Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evolving Goals, Pedagogies, and Identities as an Elementary Science Teacher Educator: Prioritizing Practice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Enhancing Professional Knowledge of Pre-Service Science Teacher Education by Self-Study Research

Part of the book series: ASTE Series in Science Education ((ASTE))

  • 817 Accesses

Abstract

In this exploration of the evolution of the work I have done as an elementary science teacher educator, I focus on the goals I have set for my elementary methods class, the pedagogies I have used and privileged, and my own changing identities as a science educator and teacher educator. I draw on my syllabi, assignment descriptions, and published scholarship to discern themes and shifts in goals, emphasis, expectations, and values. I illustrate how the evolution of my course reflects key developments in science education and teacher education: the move toward an emphasis on practice. The chapter provides a meta-self-study, examining a science teacher educator’s work and identity as evidenced by instrumental artifacts of that work and scholarly products resulting from it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    I do not include the Fall 2007 version of the class in my analyses here. Two graduate student instructors taught the class that semester and I did not save a version of the syllabus or assignments.

  2. 2.

    While still lead faculty, I did not teach the class in 2007, 2011, 2013, or 2014, due to sabbatical or administrative responsibilities. Note that because of the collaborative nature of the design and enactment of this course, when referring to our collaborative work on the course, I use first-person plural pronouns. When referring to my own work as a teacher educator or my work on the analyses for this meta-self-study, I use first-person singular pronouns.

  3. 3.

    As noted in Davis (under review), we typically call these “peer-teaching” experiences, rather than “rehearsals” (see, e.g., Kazemi, Franke, & Lampert, 2009; Lampert & Graziani, 2009). While similar, in peer teaching, preservice teachers do not necessarily have the later opportunity to enact with children the lesson they were working on in the peer teaching. Like rehearsal, peer teaching grows out of the microteaching movement of the 1960s and 1970s and it has some similarities with that approach, as well. Both are intended to reduce complexity, allow for correction, and focus on decompositions of practice (Allen, 1967). The main difference between peer teaching and microteaching is in the nature of the decomposition of the task. Microteaching tended to focus on teacher behaviors deemed important in process-product studies (Zeichner, 1999), such as asking higher-order questions. Ball and Forzani (2009) note that a critique of microteaching has been its representation of teaching as “a set of decontextualized and atomized practices” (p. 508). In contrast, peer teaching focuses on meaningful lesson chunks.

  4. 4.

    The reflective teaching assignment, peer teaching, and experience-in-the-field assignments each relate to the capacity to plan, teach, and reflect on science lessons. The unit plan (or, later, investigation plan) and critique assignments all relate to the focus on curriculum. The content interview relates to the student ideas focus.

  5. 5.

    These “eras” are demarked in relevant tables using wiggly lines.

  6. 6.

    These focal semesters are demarked in relevant tables using solid lines.

References

  • Abell, S., Park Rogers, M., Hanuscin, D., Lee, M., & Gagnon, M. (2009). Preparing the next generation of science teacher educators: A model for developing PCK for teaching science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 77–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D. (1967). Micro-teaching, a description (ERIC Number ED019224). Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arias, A. (2015). Learning to teach elementary students to construct evidence-based claims. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avraamidou, L. (2014). Tracing a beginning elementary teacher’s development of identity for science teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(3), 223–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Ball, D., & Forzani, F. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland, L., & Reiser, B. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A. (under review). Approximations of practice in an elementary science methods course: Visibility and invisibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A. (2004). Knowledge integration in science teaching: Analyzing teachers’ knowledge development. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 21–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A. (2006a). Characterizing productive reflection among preservice elementary teachers: Seeing what matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(3), 281–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A. (2006b). Preservice elementary teachers’ critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90(2), 348–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Boerst, T. (2014). Designing elementary teacher education to prepare well-started beginners: TeachingWorks Working Papers. TeachingWorks, University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Smithey, J. (2009). Beginning teachers moving toward effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 93(4), 745–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K., Krampe, R., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, C., & Davis, E. A. (2010). Curriculum design for inquiry: Preservice elementary teachers’ mobilization and adaptation of science curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 820–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J., & Boulter, C. (1998). Learning science through models and modeling. In B. J. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 53–66). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re-imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 273–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2008). Learning from curriculum materials: Scaffolds for teacher learning? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8), 2014–2026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. L., & Pinnegar, S. (2000). On the threshold of a new century: Trustworthiness, integrity, self-study in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 234–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemi, E., Franke, M., & Lampert, M. (2009). Developing pedagogies in teacher education to support novice teachers’ ability to enact ambitious instruction. In R. Hunter, B. Bicknell, & T. Burgess (Eds.), Crossing divides: Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1). Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M., & Graziani, F. (2009). Instructional activities as a tool for teachers’ and teacher educators’ learning. The Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 491–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, R., Carpenter, S., Schauble, L., & Putz, A. (2000). Designing classrooms that support inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Loughran, J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices: Responding to the challenges, demands, and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 12–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, K., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metz, K. (2000). Young children’s inquiry in biology: Building the knowledge bases to empower independent inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). How novice science teachers appropriate epistemic discourses around model-based inquiry for use in classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 310–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 4–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (2007). Accumulating knowledge across self-studies in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (2012). The turn once again toward practice-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(5), 376–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Research and practice on using a framework for argument construction to inform learning to teach elementary school science. Science Education, 93(4), 687–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I appreciate the helpful input and insight of Anna Maria Arias and Sylvie Kademian, who read early versions of this manuscript. Furthermore, I have had the opportunity to work with and learn from the many doctoral and masters students who have participated in the elementary science methods planning group at the University of Michigan over the years. Most importantly, I appreciate the experiences I have had with the many hundreds of preservice elementary teachers with whom I have had the privilege of working. I also appreciate the input provided by editors Gayle Buck and Valarie Akerson and two anonymous reviewers, whose comments helped to strengthen this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Elizabeth A. Davis

Authors
  1. Elizabeth A. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth A. Davis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Indiana University, BLOOMINGTON, Indiana, USA

    Gayle A. Buck

  2. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Indiana University, BLOOMINGTON, Indiana, USA

    Valarie L. Akerson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Davis, E.A. (2016). Evolving Goals, Pedagogies, and Identities as an Elementary Science Teacher Educator: Prioritizing Practice. In: Buck, G., Akerson, V. (eds) Enhancing Professional Knowledge of Pre-Service Science Teacher Education by Self-Study Research. ASTE Series in Science Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32447-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32447-0_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-32445-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-32447-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation