Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Tempered radicals: elementary teachers’ narratives of teaching science within and against prevailing meanings of schooling

  • Published:
Cultural Studies of Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Science educators and researchers have bemoaned the lack of reform-based science in elementary schools and focused on teachers’ difficulties (i.e., lack of knowledge, interest, experience) in enacting quality science pedagogy. We present compelling evidence that challenges assumptions about science education reform and draw on a practice theory perspective to examine the stories, commitments and identities of thirteen teachers, whose beliefs and practices aligned with those promoted by science education reform documents. Through ethnographic interviews, we learned about these teachers’ critical science experiences, perceived science teacher identities, and their goals and commitments. Their stories highlight institutional and sociohistorical difficulties of enacting reform-based science, the many biases, contradictions, and unintended consequences prevalent in educational policy and practice today, and emphasize how easily the status quo can get reproduced. These teachers had to work as ‘tempered radicals’, ‘working the system’ to teach in ways that were consistent with reform-based science.

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

  • Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching. What research says about inquiry? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. D., & Helms, J. V. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of schools: Needed research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, C., & Peters, J. (1997). Teacher collaboration across and within schools: Supporting individual change in elementary science teaching. Science Education, 81, 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buxton, C., Carlone, H. B., & Carlone, D. (2005). Boundary spanners as bridges of student and school discourses in an urban science and mathematics high school. School Science and Mathematics, 105, 302–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlone, H. B. (2007). A study of pedagogical practices and the development of students’ science identities. Unpublished technical report to the National Science Foundation.

  • Carlone, H. B., Kimmel, S., & Tschida, C. (2009). A math, science, and technology elementary school tangled up in global networks of practice. Cultural Studies of Science Education. Published Online First 16 September 2009. doi: 10.1007/s11422-009-9233-2.

  • Carlone, H. B., & Webb, S. M. (2006). On (not) overcoming our history of hierarchy: Complexities of university/school collaboration. Science Education, 90, 544–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Learning to teach against the grain. Harvard Educational Review, 61, 279–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M. (2001). Changing conceptions of culture and ethnographic methodology: Recent thematic shifts and their implications for research on teaching. In V. Richardson (Ed.), The handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 209–225). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M., & Finkel, E. (1998). Women’s science: Learning and succeeding from the margins. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A reconsideration. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a Community of Learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2000–2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. A. (2005). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. A. (2006). Disposable youth, racism, politics of zero tolerance. In America on the edge: Henry Giroux on politics, culture, and education (pp. 175–188). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Holland, D. C., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. T., & Eick, C. J. (2007). Implementing inquiry kit curriculum: Obstacles, adaptations, and practical knowledge development in two middle school science teachers. Science Education, 91, 492–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. Y. (2003). The Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. J., & Duschl, R. A. (2002). Toward a research agenda for epistemological studies in science education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.

  • LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (1999). Paradigms for thinking about ethnographic research. In M. D. LeCompte & J. J. Schensul (Eds.), Designing and conducting ethnographic research (pp. 41–60). Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C., & Moje, E. B. (2003). Sociocultural perspectives meets critical theory: Producing knowledge through multiple frameworks. The International Journal of Learning, 10, 1979–1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development program on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson, D. E. (2001). Tempered radicals: How people use difference to inspire change at work. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Reese, W. J. (2005). America’s public schools: From the common school to “No Child Left Behind”. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, A. J. (1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: A critique of the National Research Council’s National Science Education Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (2006). Making and remaking of self in urban schooling: Identity as dialectic. In J. L. Kinceloe, K. Hayes, K. Rose, & P. M. Anderson (Eds.), The Praeger handbook of urban education (pp. 143–153). Westport, CT: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., & Tobin, K. (2002). At the elbow of another: Learning to teach by coteaching. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, J. L. (2002). Scientists in the classroom: The cold war reconstruction of American science education. New York, NY: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge with gratitude the support by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. REC-0546078 to enact this study. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Additionally, we gratefully acknowledge the support of Margaret Vaughn, doctoral candidate at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, who helped us collect the data as well as the inspirational teachers in the study who gave generously of their time and who shared openly their insightful perspectives.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teacher Education and Higher Education, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 346 Curry Building, Greensboro, NC, 27402, USA

    Heidi B. Carlone

  2. Department of STEM Education and Professional Studies, Old Dominion University, Darden College of Education, 251-4 Education Building, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

    Julie Haun-Frank

  3. Library Science, Department of Teaching and Learning, Old Dominion University, Darden College of Education, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

    Sue C. Kimmel

Authors
  1. Heidi B. Carlone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julie Haun-Frank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sue C. Kimmel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heidi B. Carlone.

Appendices

Appendix A

Teacher interview protocol

As you know, we spent this year identifying excellent 4th, 5th, and 6th grade science teachers. What you may not know is that this task was extremely difficult because many, many teachers do not teach science at all. Even fewer teachers attempt to teach in ways that are hands-on or inquiry-based. Luckily, we found a small group of teachers who teach science, trying to do so using hands-on methods. You’re one of those teachers! We want to find out more about how, what and why you do what you do.

  1. 1.

    Some people think of themselves as a ‘science person’ or ‘not a science person’. How do you think of yourself and why?

    1. a.

      Describe three memorable science experiences that shape how you come to define yourself as ‘science person’ or ‘not a science person’.

  2. 2.

    If you were in a job interview, how would you characterize your teaching style? [short]

    1. a.

      How would the principal describe you as a teacher?

    2. b.

      How would other teachers describe you as a teacher?

    3. c.

      How would parents describe you as a teacher?

  3. 3.

    What kind of science teacher are you? [short]

    1. a.

      How would the principal describe you as a science teacher?

    2. b.

      How would other teachers describe you as a science teacher?

    3. c.

      How would parents describe you as a science teacher?

  4. 4.

    Tell me all the reasons why you choose to include science in the curriculum.

  5. 5.

    Tell me all the reasons why you choose to teach science using hands-on or inquiry-based (use their language) methods.

  6. 6.

    Describe your level of confidence to teach science. (Pull in their answers from survey here)

  7. 7.

    Tell me all the ways you are or have been recognized for your science teaching.

    1. a.

      If they provide answers to the above question, ask: Do you see this recognition as something that supports your efforts to teach science?

  8. 8.

    List all the supports that have allowed you to even include science in the curriculum. [Elicit list without probing at first.]

    1. a.

      [Probe after you get the list]: You identified the following supports to include science in the curriculum: [Read back list of barriers from question] Is there anything you would like to add to the list?

    2. b.

      We are also interested in what supports allow you to teach using hands-on or inquiry-based methods (use their language). Are there others you would add to this list?

  9. 9.

    List all the barriers that exist to your efforts to include science in the curriculum.

    1. a.

      [Probe after you get the list]: You identified the following barriers to including science in the curriculum: [Read back list of barriers from question] Is there anything else you would like to add to the list?

    2. b.

      Why do you choose to work around those barriers? [Don’t necessarily probe]

  10. 10.

    What kind of science teacher would you like to become?

    1. a.

      What do you need to get there?

    2. b.

      What concrete steps have you taken to work toward this goal?

Appendix B

See Table 1.

Table 1 Sample taxonomic analysis of the ‘meanings of science’ domain
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carlone, H.B., Haun-Frank, J. & Kimmel, S.C. Tempered radicals: elementary teachers’ narratives of teaching science within and against prevailing meanings of schooling. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 5, 941–965 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9282-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9282-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation