Analysis of classroom observations with the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol indicated that features of the PD were observed in the teachers’ practice during the academic year follow-up. Implications for effective science teacher professional development models are discussed.

Keywords

Professional development Science education reform Teacher beliefs Inquiry instruction Theory to practice 

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., et al. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88, 397–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akerson, V., & Hanuscin, D. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques (2nd ed.). San Fransico, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Basista, B., & Mathews, S. (2002). Integrated science and mathematics professional development programs. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 359–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berry, A. (2007). Tensions in teaching about teaching: Understanding practice as a teacher educator (Vol. 5). Clayton, Australia: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  8. Brickhouse, N. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caton, E., Brewer, C., & Brown, F. (2000). Building teacher-scientist partnerships: Teaching about energy through inquiry. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawford, B. A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10, 175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Darling-Hammond, L., & Ball, D. L. (1998). Teaching for high standards: What policymakers need to know and be able to do (CPRE joint report series, JRE-04). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education and the National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future.Google Scholar
  12. Fernandez, C. (2002). Learning from Japanese approaches to professional development: The case of lesson study. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 393–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fullan, M. G., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Columbia University.Google Scholar
  14. Garcia, A. R. (2004). The difficult relationship between theory and practice in an inservice course for science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1223–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L. M., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Analysis of a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1981). Understanding of gravity. Science Education, 65, 291–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15, 5–12.Google Scholar
  18. Hashweh, M. Z. (1996). Effects of science teachers’ epistemological beliefs in teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huffman, D., Thomas, K., & Lawrenz, F. (2003). Relationship between professional development, teachers’ instructional practices, and the achievement of students in science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 103, 378–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K., & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effects change in secondary science teachers’ classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 668–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1988). Student achievement through staff development. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  22. Judson, E., & Lawson, A. (2007). What is the role of constructivist teachers within faculty communication networks? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 490–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 631–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B.-S. (2006). Science education: Integrating views of learning and instruction. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 511–544). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  25. Lotter, C., Harwood, H., & Bonner, J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1318–1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lotter, C., Singer, J., & Godley, J. (2009). The influence of repeated teaching and reflection on preservice teachers’ views of inquiry and nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 553–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  28. Loughran, J. J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Loughran, J. J., & Berry, A. (2005). Modelling by teacher educators. Teaching & Teacher Education, 21, 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lyons, L. L., Freitag, P. K., & Hewson, P. W. (1997). Dichotomy in thinking, dilemma in actions: Researcher and teacher perspectives on a chemistry teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MacIsaac, D., & Falconer, K. (2002). Reforming physics instruction via RTOP. The Physics Teacher, 40, 479–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. Elementary School Journal, 97, 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McComas, W. (1998). The nature of science in science education. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  35. Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. In Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning (pp. 1-20). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.Google Scholar
  36. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  37. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  38. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.Google Scholar
  39. Piburn, M., Sawada, D., Falconer, K., Turley, J., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP) reference manual. ACEPT technical report no. IN00-3. Retrieved June 1, 2006, from http://www.PhysicsEd.BuffaloState.Edu/AZTEC/rtop/RTOP_full/PDF/.
  40. Roehrig, G. H., & Garrow, S. (2007). The impact of teacher classroom practices on student achievement during the implementation of a reform-based chemistry curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1789–1811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers’ beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105, 412–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 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, 883–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sawada, D., Piburn, M., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Russell, B., et al. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 245–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.Google Scholar
  46. Singer, J., & LaCross, R. (2005). Re-conceptualizing the structure of professional development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Canada: Montreal.Google Scholar
  47. Singer, J., & Maher, M. (2007). Preservice teachers and technology integration: Rethinking traditional roles. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 955–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. South Carolina Department of Education. (2005). Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.ed.sc.gov/agency/Standards-and-Learning/Academic-standards/old/cso/standards/science/index.html.
  49. Thompson, C. L., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 341–375). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  50. Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. J. (1996). Cultural myths as constraints to the enacted curriculum. Science Education, 80, 223–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tsai, C. (2007). Teachers’ scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students’ views. Science Education, 91, 222–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wallace, C. W., & Kang, N. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’ beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 936–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wee, B., Shepardson, D., Fast, J., & Harbor, J. (2007). Teaching and learning about inquiry: Insights and challenges in professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 63–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Weiss, I., Pasley, J., Smith, S., Banilower, E. R., & Heck, D. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  56. White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. UK: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  57. Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68, 130–178.Google Scholar
  58. Yerrick, R., Parke, H., & Nugent, J. (1997). Struggling to promote deeply rooted change: The “filtering effect” of teachers’ beliefs on understanding transformational views of teaching science. Science Education, 81, 137–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory T. Rushton
    • 1
  • Christine Lotter
    • 2
  • Jonathan Singer
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Chemistry and BiochemistryKennesaw State UniversityKennesawUSA
  2. 2.College of EducationUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  3. 3.University of MarylandBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations