Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development of the Inquiry-Based Science Teaching Efficacy Scale for Primary Teachers

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Helping students at all grade levels to develop inquiry skills has been an ambitious goal that science educators have been pursuing for the last three decades. Yet, studies consistently report cases of failure from science classrooms with regard to inquiry-based teaching. The purpose of this study was to develop an instrument for measuring primary teachers’ self-efficacy to teach science through inquiry. An expert panel methodology was used to develop and validate the initial instrument. The final, and thus administered survey consisted of 29 Likert-scale questions. To further validate and develop the instrument, we collected data from 358 pre-service primary teachers enrolled in teacher education programs at five different universities in Turkey. According to exploratory factor analysis, there is only one interpretable factor. Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient was found to be 0.97 for the reliability, indicating the robust scale reliability. We present the need for such an instrument and evidence on the validity and reliability of the instrument. We further discuss the potential contributions of this instrument to the field.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrams, S. A., & Southerland & P. Silva, (Eds.). (2008). Integrating inquiry in the classroom: Realities and opportunities. Hartford, CT: Age of. Information Press.

  • Anderson, R. D. (2007). Inquiry as an organizing theme for science curricula. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 807–830). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Author: Mahwah.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aydeniz, M., & Hodge, L. L. (2011). Identity: a complex structure for researching students’ academic behavior in science and mathematics. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(2), 509–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aydeniz, M., & Southerland, S. A. (2012). A national survey of middle and high school science teachers’ responses to standardized testing: Is science being devalued in schools? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(3), 233–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2000). Self-efficacy: The foundation of agency. In W. J. Perrig & A. Grob (Eds.), Control of human behavior, mental processes and consciousness (pp. 17–33). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students’ understandings of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., & Granger, E. M. (2009). No silver bullet or inquiry: Making sense of teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Science Education, 93(2), 322–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L. A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94(4), 577–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breslyn, W., & McGinnis, J. R. (2012). A comparison of exemplary biology, chemistry, earth science, and physics teachers’ conceptions and enactment of inquiry. Sci. Ed., 96, 48–77.

  • Brown, S. L., & Melear, C. T. (2006). Investigation of secondary science teachers’ beliefs and practices after authentic inquiry experiences. Journal of Research in Science Education, 43(9), 938–962.

  • Butler, S. F., Fernandez, K., Christine, B., Budman, S. H., & Jamison, R. N. (2008). Validation of the revised screener and opioid assessment for patients with pain (SOAPP-R). Pain, 9(4), 360–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrel and E. H. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching (Washington DC: American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS).

  • Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: Are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 497–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capps, D., Crawford, B., & Constas, M. (2012). A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry Professional Development: Alignment with Best Practices and a Critique of the Findings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(3), 291–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Sofer, W., Neigeborn, L., Coletta, S., & Nemeroff, M. (2007). Cognitive apprenticeship in science through immersion in laboratory practices. International Journal of Science Education, 29(2), 195–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichekian, T., Shore, B. M., & Tabatabai, D. (2016). First-year teachers’ uphill struggle to implement inquiry instruction: Exploring the interplay among self-efficacy, conceptualizations, and classroom observations of inquiry enactment. SAGE Open, 6, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2000). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(3), 175–194.

    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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development: Theory and applications (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demir, A., & Abell, S. K. (2010). Views of inquiry: Mismatches between views of science education faculty and students of an alternative certification program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching., 47(6), 716–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. New York: Dover Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dira-Smolleck, L. A. (2004). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preservice teachers’ self-efficacy in regards to the teaching of science as inquiry (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). PA, USA: The Pennsylvania State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eick, C. J. (2000). Inquiry, nature of science, and evolution: the need for a more complex pedagogical content knowledge in science teaching. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enochs, L., & Riggs, I. (1990). Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: a preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 694–706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enochs, L., Scharmann, L., & Riggs, I. (1995). The relationship of pupil control to preservice elementary science teacher self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. Science Education, 79(1), 63–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erbilgin, E., Arıkan, S., & Yabanlı, H. (2015). Çizgi grafiğini yorumlama ve oluşturma becerilerinin ölçülmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2), 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., & Mugaloglu, E. (2013). Philosophy of chemistry in chemical education: Recent trends and future directions. In M. Matthews (Ed.), Handbook of research on history, philosophy and sociology of science. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd..

    Google Scholar 

  • Grandy, R., & Duschl, R. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: analysis of a conference. Science and Education, 16(2), 141–166.

  • Germann, P. J., Haskins, S., & Auls, S. (1996). Analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals: promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 475–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: a construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R., & Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher efficacy: a study of construct dimensions. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 627–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 971–993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czernaik, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 171–187.

  • Herron, M. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. Educational Psychologist, 79(2), 171–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for the nature of science research. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarrett, O. S. (1999). Science interest and confidence among preservice elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 11(1), 49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez-Aleixandre, JM., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview. In E., & MP. S Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education:Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research (pp. 3 - 27). Springer.

  • Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 631–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberlin, C. L., & Winterstein, A. G. (2008). Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65(23), 2276–2284. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, D. B., Seyforth, S. C., & Lasky, H. J. (2009). Implementing and sustaining science curriculum reform: A study of leadership practices among teachers within a high school science department. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(7), 813–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lotter, C., Harwood, H., & Bonner, J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 1318–1347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lotter, C., Smiley, W., Thompson, S., & Dickenson, T. (2016). The impact of professional development model on middle school science teachers’ efficacy and implementation of inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 38(8), 2712–2741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J., & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science: the relationship between elementary teachers’ participation in professional development and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.551222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: the role of history and philosophy of science. Dordrecht: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., & Songer, N. B. (2008). Enacting classroom inquiry: Theorizing teachers’ conceptions of science teaching. Science Education, 92(6), 973–993.

  • Metz, K. E. (2008). Narrowing the gulf between the practices of science and the elementary school science classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 109, 138–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metz, K.E. (2009). Elementary school teachers as "targets and agents of change": Teachers' learning in interaction with reform science curriculum Science Education. 93: 915-954. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20309.

  • 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, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: a guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, M. A., & Abraham, E. C. (1973). Inquiry skill measures. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10, 291–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New. York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows (Version 15) (3rd ed.). Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfitzner-Eden, F. (2016). I feel less confident so I quit? Do true changes in teacher self-efficacy predict changes in preservice teachers’ intention to quit their teaching degree? Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 240–254.

  • Ravikumar, M. (2013). Pre-service elementary teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs about science using critical incident technique: a case study approach. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.

  • Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (pp. 102–119). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625–637.

    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(7), 883–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. (2000). Philosophy of chemistry—a new interdisciplinary field? Journal of Chemical Education, 77(4), 522–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, J. (1966). The teaching of science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2008). An instrument to assess views of scientific inquiry: the VOSI questionnaire. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, MD.

  • Simsar, A. (2016). Turkish preservice early childhood teachers’ science teaching self efficacy beliefs (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tallahassee, FL, USA: Florida State University.

  • Smolleck, L. D. (2004). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preservice teachers’ self-efficacy in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Unpublished dissertation. Penn State University. College Station, PA.

  • Smolleck, L. A., Zembal-Saul, C., & Yoder, E. P. (2006). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preserve teachers’ self-efficacy in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 137–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2003). Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Mortel, T. F. (2008). Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25, 40–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, C. W., & Kang, N. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheatley, K. F. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00047-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: what can investigative experience reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 87, 112–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thomson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92(5), 941–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirkala, C., & Kuhn, D. (2011). Problem-Based Learning in K–12 Education. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 1157–1186.

    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.

  • Zee, M., & Kooman, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustments, and teacher well-being: a synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86, 981–101.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, The University of Tennessee, Knoxwille, TN, USA

    Mehmet Aydeniz

  2. Primary Teacher Education, Kirikkale University, Kirikkale, Turkey

    Kader Bilican

  3. Primary Teacher Education, Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Mugla, Turkey

    Burcu Senler

Authors
  1. Mehmet Aydeniz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kader Bilican
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Burcu Senler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kader Bilican.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Inquiry-based teaching efficacy scale

Please indicate the level of your agreement or disagreement with the following statements using the scale provided. 1 = the lowest level of agreement, 7 = the highest level of agreement.

Scale

figure afigure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aydeniz, M., Bilican, K. & Senler, B. Development of the Inquiry-Based Science Teaching Efficacy Scale for Primary Teachers. Sci & Educ 30, 103–120 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00168-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00168-w

Search

Navigation