Skip to main content

School Resources in Teaching Science to Diverse Student Groups: An Intervention’s Effect on Elementary Teachers’ Perceptions

Abstract

Elementary school teachers’ perceptions of school resources (i.e., material, human, and social) for teaching science to diverse student groups were examined across three school districts from one state. As part of a 3-year curricular and professional development intervention, we examined the effect on teachers’ perceptions after their first year of participation. The study involved 103 fifth-grade teachers from 33 schools participating in the intervention and 116 teachers from 33 control schools. The teachers completed a survey at the beginning and end of the school year. As a result of the intervention, teachers in the treatment group reported more positive perceptions of school resources than teachers in the control group.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. The What Works Clearinghouse adopted the Benjamini–Hochberg method (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995) to correct for multiple comparisons. The traditional approach for adjusting for multiple comparisons, the Bonferroni method, was shown to be unnecessarily stringent for many practical situations. To apply the Benjamini–Hochberg method, we followed the steps outlined in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0, pp. G1–G5.

References

  • Banilower, E. R., Heck, D. J., & Weiss, I. R. (2007). Can professional development make the vision of the standards a reality? The impact of the National Science Foundation’s local systemic change through teacher enhancement initiative. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 375–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., & Weis, A. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B Methodological, 57, 289–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank, R. K. (2013). Science instructional time is declining in elementary schools: What are the implications for student achievement and closing the gap? Science Education, 97, 830–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunch, G. C. (2013). Pedagogical language knowledge: Preparing mainstream teachers for English learners in the new standards era. In C. Faltis & J. Abedi (Eds.), Review of research in education: Extraordinary pedagogies for working within school settings serving nondominant students (Vol. 37, pp. 298–341). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., Russell, J. L., Kaufman, J., & Stein, M. K. (2012). Supporting sustainability: Teachers’ advice networks and ambitious instructional reform. American Journal of Education, 119, 137–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fathman, A. K., & Crowther, D. T. (Eds.). (2006). Science for English language learners: K-12 classroom strategies. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamoran, A., Anderson, C. W., Quiroz, P. A., Secada, W. G., Williams, T., & Ashmann, S. (2003). Transforming teaching in math and science: How schools and districts can support change. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamoran, A., Secada, W. G., & Marrett, C. B. (2006). The organizational context of teaching and learning: Changing theoretical perspectives. In M. T. Hallinan (Ed.), Handbook of research in the sociology of education (pp. 37–63). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, J. I., Daeler, K. R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., & Miratrix, L. W. (2012). Differential effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 333–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewson, P. W., Kahle, J. B., Scantlebury, K., & Davies, D. (2001). Equitable science education in urban middle schools: Do reform efforts make a difference? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1130–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C. J., Bloom, H. S., Black, A. R., & Lipsey, M. W. (2008). Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Development Perspectives, 2, 172–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78, 1010–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. C. (2006). Effective professional development and change in practice: Barriers science teachers encounter and implications for reform. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. C. (2007). Whole-school collaborative sustained professional development and science teacher change: Signs of progress. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 629–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research and Science Teaching, 35, 249–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, M. B. (2002). Professional development to promote schoolwide inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, M. S., & Plecki, M. L. (2001). Investing in the renewal of urban science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1089–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M., Boerst, T. A., & Graziani, F. (2011). Organizational resources in the service of school-wide ambitious teaching practice. Teachers College Record, 113(7), 1361–1400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O. (2005). Science education and English language learners: Synthesis and research agenda. Review of Educational Research, 75, 491–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O., & Buxton, C. A. (2013). Integrating science learning and English language development for English language learners. Theory into Practice, 52, 36–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O., Llosa, L., Jiang, F., Haas, A., O’Connor, C., & Van Booven, C. (2016). Teachers’ science knowledge and practices with English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(4), 579–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O., & Maerten-Rivera, J. (2012). Teacher change in elementary science instruction with English language learners: Results of a multi-year professional development intervention across multiple grades. Teachers College Record, 114(8), 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J., Buxton, C. A., Penfield, R. D., & Secada, W. G. (2009). Urban elementary teachers’ perspectives on teaching science to English language learners. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(3), 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, S., Soland, J., & Fox, L. (2014). Is a good teacher a good teacher for all? Comparing value-added of teachers with their English learners and non-English learners. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36, 457–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Data local education agency locale code file: School year 200506. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pdf/pau051agen.pdf

  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parise, L. M., & Spillane, J. P. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers’ practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110, 323–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W., Riel, M., Krause, A., & Frank, K. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional interactions in a school as social capital: A social network approach. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 124–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., Spybrook, J., Congdon, R., Liu, X., & Martinez, A. (2011). Optimal design software for multi-level and longitudinal research (Version 2.01) [Computer software]. www.wtgrantfoundation.org

  • Rivera Maulucci, M. S. (2010). Resisting the marginalization of science in an urban school: Coactivating social, cultural, material, and strategic resources. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 840–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 883–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosebery, A. S., & Warren, B. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students’ strengths. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. S., Nelson, M. M., Trygstad, P. J., & Banilower, E. R. (2013). Unequal distribution of resources for K-12 science instruction: Data from the 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solano-Flores, G., & Nelson-Barber, S. (2001). On the cultural validity of science assessments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 553–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., Diamond, J. B., Walker, L. J., Halverson, R., & Jita, L. (2001). Urban school leadership for elementary science instruction: Identifying and activating resources in an undervalued school subject. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 918–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., & Thompson, C. (1997). Reconstructing conceptions of local capacity: The local education agency’s capacity for ambitious educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J., Sirinides, P., & May, H. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 31–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuerk, P. W. (2005). Research in the high-stakes era: Achievement, resources, and no child left behind. Psychological Science, 16, 419–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Okhee Lee.

Additional information

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant DRL 1209309. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Appendix: Teacher Survey Scales

Appendix: Teacher Survey Scales

I. Material Resources

Materials

  1. 1.

    Indicate how much of a barrier each of the following factors is to your science teaching.

 

Not a barrier

Minor barrier

Moderate barrier

Major barrier

(a) Shortage of science resources (e.g., trade books, posters, and other supplements)

1

2

3

4

(b) Shortage of computers and technology for science instruction

1

2

3

4

(c) Classroom facility (e.g., lab set-up, insufficient space, furniture, etc.)

1

2

3

4

Time

  1. 2.

    Indicate how much of a barrier each of the following factors is to your science teaching.

 

Not a barrier

Minor barrier

Moderate barrier

Major barrier

(d) Lack of time available to teach science

1

2

3

4

(e) Lack of time available for teachers to plan together

1

2

3

4

(f) Lack of time available for teacher professional development

1

2

3

4

II. Human Resources

Teaching Practices for Understanding

  1. 3.

    In your most recent teaching position, indicate how often YOU did the following in your science lessons.

 

Never or almost never

Some lessons

Most lessons

Every lesson

(a) Use students’ ideas to generate class discussion

1

2

3

4

(b) Connect science topics to one another

1

2

3

4

In your most recent teaching position, please indicate how often you ASKED STUDENTS to do the following in your science lessons.

 

Never or almost never

Some lessons

Most lessons

Every lesson

(c) Explain the reasoning behind an idea

1

2

3

4

(d) Apply science concepts to explain natural events or real world situations

1

2

3

4

(e) Talk about things they do at home that are similar to what we do in science class (e.g., measurement, mixture, energy sources)

1

2

3

4

(f) Discuss their prior knowledge or experience related to the science topic or concept

1

2

3

4

Teaching Practices for Inquiry

  1. 4.

    In your most recent teaching position, please indicate how often you ASKED STUDENTS to do the following in your science lessons.

 

Never or almost never

Some lessons

Most lessons

Every lesson

(a) Provide evidence (observations, data) to support claims

1

2

3

4

(b) Use measurement tools (e.g., ruler, thermometer, scale/balance, timer, graduated cylinder)

1

2

3

4

(c) Design investigations to test their own ideas

1

2

3

4

(d) Analyze data to identify patterns and relationships

1

2

3

4

(e) Write about what was observed and why it happened

1

2

3

4

(f) Use simulations or models to construct explanations

1

2

3

4

Language Development Strategies

  1. 5.

