Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Happens When a Teacher’s Science Belief Structure Is in Disequilibrium? Entangled Nature of Beliefs and Practice

Research in Science Education volume 49, pages 885–920 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

This qualitative case study examined the process of change in an experienced elementary teacher’s belief structure during implementation of an inquiry-based science program. Difficulties generally associated with ascertaining beliefs were minimized by using Leatham’s (Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 91-102 (2006) Sensible System Framework, enabling researchers to obtain rich descriptions of the teacher’s belief structure by focusing on words (professed beliefs), intentions (intended beliefs), and actions (enacted beliefs). Models were constructed of the teacher’s belief structure before and after implementation of the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach (Hand et al. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149, 2004), an inquiry-based approach to teaching science. Key beliefs for this teacher were related to how students learn, goals for teaching science, focus of instruction, and roles of teacher and student. Ultimately, the teacher shifted her professed, intended, and enacted beliefs resulting in a shift from a teacher-centered to a student-centered classroom. Findings support Thagard’s Coherence Theory of Justification (2002), positing that change in one belief creates a state of disequilibrium that must be alleviated by changing/realigning other beliefs in order to re-establish coherence in the overall belief structure. This research focus is distinct from the general trend in teacher beliefs research in important ways. Most significant is that this study was not focused on the traditional two lists—those beliefs that were consistent with practice and those that were inconsistent with practice—but instead focused on the entwined nature of beliefs and practice and have shown that a teacher’s practice can be viewed as their enacted beliefs, an integral part of the teacher’s overall belief structure.

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

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(1), 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). A bayesian analysis of attribution processes. Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), p. 261.

  • Barnett, C., & Sather, S. (1992). Using case discussions to promote changes in beliefs among mathematics teachers. San Francisco, CA: annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, L. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: examining a prospective elementary teacher‘s belief system about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 835–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C., & 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 

  • Crawford, B. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research of Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (2003). Change is hard: what science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning in innovative practices. Science Education, 87, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffee, L., & Aikenhead, G. (1992). Curriculum change, student evaluation, and teacher practical knowledge. Science Education, 76, 493–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1), 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, A. (2002). Multiple perspectives for the study of teaching: knowledge, reason, understanding, and being. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 1032–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetterman, D. M. (Ed.). (1991). Using qualitative methods in institutional research (no. 72). Jossey-Bass.

  • Fonteyn, M. E., Kuipers, B., & Grobe, S. J. (1993). A description of think aloud method and protocol analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 3(4), 430–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichsen, P., & Dana, T. (2005). A substantive-level theory of highly-regarded secondary biology teachers' science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 218–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers’ beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J., Czerniak, C., & Lumpe, A. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 971–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J., Czerniak, C., Lumpe, A., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: the beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harwood, W. S., Hansen, J., & Lotter, C. (2006). Measuring teacher beliefs about inquiry: the development of a blended qualitative/quantitative instrument. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jääskeläinen, R. (2010). Think-aloud protocol. Handbook of translation studies, 1, 371–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leatham, K. (2006). Viewing mathematics teachers’ beliefs as sensible systems. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 91–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (Eds.). (2009). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Corwin Press.

  • Luft, J. (1999). Teachers’ salient beliefs about a problem-solving demonstration classroom in-service program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 141–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A., Roehrig, G. H., & Patterson, N. C. (2003). Contrasting landscapes: a comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’ practices, beliefs, and experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 77–97.

  • Lumpe, A., Haney, J., & Czerniak, C. (2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 275–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marra, R. (2005). Teacher beliefs: the impact of the design of constructivist learning environments on instructor epistemologies. Learning Environments Research, 8, 135–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton-Meier, L., Hand, B., Hockenberry, L., & Wise, K. (2008). Questions, claims and evidence. Portsmith, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, M. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, M. (2001). Pre-service ESL teachers' beliefs about second language learning: a longitudinal study. System, 29(2), 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peers, C. S. E., Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2003). Supports and concerns for teacher professional growth during the implementation of a science curriculum innovation. Research in Science Education, 33(1), 89–110.

  • Pintrich, P. (1990). Implications of psychological research on student learning and college teaching for teacher education. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 826–857). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. (2002). Future challenges and directions for theory and research on personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: the psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 389–414). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rimm-Kaufman, S., Storm, M., Sawyer, B., Pianta, R., & LaParo, K. (2006). The Teacher Belief Q-Sort: a measure of teachers’ priorities in relation to disciplinary practices, teaching practices, and beliefs about children. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 141–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: a theory of organization and change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salish Research Consortium. (1997). A final report of secondary science and mathematics teacher preparation programs: influences on new teachers and their students. Iowa City: Science Education Center, University of Iowa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawada, D., Piburn, M., Falconer, et al. (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP) (Tech. Rep No. IN00-1). Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University, Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers.

  • Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P. (2002). Coherence in thought and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., & LaMaster, S. (1995). Relationship between metaphors, beliefs and actions in the context of science curriculum change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. (1996). Cultural myths as constraints to the enacted science curriculum. Science Education, 80, 223–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: the role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: an analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72, 131–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: what can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerrick, R., Parke, H., & Nugent, J. (1997). Struggling to promote deeply rooted change: the filtering effect of teachers' beliefs on understanding transformational views of teaching science. Science Education, 81, 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2002). Applications of case study research, second edition (Applied Social Research Methods Series Volume 34).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Indiana University Northwest, Hawthorn Hall 347, Gary, USA

    Anita Martin

  2. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA

    Soonhye Park

  3. University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA

    Brian Hand

Authors
  1. Anita Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Soonhye Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian Hand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anita Martin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Martin, A., Park, S. & Hand, B. What Happens When a Teacher’s Science Belief Structure Is in Disequilibrium? Entangled Nature of Beliefs and Practice. Res Sci Educ 49, 885–920 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9644-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9644-0

Keywords

search

Navigation