Research in Science Education

, Volume 48, Issue 6, pp 1359–1386 | Cite as

Exploring Science Teachers’ Affective States: Pedagogical Discontentment, Self-efficacy, Intentions to Reform, and Their Relationships

  • Ajda Kahveci
  • Murat Kahveci
  • Nasser Mansour
  • Maher Mohammed Alarfaj


Teachers play a key role in moving reform-based science education practices into the classroom. Based on research that emphasizes the importance of teachers' affective states, this study aimed to explore the constructs pedagogical discontentment, science teaching self-efficacy, intentions to reform, and their correlations. Also, it aimed to provide empirical evidence in light of a previously proposed theoretical model while focusing on an entirely new context in Middle East. Data were collected in Saudi Arabia with a total of randomly selected 994 science teachers, 656 of whom were females and 338 were males. To collect the data, the Arabic versions of the Science Teachers' Pedagogical Discontentment scale, the Science Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument and the Intentions to Reform Science Teaching scale were developed. For assuring the validity of the instruments in a non-Western context, rigorous cross-cultural validations procedures were followed. Factor analyses were conducted for construct validation and descriptive statistical analyses were performed including frequency distributions and normality checks. Univariate analyses of variance were run to explore statistically significant differences between groups of teachers. Cross-tabulation and correlation analyses were conducted to explore relationships. The findings suggest effect of teacher characteristics such as age and professional development program attendance on the affective states. The results demonstrate that teachers who attended a relatively higher number of programs had lower level of intentions to reform raising issues regarding the conduct and outcomes of professional development. Some of the findings concerning interrelationships among the three constructs challenge and serve to expand the previously proposed theoretical model.


Science teachers Affective state Pedagogical discontentment 



This research was conducted as part of the professional development for in-service science and mathematics teachers research group with support of the Excellence Research Centre of Science and Mathematics Education—King Saud University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.


  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy, Project 2061 New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Alabdulkareem, S. A. M. (2004). Investigating science teachers’ beliefs about science and science teaching: struggles in implementing science education reform in Saudi Arabia . Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.Google Scholar
  5. Almazroa, H., & Alorini, A. (2012). Science and math teachers’ perceptions of professional development within the new science curriculum implementation. Saudi Arabia: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  6. Almazroa, H., & Al-Shamrani, S. (2015). Saudi science teacher professional development: trends, practices and future. In S. Al-Shamrani & N. Mansour (Eds.), Science education in the Arab Gulf states: visions, sociocultural contexts and challenges. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. pp. 3–21. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Alshamrani, S. (2012). Priorities of research in science education in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Educational Sciences and. Islamic Studies, 24(1), 199–228.Google Scholar
  8. Alsop, S. (2003). Science education and affect. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1043–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kahveci, A. (2009). Exploring chemistry teacher candidates’ profile characteristics, teaching attitudes and beliefs, and chemistry conceptions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 109–120.Google Scholar
  10. Kahveci, M., Kahveci, A., Mansour, N. & Alarfaj, M.M. (2016). Construct validity and reliability measures of scores from the Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Discontentment (STPD) scale. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(3), 549–558.Google Scholar
  11. Mansour, N. (2010). The impact of the knowledge and beliefs of Egyptian science teachers in integrating a STS based curriculum: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(4), 513–534.Google Scholar
  12. Mansour, N., & Alshamrani, S. (2011). Perceived professional development needs for Saudi Arabian science teachers. Paper presented at the ESERA conference, Lyon, France.Google Scholar
  13. Mansour, N., & Alshamrani, S. (2012). Rethinking the theory and practice of continuing professional development: Science teachers’ perspectives. Paper presented at the ASTE conference, Clearwater Beach, FL.Google Scholar
  14. Mansour, N., Alshamrani, S., Aldahmash, A., & Alqudah, B. (2013). Saudi Arabian science teachers and supervisors’ views of professional development needs. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 51, 1–27.Google Scholar
  15. Mansour, N., El-Deghaidy, H., Alshamrani, S., & Aldahmash, A. (2014). Rethinking the theory and practice of continuing professional development: Science teachers’ perspectives. Research in Science Education, 44, 949–973.Google Scholar
  16. Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Worth Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Blanchard, M. R., Albert, J. L., Osborne, J. W., & Kinton, J. H. (2012). Is it possible to explicitly stimulate pedagogical discontentment in science teachers through a graduate course? Proceedings of the NARST Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN.Google Scholar
  18. Blanchard, M. R., Osborne, J. W., & Albert, J. L. (2011). Are there benefits to pedagogical discontentment?: A two-year study exploring its link to rural science & mathematics teachers’ changes in practices. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the AERA, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  19. Butler, D. L., Lauscher, H. N., Jarvis-Selinger, S., & Beckingham, B. (2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 435–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 166–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: the challenges of lifelong learning. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  22. de Laat, J., & Watters, J. J. (1995). Science teaching self-efficacy in a primary school: A case study. Research in Science Education, 25(4), 453–464.Google Scholar
  23. Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptalizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33(2–3), 109–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. El-Deghaidy, H. (2006). An investigation of pre-service teacher’s self-efficacy and self-image as a science teacher in Egypt. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 7(2).Google Scholar
  25. El-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., & Al-Shamrani, S. (2015). Science teachers’ typology of CPD activities: a socio-constructivist perspective. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1539–1566. doi: 10.1007/s10763-014-9560-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Enochs, L., & Riggs, I. (1990). Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: a preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics Journal, 90, 694–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Evers, W. J. G., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2002). Burnout and self-efficacy: a study on teachers’ beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 227–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feldman, A. (2000). Decision making in the practical domain: a model of practical conceptual change. Science Education, 84, 606–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. General Directorate of Training and Scholarship. (2011). About the Directorate. Retrieved from:
  31. Grossman, P. L., & Stodolsky, S. S. (1995). The role of school subjects in secondary school teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(8), 5–11+23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Holden, M. E., Groulx, J., Bloom, M. A., & Weinburgh, M. H. (2011). Assessing teacher self-efficacy through an outdoor professional development experience. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 12(2), 1–25.Google Scholar
  33. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  34. National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  35. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: towards a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Qablan, A., Khasawneh, S. A., Abu-Tineh, A. M., & AL-Omari, A. A. (2010). Measuring the level of pedagogical discontentment among Jordanian science and vocational student teachers. The Educational Journal, 24(95), 1–24.Google Scholar
  37. Qablan, A., Mansour, N., Alshamrani, S., Aldahmash, A., & Sabah, S. (2015). Ensuring effective impact of continuing professional development: Saudi science teachers’ perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(3), 619–631. doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2015.1352a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reiss, M. J. (2005). The importance of affect in science education. In S. Alsop (Ed.), Beyond Cartesian dualism: encountering affect in the teaching and learning of science (pp. 17–25). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teachers’ science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  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(14), 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 Journal, 105(8), 412–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Russell, T. (2005). Can reflective practice be taught? Reflective Practice, 6(2), 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sabah, S., Fayez, F., Alshamrani, S., & Mansour, N. (2014). Continuing professional development (CPD) provision for science and mathematics teachers in Saudi Arabia: perceptions and experiences of CPD providers. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(1), 91–104.Google Scholar
  44. Saka, Y., Southerland, S. A., & Golden, B. (2009). Describing the effects of research experiences for teachers’ attitudes and beliefs: Examining science teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs, beliefs of reformed-science teaching, attitudes and pedagogical discontentment. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the AERA, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  45. Schmidt, M., & Datnow, A. (2005). Teachers’ sense-making about comprehensive school reform: the influence of emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 949–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Southerland, S. A., Sowell, S., & Enderle, P. (2011). Science teachers’ pedagogical discontentment: its sources and potential for change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(5), 437–457.Google Scholar
  47. Southerland, S. A., Sowell, S., Blanchard, M., & Granger, D. E. (2011). Exploring the construct of pedagogical discontentment: a tool to understand science teachers’ openness to reform. Research in Science Education, 41, 299–317.Google Scholar
  48. Southerland, S. A., Nadelson, L., Sowell, S., Saka, Y., Kahveci, M., & Granger, E. M. (2012). Measuring one aspect of teachers' affective states: Development of the Science Teachers' Pedagogical Discontentment scale. School Science and Mathematics Journal, 112(8), 483–494.Google Scholar
  49. Southerland, S. A., Sowell, S., Kahveci, M., Granger, D. E., & Gaede, O. F. (2006). Working to measure the impact of professional development activities: Developing an instrument to quantify pedagogical discontentment. Proceedings of the NARST Annual Conference, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  50. Sperber, A. D., Devellis, R. F., & Boehlecke, B. (1994). Cross-cultural translation: methodology and validation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25(4), 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. A. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 944–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2011). Professional development and reform in science education: the role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. van Veen, K., Sleegers, P., & van de Ven, P. (2005). One teacher’s identity, emotions, and commitment to change: a case study into the cognitive–affective processes of a secondary school teacher in the context of reforms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 917–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wheeler, G. F. (2007). Strategies for science education reform. Educational Leadership, 64(4), 30–34.Google Scholar
  55. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zacharia, Z. (2003). Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions of science teachers regarding the educational use of computer simulations and inquiry-based experiments in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 792–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ajda Kahveci
    • 1
    • 2
  • Murat Kahveci
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nasser Mansour
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Maher Mohammed Alarfaj
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Chemistry, College of Science and HealthDePaul UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.King Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Graduate School of Education, University of ExeterExeterUK
  4. 4.Faculty of Education, Tanta UniversityTantaEgypt
  5. 5.King Faisal UniversityAl AhsaSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations