Abstract
This book is a compilation of edited chapters from different science education disciplines and contexts, aiming to provide resources for the implementation of inquiry-based science teaching/learning (IBST/L), and to highlight ways in which those approaches could be promoted across various contexts. The chapters in the book presented the efforts of a group of science education researchers and practicing science teachers to put theoretical ideas into practice and to bridge the gaps between broad policy perspectives, specific educational realities of local school traditions, and embedded practices ingrained in national educational cultures. In this concluding chapter, we provide a structured overview of the main theoretical ideas discussed throughout the book, seeking to help the reader situate all these efforts within a coherent theoretical framework of what inquiry-based approaches in science education involve and what they require from teachers in terms of knowledge and abilities. We focus on four main topics that appear across the chapters in the book: (1) application of scientific inquiry in authentic learning environments; (2) descriptions of six main theoretical frameworks underpinning IBST/L throughout the book, (i) theory and research in motivation, (ii) self-efficacy, (iii) scientific literacy, (iv) dialogic teaching, (v) the communicative approach, and (vi) the nature of science; (3) presentation of pedagogical content knowledge as a productive framework that can unite efforts for teachers’ professional development in IBST/L as presented in this book; and (4) description of effective strategies for professional development, specifically for helping teachers implement this approach for teaching science.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abell, S. (2007). Research on science teachers’ knowledge. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwa, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Abell, S. K., Anderson, G., & Chezem, J. (2000). Science as argument and explanation: Exploring concepts of sound in third grade. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 65–79). Washington, DC: AAAS.
Akkoç, H., & Yeşildere, S. (2010). Investigating development of pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through a school practicum course. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1410–1415.
Alexander, R. J. (2006). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge UK: Dialogos.
Alonzo, A. C., & Kim, J. (2016). Declarative and dynamic pedagogical content knowledge as elicited through two video-based interview methods. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(8), 1259–1286.
Andersen, A., Dragsted, S., Evans, R. & Sørensen, H. (2005, August). The relationship of capability beliefs and teaching environments of New Danish elementary teachers of science to teaching success. Paper presented at the European Science Education Research Association Conference, Barcelona, Spain.
Andersen, A. M., Dragsted, S., Evans, R. H., & Sørensen, H. (2004). The relationship between changes in teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and the science teaching environment of Danish first-year elementary teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(1), 25–38.
Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), The dialogic imagination. Four essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Ball, D. L. (1995). Transforming pedagogy: Classrooms as mathematical communities. A response to Timothy Lensmire and John Pryor. Harvard Educational Review, 65(4), 670–677.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Banilower, E., & Shimkus, E. (2004). Professional development observation study. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.
Cakmakci, G. (2012). Promoting pre-service teachers’ ideas about nature of science through educational research apprenticeship. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 114–135.
Carey, N., & Frechtling, J. (1997). Best practice in action: Follow-up survey on teacher enhancement programs. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 157–178.
Carlsen, W. S. (1993). Teacher knowledge and discourse control: Quantitative evidence from novice biology teachers’ classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 471–481.
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse. The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Chin, C. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1315–1346.
Cleland, J. V., Wetzel, K. A., Zambo, R., Buss, R. R., & Rillero, P. (1999). Science integrated with mathematics using language arts and technology: A model for collaborative professional development. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(2), 157–172.
Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science & Education, 15(5), 463–494.
Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 263–272.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 249–305.
Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 235–250.
Czerniak, C. M. (1990). A study of self-efficacy, anxiety, and science knowledge in pre-service elementary teachers. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching. New York: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
Desimone, L. M., Garet, M., Birman, B., Porter, A., & Yoon, K. S. (2002). How do district management and implementation strategies relate to the quality of the professional development that districts provide to teachers? Teachers College Record, 104(7), 1265–1312.
Dorion, K. R. (2009). Science through drama: A multiple case exploration of the characteristics of drama activities used in secondary science lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2247–2270.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Duschl, R. A. (2000). Making the nature of science explicit. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research (pp. 187–206). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Edwards, D., & Westgate, D. P. G. (1994). Investigating classroom talk. London: Falmer Press.
Enochs, L. G., & Riggs, I. M. (1990). Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: A preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90(8), 694–706.
Evens, M., Elen, J., & Depaepe, F. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge in the context of foreign and second language teaching: A review of the research literature. Porta Linguarum, 26, 187–200.
Fernandez, C. (2014). Knowledge base for teaching and Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): Some useful models and implications for teachers training. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 60, 79–100.
Fernández-Balboa, J. M., & Stiehl, J. (1995). The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 293–306.
Ford, M. E. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and personal agency beliefs. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Gaible, E. & Burns, M. (2005). Section 3: Models and best practices in teacher professional development. In G. Edmond & M. Burns, Using technology to train teachers: Appropriate uses of ICT for teacher professional development in developing countries (pp. 15–24). Washington, DC: infoDev / World Bank.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
Gerard, L. F., Varma, K., Corliss, S. B., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 408–448.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569–582.
Gross, D., Truesdale, C., & Bielec, S. (2001). Backs to the wall: Supporting teacher professional development with technology. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2–3), 161–183.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1), 63–69.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hammer, D. (1995). Student inquiry in a physics class discussion. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 401–430.
Hammer, D. (2004). The variability of student reasoning, lectures 1–3. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI (pp. 279–340). Bologna: Italian Physical Society.
Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching, 11(3), 273–292.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 127–150). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.
Hogan, K. (1999). Thinking aloud together: A test of an intervention to foster students’ collaborative scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1085–1109.
Hollon, R. E., Roth, K. J., & Anderson, C. W. (1991). Science teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 2, pp. 145–186). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Kelly, G. J., & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81(5), 533–559.
Ketelhut, D. J., & Schifter, C. C. (2011). Teachers and game-based learning: Improving understanding of how to increase efficacy of adoption. Computers & Education, 56(2), 539–546.
Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204.
Koballa, T. R., Gräber, W., Coleman, D., & Kemp, A. C. (1999). Prospective teachers’ conceptions of the knowledge base for teaching chemistry at the gymnasium. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(4), 269–286.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.
Leach, J., Hind, A., & Ryder, J. (2003). Designing and evaluating short teaching strategy about the epistemology of science in high school classroom. Science Education, 87(6), 831–848.
Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916–929.
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present and future. In S. A. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning & values. Norwoord, NJ: Ablex.
Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (Eds.). (2004). Internet environments for science education (pp. 29–46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Louca, L., & Zacharia, Z. (2007). Nascent abilities for scientific inquiry in elementary science. In S. Vosniadou, D. Kayser, & A. Protopapas (Eds.), The proceedings of EuroCogSci07.The European Cognitive Science Conference 2007 (pp. 53–58). East Sussex, UK: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
Louca, T. L., Tzialli, D., & Zacharia, Z. (2012). Identification, interpretation–evaluation, response: A framework for analyzing classroom-based teacher discourse in science. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1823–1856.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S., & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99(5), 258–271.
Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (1997). Professional development in residence: Developing reflection on science teaching and learning. Journal of Education for Teaching, 23(2), 159–179.
Loughran, J. J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
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 (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3–11.
Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in Science: Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. Martin (Eds.), Writing Science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 166–202). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pitts-burg Press.
May, D. B., Hammer, D., & Roy, P. (2006). Children’s analogical reasoning in a 3rd-grade science discussion. Science Education, 90(2), 316–330.
McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (1993). Contexts that matter for teaching and learning. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
McSharry, G., & Jones, S. (2000). Role-play in science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 82(298), 73–82.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction – What is it and does it matter? Results from research synthesis from years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Re-search in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496.
Minstrell, J. A., & Van Zee, E. H. (Eds.). (2000). Inquiring into inquiry: Learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: AAAS.
Mortimer, E. F. (1995). Addressing obstacles in the classroom: An example from the theory of matter. Paper presented at the European Conference on Research in Science Education. Leeds.
Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in science classrooms. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
MTG. (2007). Mind the Gap: Learning, Teaching, Research and Policy in Inquiry-Based Science Education, Grant Agreement Number 217725, European Commission.
National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council [NRC]. (2007). Taking science to school: Leaning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (2000). NSTA position statement on the nature of science. Retrieved January 12, 2011, from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/natureofscience.aspx
Nilsson, P., & Vikström, A. (2015). Making PCK explicit-capturing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 37(17), 2836–2857.
O’Toole, J., & Dunn, J. (2002). Pretending to learn: Helping children learn through drama. Longman, an imprint of Pearson Education Australia.
OECD. (2009). Teaching and learning international survey creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris: OECD.
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 379–407.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections (Vol. 13). London: The Nuffield Foundation.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B., Gallagher, L., Korbak, C., & Lopez-Prado, B. (2008). Is alignment enough? Investigating the effects of state policies and professional development on science curriculum implementation. Science Education, 93(4), 656–677.
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958.
Penuel, W. R., & Yarnall, L. (2005). Designing handheld software to support classroom assessment: Analysis of conditions for teacher adoption. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 3(5), 1–46.
Phillips, J. (2003). Powerful learning: Creating learning communities in urban school reform. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(3), 240–258.
Remillard, J. T., & Geist, P. (2002). Supporting teachers’ professional learning though navigating openings in the curriculum. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(1), 7–34.
Russ, R., Scherr, E. R., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in scientific inquiry. Science Education, 92(3), 499–525.
Sadeh, I., & Zion, M. (2009). The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: A comparison to guided inquiry setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1137–1116.
Scott, P., & Ametller, J. (2007). Teaching science in a meaningful way: Striking a balance be-tween ‘opening up’ and ‘closing down’ classroom talk. School Science Review, 88(324), 77–83.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23.
Smith, D. (1999). Changing our teaching: The role of pedagogical content knowledge in elementary science. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science teacher education (pp. 163–198). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Solomon, J. (1994). The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, 23, 1–19.
Sprod, T. (1998). I can change your opinion on that: Social constructivist whole class discussions and their effect on scientific reasoning. Research in Science Education, 28(4), 463–480.
Strahan, D. (2003). Promoting a collaborative professional culture in three elementary schools that have beaten the odds. The Elementary School Journal, 104(2), 127–146.
Supovitz, J. A., & Zeif, S. G. (2000). Why they stay away. Journal of Staff Development, 21(4), 24–28.
Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(2), 99–110.
Thomas, G., Wineburg, S., Grossman, P., Myhre, O., & Woolworth, S. (1998). In the company of colleagues: An interim report on the development of a community of teacher learners. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 21–32.
Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 45–93). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.
van Zee, E. H. (2000). Analysis of a student-generated inquiry discussion. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 115–142.
van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227–269.
Veal, W. R., & MaKinster, J. G. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4) From http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/ejsev3n4.html
Wayne, A. J., Yoon, K. S., Zhu, P., Cronen, S., & Garet, M. S. (2008). Experimenting with teacher professional development: Motives and methods. Educational Researcher, 37(8), 469–479.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry. Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, M. (2008). Moving technology to the center of instruction: How one experienced teacher incorporates a Web-based environment over time. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(4), 316–333.
Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 81–91.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2003). How a technology professional development program fit into the work lives of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 591–607.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Louca, L., Skoulia, T., Tsivitanidou, O.E., Constantinou, C.P. (2018). Concluding Remarks: Theoretical Underpinnings in Implementing Inquiry-Based Science Teaching/Learning. In: Tsivitanidou, O., Gray, P., Rybska, E., Louca, L., Constantinou, C. (eds) Professional Development for Inquiry-Based Science Teaching and Learning. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91406-0_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91406-0_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91405-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91406-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)