    In your most recent teaching position, please indicate how often YOU did the following in your science lessons.

 

Never or almost never

Some lessons

Most lessons

Every lesson

(a) Present information in multiple graphic formats (e.g., graphs, charts, photos, diagrams, and models)

1

2

3

4

(b) Use realia (including hands-on activities) to help students develop academic language of science

1

2

3

4

(c) Adjust style of interaction based on varying levels of English proficiency

1

2

3

4

(d) Make science text comprehensible (e.g., underline important information, identify main ideas and details, make inferences)

1

2

3

4

(e) Make science talk understandable (e.g., clearer enunciation, longer wait time)

1

2

3

4

(f) Use science terms in various contexts (e.g., introduction, science investigation, writing, and discussion)

1

2

3

4

(g) Create small groups with varying levels of language proficiency to work together in science class

1

2

3

4

Home Language Use

If you have NO ESOL level 1–5 students in your science class(es), skip to question #7.

  1. 6.

    In your most recent teaching position, please indicate how often YOU did the following in your science lessons.

 

Never or almost never

Some lessons

Most lessons

Every lesson

(a) Encourage more English proficient students to assist less English proficient students in their home language

1

2

3

4

(b) Allow students to discuss science using their home language

1

2

3

4

(c) Introduce key science vocabulary terms in both their home language and English

1

2

3

4

(d) Allow students to write about science ideas or experiments in their home language

1

2

3

4

III. Social Resources

Teacher Collaboration in Science Practices

  1. 7.

    We would like to know how you feel about teaching science in your school. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement.

 

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

(a) Most teachers in this school have a shared vision of effective science instruction

1

2

3

4

(b) When I have questions about teaching science, I can get good advice from other teachers in this school

1

2

3

4

(c) I can rely on other teachers in this school to help me try out new teaching techniques in science

1

2

3

4

(d) Teachers plan for science instruction together

1

2

3

4

Teacher Collaboration in Science Tasks

  1. 8.

    Please indicate how often YOU did the following with other teachers in your school during a typical month for at least 15 min.

 

Never

1 time

2–3 times

4–8 times

9+ times

(a) Share teaching materials and activities for science

0

1

2

3

4

(b) Share stories about teaching experiences in science

0

1

2

3

4

(c) Analyze a specific student’s work in science

0

1

2

3

4

(d) Work together to develop activities for science instruction

0

1

2

3

4

(e) Share assessment tasks that reveal how students understand science

0

1

2

3

4

School Administration Support of Science

  1. 9.

    We would like to know how you feel about teaching science in your school. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement.

 

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

(a) The school administration actively supports using the allocated time for science instruction

1

2

3

4

(b) The school administration allocates enough funding for supplementary science resources

1

2

3

4

(c) The school administration clearly communicates the importance of teaching science

1

2

3

4

(d) The school administration encourages faculty to plan for science instruction together

1

2

3

4

(e) The school administration recognizes student achievement in science

1

2

3

4

(f) The school administration demonstrates knowledge of Next Generation Sunshine State Standards (NGSSS) in Science

1

2

3

4

Parent and Family

  1. 10.

    Please indicate how much of a barrier each of the following factors is to science learning in your school.

 

Not a barrier

Minor barrier

Moderate barrier

Major barrier

(a) Lack of participation in school activities (e.g., parent-teacher conferences, returning phone calls)

1

2

3

4

(b) Parent’s (or guardian’s) limited English proficiency

1

2

3

4

(c) Lack of supervision and support for homework

1

2

3

4

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, O., Llosa, L., Jiang, F. et al. School Resources in Teaching Science to Diverse Student Groups: An Intervention’s Effect on Elementary Teachers’ Perceptions. J Sci Teacher Educ 27, 769–794 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9487-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9487-y

Keywords

  • School resources
  • Teacher professional development
  • English learners
  • Student diversity