Variations in Primary Teachers’ Responses and Development during Three Major Science In-Service Programmes
Keywords:
IBSE, In-service, Investigative-based science education, Motivation, Primary education
Abstract
This paper reports on how different types of teachers responded to in-service aimed at developing investigative-based science education (IBSE) in primary schools, and the extent to which they applied their new skills in the classroom. Common items from evaluation questionnaires allowed data to be combined from three major in-service programmes. Using complete data sets from 120 teachers, cluster analysis enabled three teacher types to be identified: a small group of ‘science unsures’, with low attitude scores and little confidence, who showed no response to the innovation; holistic improvers’, who showed the largest improvement in science teaching confidence; and ‘high level, positive progressives’ who were very positive to science teaching throughout and showed gains in confidence in teaching physics and chemistry, as well as in demonstrating the relevance of science to their pupils. Taking account of these teacher types alongside interviews and observations, nine developmental stages in how teachers apply their new expertise in the classroom and the whole school are suggested. Major factors influencing application in the classroom are the teachers’ initial science knowledge and pedagogical expertise, and motivating feedback to teachers when pupils responded positively to the innovation. Assessing teachers’ initial level of subject knowledge and science pedagogical expertise to inform the approach and amount of in-service provision is important. Subsequent mentoring as well as support from the school principal when teachers first try IBSE with pupils promotes successful implementation in the classroom.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1999). Statistics for psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavioural change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Blatchford, P. (1992). Children’s attitudes to work at 11 years. Educational Studies, 18,
107–118.
den Brook, P., Fisher, D. & Scott, R. (2005). The importance of teacher interpersonal
behaviour for student attitudes in Brunei primary science classes. International Journal of
Science Education, 27(7), 3,765–779.
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber H. A., & Shouse A.W. (Eds.) (2007). Taking science to school:
Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Gago, J. M. (2004). Increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe.
Brussels EC conference ‘Europe needs more scientists’ 2 April.
Germann, P. J. (1988). Development of the attitude toward science in school assessment
and its use to investigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude
toward science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 689-703.
Glasersfeld, E. von (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London:
Falmer Press.
Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the
implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4(1), 63-69.
Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding in science and its impact in the
classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323-337.
Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding of concepts of science:
impact on confidence and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 19(1),
93–105.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2002). Changes in primary boys’ and girls’ attitudes to school and
science during a two-year science in-service programme. The Curriculum Journal, 13(1),
43-69.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a
two-year science in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of
Science Education, 26(14), 1787-1811.
Jarvis, T., Pell, A., & McKeon, F. (2003). Changes in primary teachers’ science knowledge
and understanding during a two year in-service programme. Research in Science &
Technological Education, 21(1), 17-42.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving in-service training: the messages of research.
Educational Leadership, 37(5), 379-385.
Lee, O. (1995). Subject matter knowledge, classroom management, and instructional
practices in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
32(4), 423–440.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foy, P. (with Olson, J. F., Erberber, E., Preuschoff, C., &
Galia, J.) (2008). TIMSS 2007 International science report: Findings from IEA’s trends in
international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades. Chestnut Hill,
MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2006). The logical chain: Continuing
professional development in effective schools. London, HMI 2639.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London:
Kings College.
Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (1996). Primary science: past and future directions. Studies in
Science Education, 26, 99–147.
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK); PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals.
Research in Science Education, 38, 261-284.
Pell, A., & Jarvis, T. (2001). Developing attitude to science scales for use with children
of ages from five to eleven years. International Journal in Science Education, 23(8), 847-862.
Pell, A., & Jarvis, T. (2003). Developing attitude to science scales for use with primary
teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 25(10), 1273-1295.
Rocard, M. (2008). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe.
Brussels: European Commission.
She, H., & Fisher, D. (2002). Teacher communication behavior and its association with
students’ cognitive and attitudinal outcomes in science in Taiwan. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 39(1), 63–78.
Stein, M. K., & Wang M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: the
process of teacher change. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4(2), 171-187.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A.W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
Wittrock, C. M. (1994) Generative science teaching. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone & R.
White (Eds.), The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to Teaching and Learning.
London: Falmer Press.
Woodward, C., & Woodward N. (1998). Welsh primary school leavers’ perceptions of
science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 16(1), 43-52.
Woolnough, B.E. (1990). Making choices. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Department of
Educational Studies.
Youngman, M. B. (1979). Analysing social and educational research data. London: McGraw
Hill.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavioural change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Blatchford, P. (1992). Children’s attitudes to work at 11 years. Educational Studies, 18,
107–118.
den Brook, P., Fisher, D. & Scott, R. (2005). The importance of teacher interpersonal
behaviour for student attitudes in Brunei primary science classes. International Journal of
Science Education, 27(7), 3,765–779.
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber H. A., & Shouse A.W. (Eds.) (2007). Taking science to school:
Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Gago, J. M. (2004). Increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe.
Brussels EC conference ‘Europe needs more scientists’ 2 April.
Germann, P. J. (1988). Development of the attitude toward science in school assessment
and its use to investigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude
toward science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 689-703.
Glasersfeld, E. von (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London:
Falmer Press.
Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the
implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4(1), 63-69.
Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding in science and its impact in the
classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323-337.
Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding of concepts of science:
impact on confidence and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 19(1),
93–105.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2002). Changes in primary boys’ and girls’ attitudes to school and
science during a two-year science in-service programme. The Curriculum Journal, 13(1),
43-69.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a
two-year science in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of
Science Education, 26(14), 1787-1811.
Jarvis, T., Pell, A., & McKeon, F. (2003). Changes in primary teachers’ science knowledge
and understanding during a two year in-service programme. Research in Science &
Technological Education, 21(1), 17-42.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving in-service training: the messages of research.
Educational Leadership, 37(5), 379-385.
Lee, O. (1995). Subject matter knowledge, classroom management, and instructional
practices in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
32(4), 423–440.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foy, P. (with Olson, J. F., Erberber, E., Preuschoff, C., &
Galia, J.) (2008). TIMSS 2007 International science report: Findings from IEA’s trends in
international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades. Chestnut Hill,
MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2006). The logical chain: Continuing
professional development in effective schools. London, HMI 2639.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London:
Kings College.
Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (1996). Primary science: past and future directions. Studies in
Science Education, 26, 99–147.
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK); PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals.
Research in Science Education, 38, 261-284.
Pell, A., & Jarvis, T. (2001). Developing attitude to science scales for use with children
of ages from five to eleven years. International Journal in Science Education, 23(8), 847-862.
Pell, A., & Jarvis, T. (2003). Developing attitude to science scales for use with primary
teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 25(10), 1273-1295.
Rocard, M. (2008). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe.
Brussels: European Commission.
She, H., & Fisher, D. (2002). Teacher communication behavior and its association with
students’ cognitive and attitudinal outcomes in science in Taiwan. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 39(1), 63–78.
Stein, M. K., & Wang M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: the
process of teacher change. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4(2), 171-187.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A.W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
Wittrock, C. M. (1994) Generative science teaching. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone & R.
White (Eds.), The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to Teaching and Learning.
London: Falmer Press.
Woodward, C., & Woodward N. (1998). Welsh primary school leavers’ perceptions of
science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 16(1), 43-52.
Woolnough, B.E. (1990). Making choices. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Department of
Educational Studies.
Youngman, M. B. (1979). Analysing social and educational research data. London: McGraw
Hill.
Published
2011-03-31
How to Cite
Jarvis, T., Pell, A., & Hingley, P. (2011). Variations in Primary Teachers’ Responses and Development during Three Major Science In-Service Programmes. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1(1), 67–92. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.441
Section
FOCUS
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
