Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Preferences for Professional Development in Science Among Pre- and In-service Primary Teachers: a Best–Worst Scaling Approach

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

Abstract

This study examined the preferences for professional development (PD) in primary (elementary) science among pre-service teachers (PSTs) and in-service teachers (ISTs). The contribution of the study is its focus on quantifying the relative importance of factors that were significant for teachers by using best–worst scaling methodology. Rather than considering potential factors in isolation, teachers traded off among content areas of PD, thereby revealing which aspects they most preferred. A comparison of PSTs and ISTs indicated that both sought greater guidance on adapting their science teaching for multi-age classes and on strategies to engage students in activity-based science. Relative to the PSTs, the ISTs reported less need for PD opportunities that emphasized collaboration and networks, and science pedagogy and content. Both groups indicated that they would most benefit from PD that focused on building their knowledge and strategies for teaching guided inquiry and investigation- and activity-based science. The findings offer critical insights into the broader improvement of PD of teachers in the context of science education.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Kindergarten is the first year of formal schooling. In some Australian states and territories, it is referred to as Preparatory, Pre-Primary, or Reception. Students are aged 5 to 6 years.

  2. Years 7 to 12 are secondary school years in Australia.

References

  • Alake-Tuenter, E., Biemans, H. J., Tobi, H., Wals, A. E., Oosterheert, I., & Mulder, M. (2012). Inquiry-based science education competencies of primary school teachers: A literature study and critical review of the American National Science Education Standards. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2609–2640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). “Not girly, not sexy, not glamorous”: Primary school girls’ and parents’ constructions of science aspirations. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 21(1), 171–194.

  • Australian Academy of Science (AAS) (2021). Primary connections: Linking science with literacy. https://primaryconnections.org.au/professional-learning. Accessed 1 May 2021.

  • Australian Curriculum and Assessment Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2014). Foundation to year 10 curriculum. https://australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/science/. Accessed 7 Sept 2020.

  • Australian Government (2020). Australian jobs: Industry outlook. https://australianjobs.employment.gov.au/jobs-future/industry-outlook. Accessed 3 May 2021.

  • Burke, P. F., Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Buchanan, J., Louviere, J. J., & Prescott, A. (2013). Why do early career teachers choose to remain in the profession? The use of best–worst scaling to quantify key factors. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 259–268.

  • Aubusson, P. J., Griffin, J., & Palmer, T. A. (2015). Primary teachers’ professional learning preferences in science and technology. International Journal of Teaching and Education, 3(3), 35–49.

  • Aubusson, P., Schuck, S. R., Ng, W., Burke, P., Pressick-Kilborn, K., Palmer, T.A. (2015). Quality learning and teaching in primary science and technology literature review (2nd ed.). Association of Independent Schools New South Wales (AIS NSW). http://hdl.handle.net/10453/123730. Accessed 15 May 2020.

  • Burke, P. F., Aubusson, P. J., Schuck, S. R., Buchanan, J. D., & Prescott, A. E. (2015). How do early career teachers value different types of support? A scale-adjusted latent class choice model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 241–253.

  • Palmer, T. (2015). Fresh minds for science: Using marketing science to help school science. Doctoral dissertation, University of Technology Sydney (UTS). Open Publications of UTS Scholars. https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/37019. Accessed May 5, 2020.

  • Palmer, T. A., Burke, P. F., & Aubusson, P. (2017). Why school students choose and reject science: A study of the factors that students consider when selecting subjects. International Journal of Science Education, 39(6), 645–662.

  • Burke, P. F., Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Kearney, M., & Frischknecht, B. (2018). Exploring teacher pedagogy, stages of concern and accessibility as determinants of technology adoption. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 27(2), 149–163.

  • Aubusson, P., Skamp, K., Burke, P. F., Pressick-Kilborn, K., Ng, W., Palmer, T. A., Goodall, A., & Ferguson, J. (2019). Primary Connections: Linking science with literacy Stage 6 research evaluation final report. Steering Committee of Primary Connections, Australian Academy of Science. http://hdl.handle.net/10453/134515. Accessed 13 Aug 2020.

  • Burden, K., Kearney, M., Schuck, S., & Burke, P. (2019). Principles underpinning innovative mobile learning: Stakeholders’ priorities. TechTrends,(6), 659–668.

  • Birman, B. F., Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. S. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57(8), 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H., Jacobs, J., & Koellner, K. (2010). Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development. International Encyclopedia of Education, 7(2), 548–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J., Prescott, A., Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Burke, P., & Louviere, J. (2013). Teacher retention and attrition: Views of early career teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3), n8. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n3.9

  • Buczynski, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 599–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (2014). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Personal reflections and contemporary implications. Science and Children, 51(8), 10–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based professional development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about inquiry and nature of science? International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 1947–1978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R., Groves, T., List, J., & Machina, M. (2004). Probabilistic influence and supplemental benefits: A field test of the two key assumptions underlying stated preferences. https://users.nber.org/~confer/2004/pes04/carson.pdf

  • Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56b90cb101dbae64ff707585/t/5ad7aa45758d464041c2130e/1524083271897/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf.. Accessed 13 Aug 2020.

  • de Vries, S., Jansen, E. P., & van de Grift, W. J. (2013). Profiling teachers’ continuing professional development and the relation with their beliefs about learning and teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 33, 78–89.

    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 

  • Driesener, C., & Romaniuk, J. (2006). Comparing methods of brand image measurement. International Journal of Market Research, 48(6), 681–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, A., & Louviere, J. J. (1992). Determining the appropriate response to evidence of public concern: The case of food safety. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 11(2), 12–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, M., Danaia, L., & McKinnon, D. H. (2019). Barriers inhibiting inquiry-based science teaching and potential solutions: Perceptions of positively inclined early adopters. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 543–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fouad, N. A., Hackett, G., Smith, P. L., Kantamneni, N., Fitzpatrick, M., Haag, S., & Spencer, D. (2010). Barriers and supports for continuing in mathematics and science: Gender and educational level differences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(3), 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 495–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackling, M., Peers, S., & Prain, V. (2007). Primary connections: Reforming science teaching in Australian primary schools. Teaching Science, 53(3), 12–16.

    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(3), 150–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, M. S. (2003). Chapter 4: Professional development as a policy pathway. Review of Research in Education, 27(1), 109–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

  • Louviere, J. J., & Woodworth, G. G. (1990). Best worst scaling: A model for largest difference judgments [Working Paper]. Faculty of Business. University of Sydney.

  • Louviere, J. J., & Islam, T. (2008). A comparison of importance weights and willingness-to-pay measures derived from choice-based conjoint, constant sum scales and best–worst scaling. Journal of Business Research, 61(9), 903–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, B., & Appleton, K. (2015). Surviving the implementation of a new science curriculum. Research in Science Education, 45(6), 841–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A., & Hewson, P. W. (2014). Research on teacher professional development programs in science. Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, 889–909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, T., & Quinn, F. (2010). Choosing science. Understanding the declines in senior high school science enrolments. National Centre of Science, ICT and Mathematics Education for Rural and Regional Australia (SiMERR Australia). University of New England.

  • Maeng, J. L., Whitworth, B. A., Bell, R. L., & Sterling, D. R. (2020). The effect of professional development on elementary science teachers’ understanding, confidence, and classroom implementation of reform-based science instruction. Science Education, 104(2), 326–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons: International comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Australian Council of Learned Academies. https://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30059041/tytler-stemcountry-2013.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2020.

  • Marley, A. A., & Louviere, J. J. (2005). Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best–worst choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49(6), 464–480.

  • Marley A.A.J., Flynn, T.N. Louviere, J.J. (2008). Probabilistic models of set-dependent and attribute-level best–worst choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 52(5), 281-296.

  • Massey, G. R., Wang, P. Z., Waller, D. S., & Lanasier, E. V. (2015). Best–worst scaling: A new method for advertisement evaluation. Journal of Marketing Communications, 21(6), 425–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meschede, N., Fiebranz, A., Möller, K., & Steffensky, M. (2017). Teachers’ professional vision, pedagogical content knowledge and beliefs: On its relation and differences between pre-service and in-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 158–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C., Neil, P., & Beggs, J. (2007). Primary science teacher confidence revisited: Ten years on. Educational Research, 49(4), 415–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C., Smith, G., Varley, J., & Razı, Ö. (2015). Changing practice: An evaluation of the impact of a nature of science inquiry-based professional development programme on primary teachers. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1077692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2020). America’s share decreasing as global science and engineering grows. https://nsf.gov/nsb/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=299790. Accessed 10 May 2021.

  • Nichols, K., Gillies, R., & Kleiss, D. (2016). A professional learning model that cultivates primary science classrooms’ representational profiles. International Journal of Educational Research, 76, 12–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann, E., Brunner, M., & Anders, Y. (2019). The interplay between preschool teachers’ science self-efficacy beliefs, their teaching practices, and girls’ and boys’ early science motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 70, 86–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paige, K., Zeegers, Y., Lloyd, D., & Roetman, P. (2016). Researching the effectiveness of a science professional learning programme using a proposed curriculum framework for schools: A case study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1), 149–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, L. J., Goodrum, D., & Hackling, M. (2001). Science teaching and learning in Australian schools: Results of a national study. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 455–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K. J. (2014). Elementary science teaching. Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, 361–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (2017). Conditions for learning: Building and sharing teacher professional knowledge. In K. Smith & J. Loughran (Eds.), Quality learning: Teachers changing their practice. Brill Publishers.

  • Timperley, H. (2011). A background paper to inform the development of a national professional development framework for teachers and school leaders. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL), 1–26.

  • Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Cripps Clark, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the primary-secondary school transition. Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/26d3/9dde4d8dcb50de6855a3a4f229649dcce104.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2020.

  • van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. (2012). Primary teachers’ attitudes toward science: A new theoretical framework. Science Education, 96(1), 158–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vaerenbergh, Y., & Thomas, T. D. (2013). Response styles in survey research: A literature review of antecedents, consequences, and remedies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25(2), 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. T., Chow, A., Degol, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2017). Does everyone’s motivational beliefs about physical science decline in secondary school?: Heterogeneity of adolescents’ achievement motivation trajectories in physics and chemistry. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(8), 1821–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors received financial support from the Australian Academy of Science through funding that enabled the undertaking of this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, University of Technology Sydney, UTS Business, P.O. Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia

    Paul F. Burke

  2. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS), University of Technology Sydney (UTS), UTS Business, P.O. Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia

    Tracey-Ann Palmer & Kimberley Pressick-Kilborn

Authors
  1. Paul F. Burke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tracey-Ann Palmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kimberley Pressick-Kilborn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul F. Burke.

Ethics declarations

The research received ethics approval from the University of Technology Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (UTS HREC ETH17-1280) with all participants consenting to their participation (study overview and consent available upon request).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Burke, P.F., Palmer, TA. & Pressick-Kilborn, K. Preferences for Professional Development in Science Among Pre- and In-service Primary Teachers: a Best–Worst Scaling Approach. Res Sci Educ 52, 1791–1806 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10030-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10030-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation