Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Science-specialist Student-teachers Consider Promoting Technological Design Projects: Contributions of Multi-media Case Methods

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

Abstract

In school science, students often experience simplistic representations of knowledge-building practices in science and technology – which, in reality, are complex, unpredictable and theory-limited. While there are a great variety of reasons (many of which are beyond teachers' direct control), this occurs partly because teachers of science generally have not had such realistic experiences. While student-teachers can develop this kind of ‘meta-scientific’ literacy in university-based science teacher education programmes, this depends on the extent to which activities are legitimised through close associations with authentic school contexts. In this paper, we report effects on science-specialist student-teachers' conceptions about science and technology, and corresponding priorities for school science, after interacting with a case documentary that depicted students collaborating in development and evaluation of pneumatic-controlled robotic arms. Data, including video footage of student-teachers' interactions with cases and audio recordings of interviews with them and their teacher, indicated that many student-teachers developed more naturalistic perspectives on knowledge development in science and technology and corresponding pedagogical priorities. At the same time, most also recommended an ‘apprenticeship’ for students, gradually moving them from unrealistic (e.g., following a linear model for technological design) to more realistic (e.g., accommodating flexibility in design, while pointing out such limits to creativity as techno-determinism) problem solving contexts.

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

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikenhead, G. S., & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 269–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlex, D. M., Read, N., Fair, D., & Baker, C. (1991). Designing starts here. Seven Oaks, UK: Hodder & Stoughton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, J. L. (2000). Democratic constructivist science education: Enabling egalitarian literacy and self-actualization. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(6), 847–865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, J. L. (2001). 'Technoscience' education: Empowering citizens against the tyranny of school science. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11(3), 273–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, L., Hewitt, J., & Pedretti, E. (2001). Multi-media case methods in preservice science education: Enabling an apprenticeship for praxis. Research in Science Education, 31(2), 191–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benenson, G. (2001). The unrealized potential of everyday technology as a context for learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 730–745.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, L. E. (1998). Schooling for democracy: What kind? In L. E. Beyer & M. W. Apple (Eds.), The curriculum: Problems, politics, and possibilities (pp. 245–263). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, L. A., & Abell, S. K. (1999). Development of professional knowledge in learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(20), 121–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    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 

  • Claxton, G. (1991). Educating the inquiring mind: The challenge for school science. London: HarversterWheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students' perspectives: Towards trust, dialogue, and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copeland, W. D., & Decker, D. L. (1996). Video cases and the development of meaning making in preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(5), 467–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • DfE/WO. (1995). Science in the National Curriculum. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Désautels, J., Fleury, S. C., & Garrison, J. (2002). The enactment of epistemological practice as subversive social action, the provocation of power, and anti-modernism. In W.-M. Roth & J. Désautels (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action (pp. 237–269). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 261–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (1993). Academic influence on school science curricula. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(1), 53–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J., & Gardner, P. L. (1994). Technology education and science education: a new relationship? In D. Layton (Ed.), Innovations in science and technology education (Vol. V, pp. 159–170). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaines, B. R., & Shaw, M. L. G. (1993). Knowledge acquisition tools based on Personal Construct Psychology. Knowledge Engineering Review, 8(1), 49–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, P. L. (1999). The representation of science-technology relationships in Canadian physics textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 21(3), 329–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson, I. (2000). Professional knowledge and the teacher's life work. In C. Day, A. Fernandez, T. E. Hauge, & J. Møller (Eds.), The life and work of teachers: International perspectives in changing times (pp. 13–25). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1995). Investigative work in the science curriculum. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G. (1981).Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(2), 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1988). Naturalistic and rationalistic enquiry. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook (pp. 81–85). London: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, H. L. (1995). Fostering reasoned decisions: Case-based pedagogy and the professional development of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 203–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R. (1989). The complete problem solver (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helms, J. V. (1998). Science – and me: Subject matter and identity in secondary school science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(7), 811–834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1996). Laboratory work as scientific method: Three decades of confusion and distortion. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(2), 115–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science: Towards a personalized approach. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1999). Science fiction: The continuing misrepresentation of science in the school curriculum. Curriculum Studies, 6(2), 191–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, E. (2000). "science for all': Time for a paradigm shift? In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research (pp. 207–226). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, S. K., & Stewart, J. (1990). Using philosophy of science in curriculum development: An example from high school genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 297–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A., & Kelly, V. (1991). The assessment of performance in design and technology: Final report. London: Schools Examination and Assessment Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, K. S. (1998). Designing 21st century educational networlds: Structuring electronic social spaces. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 365–383). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koballa, T., & Tippins, D. (2000). Cases in middle and secondary science education: The promise and dilemmas. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999). Les politiques de la nature: Comment faire entrer les sciences en démocratie [Politics of nature: How to bring science into democracy]. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layton, D. (1988). Revaluing the T in STS. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4), 367–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers' understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede a relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 916–929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (2001).Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 163–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock, R. (1990). Open-ended, problem-solving investigations – what do we mean and how can we use them? School Science Review, 71(256), 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longbottom, J. E., & Butler, P. H. (1999).Why teach science? Setting rational goals for science education. Science Education, 83(4), 473–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louden, W., & Wallace, J. (1996). Quality in the classroom: Learning about teaching through case studies. Rydalmere, NSW: Hodder.

  • Loving, C. C. (1991). The scientific theory profile: A philosophy of science model for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 823–838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education and Training (MoET). (1998). The Ontario curriculum, grades 1–8: Science and technology. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer for Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmquist, B. C., & Finley, F. N. (1997). Preservice teachers' views of the nature of science during a postbaccalaureate science teaching program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(6), 595–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parke, H., & Coble, C. R. (2000). Science education. In D. A. Gabbard (Ed.), Knowledge and power in the global economy: Politics and the rhetoric of school reform (pp. 279–284).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrina, S. (2000). The political ecology of design and technology education: An inquiry into methods. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 207–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope, M., & Denicolo, P. (1993). The art and science of constructivist research in teacher thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9, 529–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, E. (1997). Why architects draw. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in openinquiry science laboratories. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (2001). Learning science through technological design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 768–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schenk, P. (1997). The role of drawing in graphic design and the implications for curriculum planning. Journal of Art and Design Education, 16(1), 73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waks, L. J. (2001). Donald Schön's philosophy of design and design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11, 37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasser, J. D., & Bresler, L. (1996). Working in the interpretive zone: Conceptualizing collaboration in qualitative research teams. Educational Researcher,25(5), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, S. A. (1992). Problem-based learning – a viable addition for secondary school science. School Science Review, 73(265), 47–55.

    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, 112–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, G. H. (1998). Democracy and the curriculum. In L. E. Beyer & M. W. Apple (Eds.), The curriculum: Problems, politics and possibilities (pp. 177–198). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. M., & Gore, J. M. (1990). Teacher socialization. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 320–347). New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toronto, Canada

    Larry Bencze, Jim Hewitt, Erminia Pedretti, Susan Yoon, Kirk Perris & Roland van Oostveen

Authors
  1. Larry Bencze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jim Hewitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erminia Pedretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Susan Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kirk Perris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Roland van Oostveen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bencze, L., Hewitt, J., Pedretti, E. et al. Science-specialist Student-teachers Consider Promoting Technological Design Projects: Contributions of Multi-media Case Methods. Research in Science Education 33, 163–187 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025044626451

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025044626451

Search

Navigation