Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 1115–1134 | Cite as

“In biology class we would just sit indoors…”: Experiences of insideness and outsideness in the places student teachers’ associate with science

  • Anna T. Danielsson
  • Kristina Andersson
  • Annica Gullberg
  • Anita Hussénius
  • Kathryn Scantlebury
Original Paper

Abstract

In this article we explore the places pre- and primary school (K-6) student teachers associate with their science learning experiences and how they view the relationship between these places and science. In doing so, we use ‘place’ as an analytical entry point to deepen the understanding of pre- and primary school student teachers’ relationship to science. Inspired by theories from human geography we firstly explore how the university science classroom can be conceptualised as a meeting place, where trajectories of people as well as artefacts come together, using this conceptualisation as the stepping stone for arguing the importance of the place-related narrations of science the students bring to this classroom. We thereafter analyse how a sense of place, including affective dimensions, is reflected in Swedish student teachers’ science learning narratives (collected in the form of an essay assignment where the student teachers’ reflected upon their in and out of school science learning experiences). The empirical material consists of 120 student essays. The most prominent feature of the empirical material as a whole is the abundance of affective stories about the student teachers’ experiences in natural environments, often expressing a strong sense of belonging to, and identification with, a particular place. However, the student narratives also give voice to an ambivalent valuing of the affective experiences of natural environments. Sometimes such affective experiences are strongly delineated from what the students consider actual science knowledge, on other occasions, students, in a somewhat contradictious way, stress natural environments as the authentic place for doing science, in contrast to the perceived in-authenticity of teaching science in the classroom. When student teachers explicitly discuss the classroom as a place, this was almost without exception with strong negative emotions, experiences of outsideness and alienation.

