Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 399–421 | Cite as

Revealing Student Teachers’ Thinking through Dilemma Analysis

  • Vicente Talanquer
  • Debra Tomanek
  • Ingrid Novodvorsky
Article

Abstract

We explore the potential of dilemma analysis as an assessment tool to reveal student teachers’ thinking and concerns about their practice. For this purpose we analyze the dilemma analyses completed by 22 student teachers enrolled in our science teacher preparation program over a period of four semesters. Student teachers’ dilemmas fall into two main groups: dilemmas about student performance and dilemmas associated with instructional decisions. These dilemmas reveal a variety of concerns that student teachers have about their work. In particular, concerns about lack of student motivation and its consequences on performance and instruction play a central role in student teachers’ thinking. The recognition of common patterns of thought in our student teacher thinking has made us reflect on and re-evaluate important components of the curriculum in our science teacher preparation program.

References

  1. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  2. Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291–310). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Connelley, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Elbaz, F. (1983). Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge. New York: Nichols Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Evans, E. D., & Tribble, M. (1986). Perceived teaching problems, self-efficacy, and commitment to teaching among preservice teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 80(2), 81–85.Google Scholar
  8. Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fuller, F. F., & Brown, O. H. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher education (Seventy-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  10. Haritos, C. (2004). Understanding teaching through the minds of teacher candidates: A curious blend of realism and idealism. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 637–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lampert, M. (1985). How do teachers manage to teach? Perspectives on problems in practice. Harvard Educational Review, 55(2), 178–194.Google Scholar
  13. Lampert, M. (1986). Teaching about thinking and thinking about teaching. In P. Taylor (Ed.), Developments in curriculum studies (pp. 233–259). London: NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar
  14. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Marland, P., & Osborne, B. (1990). Classroom theory, thinking, and action. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(1), 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  17. Munby, H. (1986). Metaphor in the thinking of teachers: An exploratory study. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18, 197–209.Google Scholar
  18. Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Teachers’ knowledge and how it develops. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (4th ed., pp. 877–904). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  19. Nisbet, R., & Wilson, T. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 83(3), 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.Google Scholar
  22. Talanquer, V., Novodvorsky, I., Slater, T. F., & Tomanek, D. (2003). A stronger role for science departments in the preparation of future chemistry teachers. Journal of Chemical Education, 80, 1168–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tobin, K. (1990). Changing metaphors and beliefs: A master switch for teaching? Theory Into Practice, 29(2), 122–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tomanek, D. (1994). A case of dilemmas: Exploring my assumptions about teaching science. Science Education, 78(5), 399–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tomanek, D. (1996). Developing teacher reflection on practice with practical inquiry. Reflect: The Journal of Reflection in Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 27–35.Google Scholar
  26. Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54(2), 143–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vicente Talanquer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Debra Tomanek
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ingrid Novodvorsky
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Science Teacher Preparation Program, College of ScienceUniversity of ArizonaTucsonU.S.A
  2. 2.Department of ChemistryUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Molecular and Cellular BiologyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonU.S.A
  4. 4.Department of PhysicsUniversity of ArizonaTucsonU.S.A

Personalised recommendations