Advertisement

Science & Education

, Volume 26, Issue 3–4, pp 271–298 | Cite as

Working Alongside Scientists

Impacts on Primary Teacher Beliefs and Knowledge About Science and Science Education
  • Dayle AndersonEmail author
  • Azra Moeed
Article

Abstract

Current curriculum demands require primary teachers to teach about the Nature of Science; yet, few primary teachers have had opportunity to learn about science as a discipline. Prior schooling and vicarious experiences of science may shape their beliefs about science and, as a result, their science teaching. This qualitative study describes the impact on teacher beliefs about science and science education of a programme where 26 New Zealand primary (elementary) teachers worked fulltime for 6 months alongside scientists, experiencing the nature of work in scientific research institutes. During the 6 months, teachers were supported, through a series of targeted professional development days, to make connections between their experiences working with scientists, the curriculum and the classroom. Data for the study consisted of mid- and end-of-programme written teacher reports and open-ended questionnaires collected at three points, prior to and following 6 months with the science host and after 6 to 12 months back in school. A shift in many teachers’ beliefs was observed after the 6 months of working with scientists in combination with curriculum development days; for many, these changes were sustained 6 to 12 months after returning to school. Beliefs about the aims of science education became more closely aligned with the New Zealand curriculum and its goal of developing science for citizenship. Responses show greater appreciation of the value of scientific ways of thinking, deeper understanding about the nature of scientists’ work and the ways in which science and society influence each other.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

This research was carried out with ethical approval from the Victoria University of Wellington Human Ethics Committee.

Conflict of interest

In accordance with the “instructions to authors”, we are declaring a potential conflict of interest. Victoria University of Wellington was contracted by the Royal Society of New Zealand to provide the services of Dayle Anderson (first author) to facilitate the professional development days that formed part of the Primary Science Teacher Fellowship programme described in this paper. While this could be seen as a potential conflict of interest or limitation to the research, the research was designed so that participants’ responses were not identifiable by the researchers and the second researcher was not involved in the programme.

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science: Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 53–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). The evolving landscape related to assessment of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Volume II) (pp. 621–650). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science: Perspectives & resources. Saint Paul: Ships Education Press.Google Scholar
  6. Allchin, D. (2014). From science studies to scientific literacy: A view from the classroom. Science & Education, 23(9), 1911–1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson, D. (2013). Leading change in primary science: Experiences of primary science teacher fellows who have raised the profile of science in their schools. Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 28(2), 15–27.Google Scholar
  8. Anderson, D. (2015). The nature and influence of teacher beliefs and knowledge on the science teaching practice of three generalist New Zealand primary teachers. Research in Science Education, 45(3), 395–423. doi: 10.1007/s11165-014-9428-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Anderson, D., & Clark, M. (2012). Development of syntactic subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge for science by a generalist elementary teacher. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 18(3), 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Appleton, K. (2006). Science pedagogical content knowledge and elementary school teachers. In K. Appleton (Ed.), Elementary science teacher education: International perspectives on contemporary issues and practice (pp. 31–54). Mahwah: Association for Science Teachers and Laurence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Appleton, K. (2007). Elementary science teaching. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 493–595). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Bolstad, R., & Bull, A. (2013) Strengthening engagements between schools and the science community: Final report. Wellington: Ministry of Education. http://www.nzcer.org.nz/system/files/Strengthening%20engagements%20between%20school%20.pdf. Accessed 28 Oct 2016.
  13. Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teacher’s belief system about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 835–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bull, A. (2014). Rethinking professional learning and development in primary science. http://www.nzcer.org.nz/system/files/Rethinking%20professional%20learning%20and%20development%20in%20primary%20science.pdf. Accessed 11 July 2016.
  15. Bull, A., Gilbert, J., Barwick, R., Hipkins, R., & Baker, R. (2010). Inspired by science. A paper commissioned by the Royal Society of New Zealand and the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor. http://www.nzcer.org.nz/pdfs/inspired-by-science.pdf. Accessed 27 June 2011.
  16. Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 709–725). New York: Simon & Shuster Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based professional development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about the nature of science? International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 1947–1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chamberlain, M., & Caygill, R. (2012). Key findings from New Zealand’s participation in the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 2010/11. http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/114995/Key-Findings-NZ-Participation-in-TIMSS-and-PIRLS-2010-2011.pdf. Accessed 25 March 2013.
  19. Dresner, M., & Worsley, E. (2006). Teacher research experiences, partnerships with scientists, and teacher networks sustaining factors from professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Education Review Office. (2010). Science in Years 5 to 8: Capable and competent teaching. http://www.ero.govt.nz/National-Reports/Science-in-Years-5-to-8-Capable-and-Competent-Teaching-May-2010/Overview. Accessed 6 June 2010.
  21. Education Review Office (2012). Science in the New Zealand Curriculum Years 5 to 8. http://www.ero.govt.nz/National-Reports/Science-in-The-New-Zealand-Curriculum-Years-5-to8-May-2012/. Accessed 13 Dec 2013.
  22. Erduran, S., & Daghar, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualising the nature of science for science education; scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Fitzgerald, A., Dawson, V., & Hackling, M. (2013). Examining beliefs and practices of four effective Australian primary science teachers. Research in Science Education, 43, 981–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ford, M. J., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30(1), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Friedrichsen, P., Van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95(2), 358–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Guerra-Ramos, M. (2012). Teachers’ ideas about the nature of science: A critical analysis of research approaches and their contribution to pedagogical practice. Science & Education, 21, 631–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding in science and its impact in the classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hipkins, R., & Bull, A. (2015). Science capabilities for a functional understanding of the nature of science. Curriculum Matters, 11, 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science. Language, theories, methods, history, traditions and values. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  30. Hodson, D., & Wong, S. L. (2014). From the horse’s mouth: Why scientists’ views are crucial to nature of science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2639–2665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jones, M. G., & Leagon, M. (2014). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs: Reforming practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Volume II) (pp. 830–848). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Kampourakis, K. (2016). The “general aspects” conceptualization as a pragmatic and effective means to introducing students to nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(5), 667-682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leden, L., Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Ideland, M. (2015). Teachers’ ways of talking about nature of science and its teaching. Science & Education, 24, 1141–1172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lederman, N. G. (2004). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 301–317). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  37. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Volume II) (pp. 600–620). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lewthwaite, B. (2000). Implementing science in the New Zealand curriculum: How teachers see the problems. In G. Haisman (Ed.), Exploring issues in science education: Papers from a research seminar on science education in primary schools (pp. 11–22). Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  41. Lotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 1318–1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Loucks-Horsley, S. L., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  43. Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ beliefs and practices: Issues, implications and research agenda. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(1), 25–48.Google Scholar
  44. McLaughlin, C. A., & MacFadden, B. J. (2014). At the elbows of scientists: Shaping science teachers’ conceptions and enactment of inquiry-based instruction. Research in Science Education, 44, 927–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Merriam, S. B. (2001). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  46. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Millar, R. (2011). Practical work. In J. Osborne & J. Dillon (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (2nd ed., pp. 108–134). Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Ministry of Education. (2007a). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  49. Ministry of Education. (2007b). The New Zealand curriculum by achievement objectives. http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/Learning-areas/Science/Achievement-objectives. Accessed 16 May 2017.
  50. Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pegg, J., & Gummer, E. (2010). The influence of a multidisciplinary scientific research experience on teachers’ views of nature of science. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 7(2), 447–460.Google Scholar
  53. Rennie, L. (2012). Evaluation of the Scientists in Schools project. http://www.scientistsinschools.edu.au/downloads/SiSEvaluationReport2011-2012.pdf . Accessed 20 Dec 2015.
  54. Schuster, D. A., & Carlsen, W. S. (2009). Scientists’ teaching orientations in the context of teacher professional development. Science Education, 93(4), 635–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schwartz, R. S., & Crawford, B. (2004). Authentic scientific inquiry as context for teaching nature of science. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 331–355). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  56. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tala, S., & Vesterinen, V. (2015). Nature of science contextualized: Studying nature of science with scientists. Science & Education, 24, 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Traianou, A. (2007). Understanding teacher expertise in primary science: A sociocultural approach. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  59. Waters-Adams, S. (2006). The relationship between understanding of the nature of science and practice: The influence of teachers’ beliefs about education, teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28(8), 919–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  62. Willcuts, M.H. (2009). Scientist-teacher partnerships as professional development: An action research study. Report prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC05-76RL01830. http://science-ed.pnnl.gov/teachers/pdfs/PNNL-18305.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2015.
  63. Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1431–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations