• Junjun ChenEmail author
  • Bronwen Cowie


The benefits of connecting school students with scientists are well documented. This paper reports how New Zealand teachers brought scientists into the classrooms through the use of videos of New Zealand scientists talking about themselves and their research. Two researchers observed lessons in 9 different classrooms in which 23 educational videos were shown to students from years 2 to 11 (aged 6–17 years). Seven groups of primary students and 4 groups of secondary students participated in interviews after classroom observations. Eight additional secondary teachers participated in 7 focus group discussions; 4 additional primary teachers participated in 1 focus group discussion. Data were analysed thematically using an inductive approach. This analysis uncovered 4 major functions for the use of videos of scientists talking about their work: bringing scientists into the classroom, scientists talking about science with local relevance, scientists explaining concepts using a multitude of modes and scientists as authentic alternative authorities within the classroom. Taken together, the findings demonstrate that the use of video clips of scientists talking about their work can be an effective and efficient way of engaging students in learning about science and scientists.

Key words

classroom research educational technology image of scientist science education video 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aikenhead, G., Orpwood, G. & Fensham, P. (2011). Scientific literacy for a knowledge society. In C. Linder, L. Ostman, D. Roberts, P. O. Wickman, G. Erickson & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 28–44). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Barak, M. & Dori, Y. J. (2011). Science education in primary schools: Is an animation worth a thousand pictures? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(5), 608–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolstad, R. & Hipkins, R. (2008). Seeing yourself in science—The importance of the middle school years. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  4. Braund, M. & Reiss, M. (2006). Validity and worth in the science curriculum: Learning school science outside the laboratory. Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 213–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brickhouse, N. W., Lowery, P. & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of a girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brunvand, S. & Fishman, B. (2007). Investigating the impact of the availability of scaffolds on pre-service teacher noticing and learning. Video Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(2), 151–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen, J., Cowie, B. & Oliver, K. (2011). Reading to learn about New Zealand birds in a primary science classroom. New Zealand Science Teacher, 129, 31–33.Google Scholar
  8. Chen, J., & Cowie, B. (2012). A butterfly story: Being a citizen scientist. New Zealand ScienceTeacher, 130, 34–37.Google Scholar
  9. Cooper, B., Cowie, B. & Jones, A. (2010). Connecting teachers and students with science and scientists: The Science Leaning Hub. Science Education International, 21(2), 92–101.Google Scholar
  10. Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis, E., Beyer, C., Forbes, C. & Stevens, S. (2011). Understanding pedagogical design capacity through teachers’ narratives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 797–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Demirba, M. (2009). The relationships between the scientist perception and scientific attitudes of science teacher candidates in Turkey: A case study. Scientific Research and Essay, 4(6), 565–576.Google Scholar
  13. Dixon, P. & Wilke, R. (2007). The influence of a teacher research experience on elementary teachers’ thinking and instruction. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 19, 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eccles, J. (2005). Why women shy away from careers in science and math. Retrieved from Accessed 2 Aug 2012.
  15. Elster, D. (2009). Biology in context: Teachers’ professional development in learning communities. Journal of Biological Education, 43(2), 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Falloon, G. & Trewern, A. (2013). Developing school–scientist partnerships: Lessons for scientists from Forests-of-Life. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fasse, B. B. & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Evaluating classroom practices using qualitative methods: Defining and refining the process. Paper presented at the International Conference of Learning Sciences, Australia.Google Scholar
  18. Feldman, A., Divoll, K. & Rogan, A. (2007). Research education of new scientists: Implications for science teacher education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  19. Fensham, P. (2009). Teaching science to achieve scientific literacy. In R. Bybee & B. McCrae (Eds.), OISA science 2006: Implications for science teachers and teaching (pp. 187–202). New Orleans, USA: National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  20. France, B. & Bay, J. L. (2010). Questions students ask: Bridging the gap between scientists and students in a research institute classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 32(2), 173–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gluckman, P. (2011). Looking ahead: Science education for the 21st century. Retrieved from Accessed 2 Aug 2012.
  22. Harlen, W. (2008). Science as a key component of the primary curriculum: A rationale with policy implications. Retrieved from Accessed 2 Aug 2012.
  23. Hoffler, T. N. & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 722–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hughes, R., Molyneaux, K. & Dixon, P. (2012). The role of scientist mentors on teachers’ perceptions of the community of science during a summer research experience. Research in Science Education, 42(5), 915–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 241–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kearney, M. (2002). Using digital video to enhance authentic technology-mediated learning in science classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Council for Computers in Education, Hobart, Australia.Google Scholar
  27. Kelly, K. & Brown, C. (2003). Communicative demands of learning science through technological design: Third grade students’ construction of solar energy devices. Linguistics and Education, 13, 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J. & Tsatsarelius, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetoric of the science classroom. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  29. Laursen, S., Liston, C., Thiry, H. & Graf, J. (2007). What good is a scientist in the classroom? Participant outcomes and program design features for a short-duration science outreach intervention in K-12 classrooms. CBE Life Sciences education, 6(1), 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  31. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Ministry of Education (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  33. Moreland, J., Cowie, B., Otrel-Cass, K. & Jones, A. (2010). Planning for learning: Building knowledge for teaching primary science and technology. Wellington, New Zealand: Teaching and Learning Research Initiative.Google Scholar
  34. Morrison, J. A. & Estes, J. C. (2007). Using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(2), 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Olympiou, G. & Zacharia, Z. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96, 21–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow’s world. Volume 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  37. Osborne, J. & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London: Nuffield Foundation.Google Scholar
  38. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Pop, M. M., Dixon, P. & Grove, C. (2010). Research experiences for teachers (RET): Motivation, expectation, and changes to teaching practices due to professional program involvement. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 127–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Quellmalz, E. S., Timms, M. J., Silberglitt, M. D. & Buckley, B. C. (2012). Science assessments for all: Integrating science simulations into balanced state science assessment systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(3), 363–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rennie, L. J. (2012). A very valuable partnership: Evaluation of the Scientists in Schools Project 2011–12. Dickson, ACT: CSIRO Education.Google Scholar
  42. Scherz, Z. & Oren, M. (2006). How to change students’ images of science and technology. Science Education, 90(6), 965–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schibeci, R. & Lee, L. (2003). Portrayals of science and scientists, and “science for citizenship”. Research in Science and Technological Education, 21(2), 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Scott, P., Mortimer, E. & Ametller, J. (2011). Pedagogical link-making: A fundamental aspect of teaching and learning scientific conceptual knowledge. Studies in Science Education, 47(1), 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sharkawy, A. (2012). Exploring the potential of using stories about diverse scientists and reflective activities to enrich primary students’ images of scientists and scientific work. Culture Studies of Science Education, 7, 307–340. doi: 10.1007/s11422-012-9386-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tabak, I. (2004). Reconstructing context: Negotiating the tension between exogenous and endogenous educational design. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tversky, B. & Morrison, J. B. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 57(40), 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tytler, R., Osborne, J. F., Williams, G., Tytler, K. & Clark, C. J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the school transition. Canberra: Commissioned by the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.Google Scholar
  49. Wong, S. L. & Hodson, D. (2009). From the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93, 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wormstead, S. J., Becker, M. L. & Congalton, R. G. (2002). Tools for successful student–teacher–scientist partnerships. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(3), 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yarden, H. & Yarden, A. (2011). Studying biotechnological methods using animations: The teacher’s role. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 689–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ziedler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L. & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science Education, 89, 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Education Policy and LeadershipThe Hong Kong Institute of EducationTai Po, New TerritoriesSAR

Personalised recommendations