Keywords

Teacher education Place Primary teacher education Preschool teacher education 

References

  1. Aikenhead, G. (1997). Towards a First Nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217–238. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199704)81:2<217:AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-I.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson, K., & Gullberg, A. (2014). What is science in preschool and what do teachers have to know to empower children? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(275), 296. doi:10.1007/s11422-012-9439-6.Google Scholar
  3. Appelton, K., & Kindt, I. (2002). Begining elementary teachers’ development as teachers of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 43–61. doi:10.1023/A:1015181809961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Atwood, R. K., & Atwood, V. A. (1996). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the causes of seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 553–563. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199605)33:5<553:AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-Q.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barton, A. C. (2002). Urban science education studies: A commitment to equity, social justice and a sense of place. Studies in Science Education, 38, 1–37. doi:10.1080/03057260208560186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., & Levine, S. C. (2010). Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 1860–1863. doi:10.1073/pnas.0910967107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bouillion, L. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school–community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 878–898. doi:10.1002/tea.1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Danielsson, A. T., & Warwick, P. (2014). ‘You have to give them some science facts’ :Primary student teachers’ early negotiations of teacher identities in the intersections of discourses about science teaching and about primary teaching. Research in Science Education, 44, 289–305. doi:10.1007/s11165-013-9383-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daun, Å. (2006). Sinnlighet i naturen. In E. Johansson (Ed.), Mångnatur. Friluftslov och natursyn i det mångkulturella samhället (pp. 56–59). Bromma: Naturvårdsverket.Google Scholar
  12. Eiriksson, S. (1997). Preservice teachers’ perceived constraints of teaching science in the elementary classroom. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 9, 18–27. doi:10.1007/BF03173774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ekman, K. (2007). Herrarna i skogen. Stockholm: Bonnier.Google Scholar
  14. Frykman, J., & Löfgren, O. (1979). Den kultiverade människan. Lund: Liber Läromedel.Google Scholar
  15. Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher, 32, 3–12. doi:10.3102/0013189X032004003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding of concepts of science: Impact on confidence and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 93–105. doi:10.1080/0950069970190107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heywood, D. S. (2005). Primary trainee teachers’ learning and teaching about light: Some pedagogic implications for initial teacher training. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1447–1475. doi:10.1080/09500690500153741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hussénius, A., Andersson, K., Danielsson, A., & Gullberg, A. (2014). Ämnesinnehåll och genusmedvetenhet i samspel för en mer inkluderande naturvetenskap. Högre utbildning, 4(2), 109–125.Google Scholar
  20. Kincheloe, J. L., McKinley, E., Lim, M., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2006). Forum: A conversation on “sense of place” in science learning. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 143–160. doi:10.1007/s11422-005-9003-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lim, M., & Barton, A. C. (2006). Science learning and a sense of place in a urban middle school. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 107–142. doi:10.1007/s11422-005-9002-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Löfgren, O. (1997). Kulturarvets renässans. Landskapsupplevelse nlellan marknad och politik. RIG—Kulturhistorisk tidskrift, 80, 3–14.Google Scholar
  23. Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  24. Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (2002). Navigating boarder crossings: How primary teachers learn to teach science. Australian Science Teacher Journal, 48, 12–19.Google Scholar
  26. Nature Environment Protection Agency. (2015). Retrieved June 6 from www.swedishepa.se/Enjoying-nature/The-Right-of-Public-Access
  27. Palmer, A. (2011). “How many sums can I do?” Performative strategies and diffractive thinking as methodological tools for rethinking mathematical subjectivity. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 1, 3–18.Google Scholar
  28. Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion Limited.Google Scholar
  29. Sandell, K., & Öhman, J. (2010). Educational potentials of encounters with nature: Reflections from a Swedish outdoor perspective. Environmental Education Research, 16, 113–132. doi:10.1080/13504620903504065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Scantlebury, K., Hussenius, A., Gullberg, A. Andersson, K. & Danielsson, A. (2014). Can material feminism make gender matter in 21st science education research? In Paper presented at National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Annual Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  31. Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 440–452. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Seamon, D., & Sower, J. (2008). Place and placelessness, Edward Relph. In P. Hubbard, R. Kitchen, & G. Vallentine (Eds.), Key texts in human geography (pp. 43–51). London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Semken, S. (2005). Sense of place and place-based introductory geoscience teaching for American Indian and Alaska Native undergraduates. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Semken, S., & Butler Freeman, C. (2008). Sense of a place in the practice and assessment of place-based science teaching. Science Education, 92, 1042–1057. doi:10.1002/sce.20279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sharp, J., Hopkin, R., James, S., Peacock, G., Kelly, L., Davies, D., & Bowker, D. (2009). Teacher preparation and the national primary science curriculum: A twentieth-anniversary perspective. Research Papers in Education, 24, 247–263. doi:10.1080/02671520902725770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sible, J. C., Wilhelm, D. E., & Lederman, M. (2006). Teaching cell and molecular biology for gender equity. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 5, 227–238. doi:10.1187/cbe.05-08-0096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2001). Emergent science and technology in the early years. In Paper presented at the XXIII World Congress of OMEP. Santiago Chile.Google Scholar
  38. Sjøberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2010). The ROSE project. An overview and key findings. Oslo: University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  39. Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and communities. Great Barrington, MA: The Orion Society.Google Scholar
  40. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273–285). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  41. Sundberg, B., & Ottander, C. (2013). The conflict within the role: A longitudinal study of preschool student teachers’ developing competence in and attitudes towards science teaching in relation to developing a professional role. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 34(1), 80–94. doi:10.1080/10901027.2013.758540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Szczepanski, A. (2013). Platsens betydelse för lärande och undervisning—ett utomhuspedagogiskt perspektiv. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 9, 3–17.Google Scholar
  43. Thulin, S. (2011). Lärares tal och barns nyfikenhet: Kommunikation om naturvetenskapliga innehåll i förskolan. Gothenburg, Sweden: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  44. Trend, R. (2000). Conceptions of geological time among primary teacher trainees, with reference to their engagement with geoscience, history, and science. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 539–555. doi:10.1080/095006900289778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van Eijck, M., & Roth, W.-M. (2010). Towards a chronotopic theory of “place” in place-based education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5, 869–898. doi:10.1007/s11422-010-9278-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Warf, B., & Arias, S. (2009). Introduction: The reinsertion of space in the humanities and social sciences. In B. Warf & S. Arias (Eds.), The spatial turn: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 1–10). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Watters, J. J., & Ginns, I. S. (2000). Developing motivation to teach elementary science: Effect of collaborative and authentic learning practices in preservice education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 301–321. doi:10.1023/A:1009429131064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna T. Danielsson
    • 1
  • Kristina Andersson
    • 1
  • Annica Gullberg
    • 1
  • Anita Hussénius
    • 1
  • Kathryn Scantlebury
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Gender ResearchUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations