Preservice science teachers face numerous challenges in understanding and teaching science as inquiry. Over the course of their teacher education program, they are expected to move from veteran science students with little experience learning their discipline through inquiry instruction to beginning science teachers adept at implementing inquiry in their own classrooms. In this study, we used Aikenhead’s (Sci Educ 81: 217–238, 1997, Science Educ 85:180–188, 2001) notion of border crossing to describe this transition preservice teachers must make from science student to science teacher. We examined what one cohort of eight preservice secondary science teachers said, did, and wrote as they both conducted a two-part inquiry investigation and designed an inquiry lesson plan. We conducted two types of qualitative analyses. One, we drew from Costa (Sci Educ 79: 313–333, 1995) to group our preservice teacher participants into one of four types of potential science teachers. Two, we identified successes and struggles in preservice teachers’ attempts to negotiate the cultural border between veteran student and beginning teacher. In our implications, we argue that preservice teachers could benefit from explicit opportunities to navigate the border between learning and teaching science; such opportunities could deepen their conceptions of inquiry beyond those exclusively fashioned as either student or teacher.
This is a preview of subscription content,to check access.
Access this article
Similar content being viewed by others
Aikenhead, G. S. (1997). Toward a First Nations Cross-Cultural Science and Technology Curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217–238.
Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Students’ ease in crossing cultural borders into school science. Science Education, 85, 180–188.
Ball, D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 241–247.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.
Brand, B. R., & Glasson, G. E. (2004). Crossing cultural borders into science teaching: Early life experiences, racial and ethnic identities, and believes about diversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(2), 119–141.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Carlsen, W. S. (1992). Closing down the conversation: Discouraging student talk on unfamiliar science content. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 27(2), 15–21.
Carlsen, W. S. (2007). Language and science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 57–74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Carter, L. (2010). The armchair at the borders: The “messy” ideas of borders and border epistemologies within multicultural science education scholarship. Science Education, 94, 428–447.
Chapman, O. L. (2001). White paper: A description of Calibrated Peer Review. Los Angeles: UCLA. http://cpr.molsci.ucla.edu.
Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1998). The golem: What you should know about science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Costa, V. B. (1995). When science is “another world”: Relationships between worlds of family, friends, school, and science. Science Education, 79, 313–333.
DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. New York: Teachers College.
Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268–291.
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (2005, February) Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Framing the debates. Plenary paper for inquiry conference on developing a consensus research agenda, New Brunswick, NJ.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013–1055.
Gee, J. P. (2001). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction and what is literacy? In E. Cushman, E. R. Kintgen, B. M. Kroll, & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy: A critical sourcebook (pp. 525–544). Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins.
Green, J. L., & Dixon, C. (2007). Classroom interaction, situated learning. In M. Martin-Jones, A.M. de Mejia & N. H. Homberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed., Vol. 3) Discourse and Education, 1–12. Berlin: Springer.
Green, J. L., & Wallat, C. (1981). Mapping instructional conversations: A sociolinguistic ethnography. In J. L. Green & C. Wallat (Eds.), Ethnography and language in educational settings (pp. 161–205). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 645–670.
Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 160–189.
Kelly, J. (2000). Rethinking the elementary science methods course: A case for content, pedagogy, and informal science. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 755–777.
Kelly, G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science teaching (pp. 443–469). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kelly, G. J., Regev, J., & Prothero, W. A. (2008). Analysis of lines of reasoning in written argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Recent developments and future directions (pp. 137–157). New York: Springer.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Metz, M. H. (2001). Intellectual border crossing in graduate education: A report from the field. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 1–7.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national standards in science education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2012). Framework for K-12 science education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224–240.
Phelan, P., Davidson, A. L., & Cao, H. T. (1991). Students’ multiple worlds—negotiating the boundaries of family, peer, and school cultures. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 22, 224–250.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.
Roth, W. M., McGinn, M. K., & Woszczyna, C. (1999). Differential participation during science conversations: The interaction of focal artifacts, social configurations, and physical arrangements. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3&4), 247–293.
Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89, 634–656.
Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. F. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 1–103). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Trautmann, N. (2009). Designing peer review for pedagogical success. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(4), 14–19.
Trautmann, N. M., Carlsen, W. S., Krasny, M. E., & Cunningham, C. M. (2000). Integrated inquiry. The Science Teacher, 9, 52–55.
Trautmann, N. M., Carlsen, W. S., Krasny, M. E., & Cunningham, C. M. (2001a). Assessing toxic risk: Student edition. National Science Teacher Association.
Trautmann, N. M., Carlsen, W. S., Krasny, M. E., & Cunningham, C. M. (2001b). Assessing toxic risk: Teachers guide. National Science Teacher Association.
Trumbull, D., & Kerr, P. (1993). University researchers’ inchoate critiques of science teaching: Implications for the content of pre-service science teacher education. Science Education, 77, 301–317.
Wallace, C. S., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2004). Writing and learning in the science classroom. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers’ understandings of model-based inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 783–835.
Yore, L. D., Florence, M. K., Pearson, T. W., & Weaver, A. J. (2006). Written discourse in scientific communities: A conversation with two scientists about their views of science, use of language, role of writing in doing science, and compatibility between their epistemic views and language. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 109–141.
Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., Crawford, B., Friedrichsen, P., & Land, S. (2002). Scaffolding preservice science teachers’ evidence-based arguments during an investigation of natural selection. Research in Science Education, 32, 437–463.
About this article
Cite this article
Kang, E.J.S., Bianchini, J.A. & Kelly, G.J. Crossing the Border from Science Student to Science Teacher: Preservice Teachers’ Views and Experiences Learning to Teach Inquiry. J Sci Teacher Educ 24, 427–447 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9317-9