Advertisement

Journal of Elementary Science Education

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 51–66 | Cite as

Enhancing prospective teachers’ science teaching efficacy beliefs through scaffolded, student-directed inquiry

  • Ling L. Liang
  • Greer M. Richardson
Article

Abstract

This study examined the impact of a recently revised science course that engaged preservice teachers in a scaffolded, student-directed inquiry unit on local streams. Upon the completion of the inquiry project, the teacher candidates in the stream study classes demonstrated significantly greater improvement in the personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE) beliefs than their peers did in the non-stream study classes. Furthermore, the paper reported how the prospective elementary teachers perceived their understandings of science and the instructional strategies related to the stream study unit. Implications and recommendations for future studies are also discussed.

Keywords

Preservice Teacher Prospective Teacher Elementary Teacher Teacher Candidate Preservice Elementary Teacher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adamson, A. L., Banks, D., Burtch, M., Cox, F., Judson, E., Turley, J. B., et al. (2003). Reformed undergraduate instruction and its subsequent impact on secondary school teaching practice and student achievement.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 939–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993).Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986).Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.),Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1997).Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  7. Bonnstetter, R. J. (1998). Inquiry: Learning from the past with an eye on the future.Electronic Journal of Science Education,3(1). Retrieved December 9, 2008, from http://unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejse/bonnstetter.html.Google Scholar
  8. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989).Educational research: An introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  9. Dreyfus, A., Jungwirth, E., & Eliovitch, R. (1990). Applying the “cognitive conflict” strategy for conceptual change: Some implications, difficulties, and problems.Science Education, 74(5), 555–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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, 694–706.Google Scholar
  11. Enochs, L. G., Scharmann, L. C., & Riggs, I. M. (1995). The relationship of pupil control to preservice elementary science teacher self-efficacy and outcome expectancy.Science Education, 79, 63–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation.Journal of Education Psychology, 76, 569–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grandy, R. E., & Duschl, R. A. (2005, July).Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. A paper presented at the International History and Philosophy of Science and Science Teaching Group Meeting, Leeds, England.Google Scholar
  14. Haefner, L. A., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers’ developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science teaching and learning.International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1653–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haim, E. (2003). Inquiry-events as tools for changing science teacher efficacy belief of kindergarten and elementary school teachers.Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell & E. H. Van Zee (Eds.),Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 283–315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
  17. Liang, L. L., & Gabel, D. L. (2005). Effectiveness of a constructivist approach to science instruction for prospective elementary teachers.International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1143–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mastrilli, T., Johnson, P., & McDonald, A. (2001).Inclusion of environmental education in Pennsylvania teacher preparation curricula: A survey of elementary pre-service teacher programs. Slippery Rock: Pennsylvania Center for Environmental Education (PCEE). Retrieved October 5, 2003, from www.pcee.org.Google Scholar
  19. McGinnis, J. R., Kramer, S., Shama, G., Graeber, A. O., Parker, C. A., & Watanabe, T. (2002). Undergraduates’ attitudes and beliefs about subject matter and pedagogy measured periodically in a reform-based mathematics and science teacher preparation program.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 713–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mulholland, J., Dorman, J. P., & Odgers, B. M. (2004). Assessment of science teaching efficacy of preservice teachers in an Australian University.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15, 313–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. National Research Council (NRC). (1996).National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  22. NRC. (1999).How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  23. NRC. (2000).Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  24. NRC. (2005).How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom (Committee on how people learn: A targeted report for teachers). M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.Google Scholar
  25. Palmer, D. (2006). Durability of changes in self-efficacy of preservice primary teachers.International Journal of Science Education, 28, 655–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pennsylvania Department of Education. (2002).Academic standards for environment and ecology. Retrieved January 26, 2009, from www.pde.state.pa.us/stateboard_ed/cwp/view.asp?Q=76716.Google Scholar
  27. Richardson, G. M., & Liang, L. L. (2008). The use of inquiry in the development of preservice teacher efficacy in mathematics and science.Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Riggs, E. M., & Kimbrough, D. L. (2002). Implementation of constructivist pedagogy in a geoscience course designed for pre-service K-6 teachers: Progress, pitfalls, and lessons learned.Journal of Geoscience Education, 50, 49–55.Google Scholar
  29. Shroyer, M. G. (1997, January).Enhancing preservice elementary teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy beliefs: A longitudinal inquiry. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Cincinnati, OH.Google Scholar
  30. Slater, T. F., Safko, J. L., & Carpenter, J. R. (1999). Long-term attitude sustainability from a constructivist-based astronomy-for-teachers course.Journal of Geoscience Education, 47, 366–368.Google Scholar
  31. Tosun, T. (2000). The beliefs of preservice elementary teachers towards science and science teaching.School Science and Mathematics, 100, 374–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (2000). Metacognitive facilitation: An approach to making scientific inquiry accessible to all. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.),Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 331–370). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
  33. Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classrooom practice?Science Education, 87, 112–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Young, B. J., & Kellogg, T. (1993). Science attitudes and preparation of preservice elementary teachers.Science Education, 77(3), 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationLaSalle UniversityPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations