Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Do Preservice Science Teachers Develop Goals Reflective of Science Teacher Education? A Case Study of Three Preservice Science Teachers

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One broad research question researchers continue to pursue is: to what degree does science teacher education influence the thinking of preservice science teachers? In other words, how has the thinking of preservice science teachers changed during the course of teacher education? Different models of cognition suggest different foci for this research, leading to research on preservice science teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge, among other mental constructs. This study explores the question of preservice science teachers’ thinking using a goal-driven theory of cognition. From this theoretical perspective, a person’s actions are attempts to satisfy one or more of the goals he or she holds. Applied to the study of preservice science teachers’ thinking, goal-driven models of cognition suggest that an important outcome of teacher education is for preservice science teachers to develop goals reflective of their pedagogical training. The research question for this study is: to what extent do the goals of preservice science teachers align with the instructional practice emphasized in teacher education? Qualitative methods were used to study the goals of three science student teachers from a STEM teacher education program at a large state university in southwestern USA. Interviews were conducted at the beginning and the end of the student teaching semester, with student portfolio submissions providing evidence for triangulation. We present three main findings: First, preservice teachers adopt goals reflective of many, but not all, of the pedagogical strategies emphasized in teacher education. Second, the goals of student teachers remain in flux over the course of the semester, with students tending to disengage from goals during this time. Third, conflict may arise between pedagogical goals, with student teachers resolving these conflicts in ways that are both research based and less than ideal. Finally, we present implications for teacher educators and those who conduct research on STEM teacher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Note that we are not committing to any specific process of learning, as the focus of this paper is not about the process of learning during teacher education. Instead, it is about the content of the representations (i.e., the result of those learning processes)—what representations are stored in long term memory?

References

  • Aarts, H., & Elliot, A. J. (2012). Preface. In H. Aarts & A. J. Elliot (Eds.), Goal directed behavior (pp. vii–viii). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aarts, H., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Hassin, R. R. (2004). Goal contagion: perceiving is for pursuing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(1), 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abell, S. K., & Bryan, L. A. (1997). Reconceptualizing the elementary science methods course using a reflection orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(3), 153–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alonzo, A. C., Kobarg, M., & Seidel, T. (2012). Pedagogical content knowledge as reflected in teacher-student interactions: analysis of two video cases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(10), 1211–1239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. M., & Stillman, J. A. (2013). Student teaching's contribution to preservice teacher development: a review of research focused on the preparation of teachers for urban and high-needs contexts. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 3–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A. J., Zech, L., et al. (1998). Doing with understanding: lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3/4), 271–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belo, N. A. H., Van Driel, J. H., van Veen, K., & Verloop, N. (2014). Beyond the dichotomy of teacher- versus student-focused education: a survey study on physics teachers’ beliefs about the goals and pedagogy of education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 89–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A., & Van Driel, J. H. (2013). Teaching about teaching science: aims, strategies, and backgrounds of science teacher educators. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(2), 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., de Koning, E., & Vedder, P. (2006). Goal-directed behavior and contextual factors in the classroom: an innovative approach to the study of multiple goals. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 33–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. (1973). Considerations of some problems of comprehension. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 383–438). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Scotter, P. V., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., et al. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: origins, effectiveness, and applications. Colorado Springs: BSCS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, L. J., & Schooler, C. (1999). One the use of analogy in text-based memory and comprehension: the interaction between complexity of within-domain encoding and between-domain processing. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(1), 41–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2008). Feedback process in the simultaneous regulation of action and affect. In J. Y. Shah & W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 308–324). New York: Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanagh, S. (2007). Science labs: beyond isolationism. Education Week, 26(18), 24–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1987). Teacher planning. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 84–103). London: Cassell Educational.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, C. J. (2006). Why is dissemination so difficult? The nature of teacher knowledge and the spread of curriculum reform. American Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 257–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Second ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, D. I. (2009). Alignment, cohesions and change: examining mathematics teachers’ belief structures and their influence on instructional practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12, 325–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. M. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, O., Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2005). Preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of using particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(8), 947–964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deemer, S. (2004). Classroom goal orientation in high school classrooms: revealing links between teacher beliefs and classroom environments. Educational Research, 46(1), 73–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J., & Fryer, J. W. (2008). The goal construct in psychology. In J. Y. Shah & W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 235–250). New York: Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enderle, P., Dentzau, M., Roseler, K., Southerland, S. A., Granger, E., Hughes, R., et al. (2014). Examining the influence of RETs on science teacher beliefs and practice. Science Education, 98(6), 1077–1108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldon, D. F. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: the double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 123–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbach, A., Zhang, Y., & Koo, M. (2009). The dynamics of self-regulation. European Review of Social Psychology, 20, 315–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, S. S., & Luft, J. A. (2011). Early career secondary science teachers: a longitudinal study of beliefs in relation to field experiences. Science Education, 95(6), 1124–1146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichsen, P., Van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95(2), 358–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, M. G., & Hoffman, B. (2009). Shared planning time: a novel context for studying teachers’ discourse and beliefs about learning and instruction. Teachers College Record, 111(5), 1242–1273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, P. M., & Moskowitz, G. B. (1996). Goal effects on action and cognition. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: handbook of basic principles (pp. 361–399). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunckel, K. L., & Wood, M. B. (2016). The principle-practical discourse edge: elementary preservice and mentor teachers working together on colearning tasks. Science Education, 100(1), 96–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrington, D. G., Bancroft, S. F., Edwards, M. M., & Schairer, C. J. (2016). I want to be the inquiry guy! How research experiences for teachers change beliefs, attitudes, and values about teaching science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(2), 183–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutner, T. L., & Markman, A. B. (2016). Proposing an operational definition of science teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(6), 675–691.

  • Hutner, T. L., & Markman, A. B. (2017). Applying a goal-driven model of science teacher cognition to the resolution of two anomalies in research on the relationship between science teacher education and classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(6), 713–736.

  • Jones, M. G., & Carter, G. (2007). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1067–1104). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., & Leagon, M. (2014). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 830–847). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. M. (2005). Inside teaching: how classroom life undermines reform. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kind, V. (2016). Preservice Science Teachers' Science Teaching Orientations and Beliefs about Science. Science Education, 100(1), 122–152.

  • Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W. Y., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 331–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, K. J., Miao, C., & Gentner, D. (2001). Learning by analogical bootstrapping. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(4), 417–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lead States, N. G. S. S. (2013). Next generation science standards: for States, by States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: understanding teaching and learning about teaching. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. J. (2007). Science teacher as learner. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1043–1065). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. J. (2014). Developing understandings of practice: science teacher learning. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 811–829). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A. (2009). Beginning secondary science teachers in different induction programmes: the first year of teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 31(17), 2355–2384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2007). Capturing science teachers’ epistemological beliefs: the development of the teacher beliefs interview. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 38–63.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A., Firestone, J. B., Wong, S. S., Ortega, I., Adams, K., & Bang, E. (2011). Beginning secondary science teacher induction: a two-year mixed methods study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1199–1224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: the construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, M. F., Greenfield, D. B., & Bulotsky-Shearer, R. J. (2013). Development and validation of a preschool teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward science teaching questionnaire. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28, 366–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B., & Brendl, C. M. (2000). The influence of goals on value and choice. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 39, 97–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B., & Dietrich, E. (2000). In defense of representation. Cognitive Psychology, 40(2), 138–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B., Zhang, S., & Moreau, C. P. (2000). Representation and the construction of preferences. In E. Dietrich & A. B. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive dynamics: conceptual and representational change in humans and machines (pp. 343–365). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B., Brendl, C. M., & Kim, K. (2007). Preference and the specificity of goal;s. Emotion, 7(3), 680–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, J. A., Petrosino, A. J., & Martin, T. (2010). Preservice Teachers' Conceptions and Enactments of Project-Based Instruction. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(4), 37–386.

  • Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: a methods source book (edition 3). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, G. B. (2012). The representation and regulation of goals. In H. Aarts & A. J. Elliot (Eds.), Goal directed behavior (pp. 1–47). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. (2015). Science teachers’ learning: enhancing opportunities, creating supportive contexts. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel, D. S., & McNeil, K. L. (2013). Conducting talk in secondary science classrooms: investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs. Science Education, 97(3), 367–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, R. E., Sinatra, G. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1996). Vies of knowledge acquisition and representation: a continuum from experience centered to mind centered. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 93–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronfeldt, M., & Reininger, M. (2012). More or better student teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 1091–1106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozelle, J. J., & Wilson, S. M. (2012). Opening the black box of field experiences: how cooperating teachers’ beliefs and practices shape student teachers' beliefs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 1196–1205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russ, R. S., Sherin, B. L., & Sherin, M. G. (2016). What constitutes teacher learning? In D. H. Gitomer & C. A. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 391–438). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saka, Y., Southerland, S. A., & Brooks, J. S. (2009). Becoming a member of a school community while working toward science education reform: teacher induction from a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) perspective. Science Education, 93(1), 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Introduction: the new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 1–16). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2011). How we think: a theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutz, P. A. (1991). Goals in self-directed behavior. Educational Psychologist, 26, 55–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shah, J. Y., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2007). Structural dynamics: the challenge of change in goal systems. In J. Y. Shah & W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 217–229). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L. (2012). From goals to action. In H. Aarts & A. J. Elliot (Eds.), Goal-directed behavior (pp. 175–202). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 411–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J. H., Berry, A., & Meirink, J. (2014). Research on science teacher knowledge. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 848–870). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, C. S., & Kang, N. H. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’ beliefs about inquiry: an examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 936–960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Lin, E., Spalding, E., Klecka, C. L., & Odell, S. J. (2011). Editorial: Quality teaching and teacher education: a kaleidoscope of notions. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 331–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: design and methods. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The University of Alabama, P.O. Box 870232, 201 Graves Hall, Tuscaloosa, AL, 35487-0232, USA

    Todd L. Hutner

  2. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway Stop D5700, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Anthony J. Petrosino & Cinthia Salinas

Authors
  1. Todd L. Hutner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony J. Petrosino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cinthia Salinas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd L. Hutner.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(DOCX 13 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hutner, T.L., Petrosino, A.J. & Salinas, C. Do Preservice Science Teachers Develop Goals Reflective of Science Teacher Education? A Case Study of Three Preservice Science Teachers. Res Sci Educ 51, 761–789 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9816-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9816-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation