Advertisement

Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 219–243 | Cite as

Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Reflection on Narrative Images of Inquiry

  • Christine M. Dietz
  • Elizabeth A. Davis
Article

Abstract

Preservice elementary teachers face challenges in learning to teach science. Educative curriculum materials, designed to promote teacher learning, can provide support for overcoming these challenges. The educative curriculum materials used in this study provide narrative vignettes describing a teacher’s decision making with regard to lesson plans. As part of an elementary science methods course, 40 preservice teachers were asked to reflect on and respond to the narratives. Results suggest that descriptions of teaching situated in lesson plans can promote productive reflection for preservice teachers. This study informs the design of educative curriculum materials and elementary science teacher education experiences and helps improve the pedagogical content knowledge of elementary science teacher educators.

Keywords

Preservice elementary teachers Educative curriculum materials Science teacher education 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research is funded by a PECASE/CAREER Award grant #REC-0092610 and a CLT grant number #0227557 from the National Science Foundation. However, any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors. We thank our colleagues in the CASES research group, including Shawn Stevens, Cory Forbes, Michele Nelson, Julie Smithey, and Carrie Beyer, for their help with this study and feedback on earlier versions of this paper. For more information about CASES, see http://cases.soe.umich.edu.

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. D., & Mitchener, C. P. (1994). Research on science teacher education. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 3–44). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, L. M., Smith, D. C., & Peasley, K. (2000). Integrating learner and learning concerns: Prospective elementary science teachers’ paths and progress. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5–6), 547–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is—or might be—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8, 14.Google Scholar
  6. Barnett, C. (1998). Mathematics teaching cases as a catalyst for informed strategic inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  8. Beyer, C., & Davis, E. A. (in press a). Using educative curriculum materials to support preservice elementary teachers’ curricular planning: A comparison between two different forms of support. Curriculum Inquiry.Google Scholar
  9. Beyer, C., & Davis, E. A. (in press b). Supporting preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of science curricula using educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education.Google Scholar
  10. Bolin, F. (1988). Helping student teachers think about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 48–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boone, W. J., & Gabel, D. L. (1998). Effectiveness of a model teacher preparation program for the elementary level. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(1), 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Borko, H., Lalik, R., & Tomchin, E. (1987). Student teachers’ understandings of successful and unsuccessful teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  14. Bullough, R. (1992). Beginning teacher curriculum decision making, personal teaching metaphors, and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(3), 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1991). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 363–401). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. Cochran, K., & Jones, L. (1998). The subject matter knowledge of preservice science teachers. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 707–718). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  17. Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers’ learning. The Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 287–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Czerniak, C. M., & Shriver, M. L. (1994). An examination of preservice science teachers’ beliefs and behaviors as related to self-efficacy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 5(3), 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Darling-Hammond, L., Banks, J., Zumwalt, K., Gomez, L., Sherin, M. G., Griesdorn, J., et al. (2005). Educational goals and purposes: Developing a curricular vision for teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 169–200). San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Davis, E. A. (2004). Knowledge integration in science teaching: Analyzing teachers’ knowledge development. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 21–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Davis, E. A. (2006a). Characterizing productive reflection among preservice elementary teachers: Seeing what matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(3), 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davis, E. A. (2006b). Preservice elementary teachers’ critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90(2), 348–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davis, E. A., Beyer, C., Forbes, C., & Stevens, S. (2009). Understanding pedagogical design capacity through teachers’ narratives (under review).Google Scholar
  24. Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davis, J., Lee, T., Vye, N., Bransford, J., & Schwartz, D. (2006a). The role of people knowledge in learning narrative and domain content. In S. Barab, K. Hay, & D. Hickey (Eds.), The Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 914–915). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006b). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davis, E. A., & Smithey, J. (in press). Beginning teachers moving toward effective elementary science teaching. Science Education.Google Scholar
  28. Davis, E. A., Smithey, J., & Petish, D. (2004). Designing an online learning environment for new elementary science teachers: Supports for learning to teach. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 594). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.Google Scholar
  29. Doyle, W. (1990). Case methods in the education of teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 17(1), 7–15.Google Scholar
  30. Eick, C., & Reed, C. (2002). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science Education, 86(3), 401–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Eisenhart, M., Cuthbert, A., Shrum, J., & Harding, J. (1988). Teacher beliefs about work activities: Policy implications. Theory into Practice, 27(2), 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Enyedy, N., Goldberg, J., & Welsh, K. M. (2006). Complex dilemmas of identity and practice. Science Education, 90, 68–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Forbes, C., & Davis, E. A. (2008a). Exploring preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of science curriculum materials in respect to socioscientific issues. Science and Education, 17(8–9), 829–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Forbes, C., & Davis, E. A. (2008b). The development of preservice elementary teachers’ curricular role identity for science teaching. Science Education, 92(5), 909–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Francis, D. (1995). The reflective journal: A window to preservice teachers’ practical knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Grossman, P. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  37. Grossman, P. (1992). Why models matter: An alternate view on professional growth in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 171–179.Google Scholar
  38. Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2004). Curriculum materials: Scaffolds for teacher learning?. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.Google Scholar
  39. Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358–389). San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. Hoover, L. (1994). Reflective writing as a window on preservice teachers’ thought processes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(1), 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kleinfeld, J. S. (1998). The use of case studies in preparing teachers for cultural diversity. Theory into Practice, 37(2), 140–147.Google Scholar
  42. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Linn, M. C., Eylon, B.-S., & Davis, E. A. (2004). The knowledge integration perspective on learning. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 29–46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  44. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Lundeberg, M. A., Levin, B. B., & Harrington, H. L. (Eds.). (1999). Who learns what from cases and how? The research base for teaching and learning with cases. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  47. Mahlios, M. (2002). Teacher role formation. Action in Teacher Education, 24(1), 9–21.Google Scholar
  48. McMahon, S. (1997). Using documented written and oral dialogue to understand and challenge preservice teachers’ reflections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(2), 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Meadows, L., & Koballa, T. R., Jr. (1993). Elementary teachers’ beliefs about joining a professional science teachers organization. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 4(4), 115–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  51. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.Google Scholar
  53. Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(3), 315–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers’ learning? Two-fourth-grade teachers’ use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ross, D. (1990). Programmatic structures for the preparation of reflective teachers. In R. Clift, W. R. Houston, & M. Pugach (Eds.), Encouraging reflective practice in education (pp. 97–118). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  57. Schneider, R. (2006). Supporting science teacher thinking through curriculum materials. In S. Barab, K. Hay, & D. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 674–680). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  58. Schneider, R., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 221–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sherin, M. G. (2002). When teaching becomes learning. Cognition and Instruction, 20(2), 119–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sherin, M. G. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  62. Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1–30). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  63. Smagorinsky, P., Cook, L. S., Moore, C., Jackson, A. Y., & Fry, P. G. (2004). Tensions in learning to teach: Accommodation and the development of a teaching identity. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(1), 8–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Smith, D. (2000). Content and pedagogical content knowledge for elementary science teacher educators: Knowing our students. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(1), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smithey, J. (2008). The development of preservice elementary teachers’ knowledge about learners’ science ideas. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  66. Smithey, J., & Davis, E. A. (2002). Preservice elementary science teachers’ distributed expertise in an online community of practice. In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & T. Satwicz (Eds.), Fifth international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) (pp. 444–450). Seattle, WA: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  67. Smithey, J., & Davis, E. A. (2004). Preservice elementary science teachers’ identity development: Identifying with images of inquiry. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 635). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.Google Scholar
  68. van Driel, J., De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86, 572–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations