School–University Action Research: Impacts on Teaching Practices and Pupil Learning

  • Iiris Attorps
  • Eva Kellner


The aim of this article is to describe a design and implementation of a school–university action research project about teaching and learning biology and mathematics in primary school. Nine teachers in grades 1 to 6, in collaboration with two researchers, were using content representation (CoRe) in learning study (LS)-inspired cycle as pedagogical tools when planning, implementing, and reflecting on lessons and pupil learning. By using pre- and post-tests, the teachers acquired knowledge about pupil subject-specific knowledge and learning. Some examples are given on how the tools in the project influenced the teaching practices and pupil learning. This research design brought together university and school practitioners to work collaboratively in a professional learning community, which developed teaching and learning in biology and mathematics.


Action research Content representation Learning study Professional development Professional learning community 



The authors wish to thank the University of Gävle, Sweden, and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency for their financial support


  1. Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1405–1416. doi: 10.1080/09500690802187041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bausmith, J. M. & Barry, C. (2011). Revisiting professional learning communities to increase college readiness: The importance of pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 40(4), 175–178. doi: 10.3102/0013189X11409927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertram, A. & Loughran, J. (2012). Science teachers’ views on CoRes and PaP-eRs as a framework for articulating and developing pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Science Education, 42(6), 1027–1047. doi: 10.1007/s11165-011-9227-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bleicher, R. E. (2014). A collaborative action research approach to professional learning. Professional Development in Education, 40(5), 802–821. doi: 10.1080/19415257.2013.842183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borko, H., Jacobs, J. & Koellner, K. (2010). Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development. In P. L. Peterson, E. Baker & B. McGaw (Eds.), Third international encyclopedia of education (pp. 548–556). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlsson, B. (2002a). Ecological understanding 1: Ways of experiencing photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 24(7), 681–699. doi: 10.1080/09500690110098868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carlsson, B. (2002b). Ecological understanding 2: Transformation—a key to ecological understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 24(7), 701–715. doi: 10.1080/09500690110098877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlsson, B. (2003). Dramatic photosynthesis. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49(1), 26–35.Google Scholar
  11. Clements, D. H. & Sarama, J. (2007). Effects of a preschool mathematics curriculum: Summative research on the building blocks project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 136–163.Google Scholar
  12. Darling-Hammond, L., Chung Wei, R., Andree, A., Richardson, N. & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the U.S. and abroad. Stanford University, CA: National Staff Development Council.Google Scholar
  13. Darling-Hammond, L. & McLaughlin, M. W. (2011). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform; policies must keep pace with new ideas about what, when, and how teachers learn and must focus on developing schools’ and teachers’ capacities to be responsible for student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S. & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112. doi: 10.3102/01623737024002081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doppelt, Y., Schunn, C. D., Silk, E. M., Mehalik, M. M., Reynolds, B. & Ward, E. (2009). Evaluating the impact of a facilitated learning community approach to professional development on teacher practice and student achievement. Research in Science and Technology Education, 27(3), 339–354. doi: 10.1080/02635140903166026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. English, L. D. (2004). Promoting the development of young children’s mathematical and analogical reasoning. In L. English (Ed.), Mathematical and analogical reasoning of young learners (pp. 201–213). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S. & Tal, R. T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(16), 643–658. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00059-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  19. Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hawley, D. & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development: A new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. (pp. 127–150). Jossey-Bass Education Series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Helldén, G. F. (2004). A study of recurring core developmental features in students’ conceptions of some key ecological processes. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics & Technology Education, 4(1), 59–76. doi: 10.1080/14926150409556597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kellner, E. & Attorps, I. (2015). Primary school teachers’ concerns and needs in biology and mathematics teaching. Accepted in NorDiNa - Nordic Studies in Science Education.Google Scholar
  23. Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice-based practice. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463–474. doi: 10.1080/09650790903093284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204. doi: 10.1080/03057260903142285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leung, A. (2003). Dynamic geometry and the theory of variation. In N. Pateman, B. J. Doughherty & J. Zillox (Eds.), Proceedings of the PME 27: Psychology of Mathematics education 27th International Conference (pp. 197–204). Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
  26. Liljedahl, P. (2004). Repeating pattern or number pattern: The distinction is blurred. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 26(3), 24–42.Google Scholar
  27. Lin, C.-Y. & Hu, R. (2003). Students’ understanding of energy flow and matter cycling in the context of the food chain, photosynthesis and respiration. International Journal of Science Education, 25(12), 1529–1544. doi: 10.1080/0950069032000052045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Little, J. W. (2004). “Looking at student work” in the United States: Countervailing impulses in professional development. In C. Day & J. Sachs (Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers (pp. 94–118). Buckingham, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  29. Little, J. W. (2006). Professional community and professional development in the learning-centered school. Arlington, VA: National Education Association.Google Scholar
  30. Loughran, J. J., Berry, A. & Mulhall, P. (2012). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Loughran, J. J., Mulhall, P. & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370–391. doi: 10.1002/tea.20007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P. & Berry, A. (2008). Exploring pedagogical content knowledge in science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1301–1320. doi: 10.1080/09500690802187009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J. & Borko, H. (1999). PCK and science education. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  34. Marmaroti, P. & Galanopoulou, D. (2006). Pupils’ understanding of photosynthesis: A questionnaire for the simultaneous assessment of all aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 383–403. doi: 10.1080/09500690500277805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Marton, F. & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Science, 15(2), 193–220. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls1502_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marton, F., Runesson, U. & Tsui, A. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. McNiff, J. (2002). Action research: Principles & practice. New York, NY: Routledge/Falmer.Google Scholar
  38. Mulligan, J., Mitchelmore, M. & Prescott, A. (2006). Integrating concepts and processes in early mathematics: The Australian Pattern and Structure Awareness Project (PASMAP). In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Kratká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Prague, the Czech Republic (pp. 209–216). Prague, Czech Republic: PME.Google Scholar
  39. Nilsson, P. & Loughran, J. (2012). Exploring the development of pre-service science elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 699–721. doi: 10.1007/s10972-011-9239-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nuthall, G. (2004). Relating classroom teaching to student learning: A critical analysis of why research has failed to bridge the theory—practice gap. Harvard Educational Review, 74(3), 273–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2015). Improving schools in Sweden: An OECD perspective. Retrieved from (Accessed 2015-06-24)
  42. Özay, E. & Öztas, H. (2003). Secondary students’ interpretations of photosynthesis and plant nutrition. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 68–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pang, M. F. & Ling, L. M. (2012). Learning study: Helping teachers to use theory, develop professionally, and produce new knowledge to be shared. Instructional Science, 40(3), 589–606. doi: 10.1007/s11251-011-9191-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sagor, R. D. (2010). The action research guidebook: A four-stage process for educators and school teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  45. Saunders, W. M., Goldenberg, C. N. & Gallimore, R. (2009). Increasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title I schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 1006–1033. doi: 10.3102/0002831209333185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundation of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stavy, R., Eisen, Y. & Yaakobi, D. (1987). How students aged 13–15 understand photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 105–115. doi: 10.1080/0950069870090111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. The Swedish National Agency for Education [Skolverket] (2011). Syllabuses. Compulsory school. Retrieved from (Accessed 2015-04-14)
  51. Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education. (UK).Google Scholar
  52. Van Driel, J. H. & Berry, A. (2010). The teacher education knowledge base: Pedagogical content knowledge. In P. L. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), Third international encyclopedia of education (pp. 656–661). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Van Driel, J. H. & Berry, A. (2012). Teacher professional development focusing on pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 26–28. doi: 10.3102/0013189X11431010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vescio, V., Ross, D. & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vikström, A. (2008). What is intended, what is realized, and what is learned? Teaching and learning biology in the primary school classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(3), 211–233. doi: 10.1007/s10972-008-9090-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Warren, E. (2005). Young children’s ability to generalise the pattern rules for growing patterns. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Melbourne, Australia (pp. 305–312). Melbourne, Austalia: The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  57. Warren, E. & Cooper, T. (2006). Using repeating patterns to explore functional thinking. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 11(1), 9–14.Google Scholar
  58. Yoon, K.S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloos, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No.033). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from (Accessed 2015-04-14).
  59. Zeichner, K. M. & Noffke, S. E. (2001). Practitioner research. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 298–330). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable DevelopmentUniversity of GävleGävleSweden

Personalised recommendations