Teachers’ Perceptions of the Values that Underpin Science as a Way of Thinking and Acting

  • Kathy SmithEmail author
  • Deborah Corrigan


This chapter explore values held by teachers that underpin their ideas of science as a way of thinking and acting. The different ways that teachers think about, value and recognise the nature of science greatly influences how they represent science knowledge in the curriculum and the pedagogical emphases they place in their science teaching. Ultimately such decisions directly influence the type of science learning their students experience. Professional learning opportunities that frame science as a way of thinking and acting can create conditions to consider differences in teacher thinking about science, and how these differences influence the ways science is presented in the classroom.


  1. Bell, R. (2013). Having it both ways: Student inquiry in a teacher-centred classroom. In S. Keast, G. Lancaster, J. Loughran, & D. Panizzon (Eds.), Teaching and learning science through cases (pp. 29–30). Melbourne: Monash Print Services.Google Scholar
  2. Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Carrier, R. (2001). Test your scientific literacy. Retrieved from
  4. Corrigan, D., Lancaster, G., Cooper, R., Do, N., Burke, J., & Twist, K. (2018). Contemporary science and mathematics integrated into initial teacher education units of study. In S. Dinham, D. Hoxley, R. Tytler, & D. Corrigan (Eds.), Reconceptualising mathematics and science teacher education programmes (pp. 45–60). Camberwell, Australia: ACER.Google Scholar
  5. Corrigan, D., & Smith, K. (2015). The role of values in teaching and learning science. In J. Deppler, T. Loreman, R. Smith, & L. FLorian (Eds.), Inclusive pedagogy across the curriculum (pp. 99–118). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. Columbia, NY: Teachers College.Google Scholar
  7. Keating, H. (2013). I love science ... Thankyou Facebook. In K. Keast, G. Lancaster, J. Loiughran, & D. Panizzon (Eds.), Teaching and learning science through cases (pp. 16–17). Melbourne: Monash Print Services.Google Scholar
  8. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Loughran, J., & Smith, K. V. (2015). Facilitating change in science teachers’ perceptions about learning and teaching. In D. Corrigan, C. Buntting, J. Dillon, A. Jones, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The future in learning science: What’s in it for the learner? (pp. 279–294). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Roberts, D. A. (1982). Developing the concept of ‘curriculum emphases’ in science education. Science Education, 66(2), 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Smith, K. (2017). Teachers as self-directed learners—Active positioning through professional learning. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Monash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations