Abstract
Pre-service teachers develop mental models of school science from their experiences as students from elementary through the tertiary level. So, what mental models do chemistry pre-service teachers have regarding teaching and learning in science of themselves as science teachers? This chapter will present the findings from a study conducted with 43 pre-service teachers enrolled in a chemistry teaching methods course to explore their mental models and personal beliefs of chemistry teaching and learning. Data were collected through “Draw-A-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist” (DASTT-C) developed by Thomas, Pederson, and Finson (J Sci Teach Educ, 12(3):295–310, 2001) and modified by Markic (Studies on freshman science student teachers’ beliefs about science teaching and learning. Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 2008). The DASTT-C was administered to the pre-service teachers during the first meeting of their lecture course. They were asked to “Draw a picture of you as a science teacher at work” and to “Answer the questions at the bottom of the page to further explain the picture.” The four open-ended questions asked the students to describe the depicted instructional situation, the activity of the students in the instructional situation, the goal they tried to achieve within the period of time, and their approach to achieving their teaching and learning goals. The measurement of their beliefs was quantified using the scales and description of the codes from the evaluation pattern developed by Grounded Theory (Markic & Eilks (2008). Chem Educ Res Pract 9: 25–34). Initial analysis of the illustrated diagrams showed that the majority of the chemistry education students from this sample possessed teacher-centered mental models, whereas only some seemed to possess student-centered mental models but failed because of lack of understanding of the instructional approach.
Personal information:
Maryam BT Hj SULAIMAN, B.Sc., Hons. (UKM), M.Sc. (USM), Dip.Ed (UKM) is a post-graduate student completing her Ph.D. at the School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia. He is also working as a master chemistry teacher in MARA Junior Sains College, Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA), Malaysia.
Zurida Binti Haji Ismail, B.Sc., M.Sc. (N. Illinois), Ph.D. (Georgia) is an Professor in the School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia. Her expertise is in Science Education, Chemistry Instructional Methodology, Measurement & Evaluation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, J. R. (2004). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Worth.
Barnes, D. (1992). The significance of teachers’ frames for teaching. In T. Russell & H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 9–32). New York: Falmer Press.
Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: Student teachers’ early conceptions of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(1), 1–8.
Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61–82). New York: Routledge.
Eckert, E., & Bell, A. (2005). Invisible force: Farmers’ mental models and how they influence learning and actions. Journal of Extension, 43(3). Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005june/a2.shtml
Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness (Vol. 6). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J. (2002). Conditionals: A theory of meaning, pragmatics, and inference. Psychological Review, 109(4), 646–678.
Kerr, D. H. (1981). The structure of quality in teaching. In J. F. Soltis (Ed.), Philosophy and education (Vol. 1, pp. 61–93). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Markic, S. (Ed.). (2008). Studies on freshman science student teachers’ beliefs about science teaching and learning. Aachen, Germany: Shaker Verlag.
Markic, S., & Eilks, I. (2008). A case study on German first year chemistry student teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching, and their comparison with student teachers from other science teaching domains. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 9, 25–34.
Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 43.
Norman, D. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 7–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Norman, D. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basic of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures of developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thomas, J. A., Pederson, J. E., & Finson, K. (2001). Validating the Draw-A-Scientist-Test Checklist (DASTT-C): Exploring mental models and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 295–310.
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1989). Causal models as intelligent learning environments for science and engineering education. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 3(2), 167–190.
Yehezkel, C., Ben-Ari, M., & Dreyfus, T. (2005). Computer architecture and mental models. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37(1), 101–105.
Acknowledgment
Our appreciation and thanks to Dr. Silvija Markic, University of Bremen, Department of Biology and Chemistry, Institute of Science Education (IDN) – Didactics of Chemistry for the instruments and assistance in data analysis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A
Appendix A
Numbers and percentage of the pre-service science teachers in the respective categories. The categories refer to Table 1 in the sequence Classroom Organization, Teaching Objectives, and Epistemological Beliefs. For single students not all codes were given in every category.
Code combination | All Science (n = 43) | Chemistry (n = 10) | Code combination | All Science (n = 43) | Chemistry (n = 10) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(−2,−2,−2) | 2 (4.7%) | 1 (10.0%) | (0,0,+1) | 2 (4.7%) | |
(−2,−2,−1) | 6 (14.0%) | 1 (10.0%) | (0,−1,+1) | 1 (2.3%) | 1 (10.0%) |
(−2,−2,0) | 1 (2.3%) | (0,−1,−1) | 1 (2.3%) | ||
(−2,−1,−1) | 1 (2.3%) | (0,−1,0) | 1 (2.3%) | ||
(−2,−1,+1) | 1 (2.3%) | (0,−2,−1) | 2 (4.7%) | 2 (20.0%) | |
(−1,−2,−2) | 2 (4.7%) | 1 (10.0%) | (0,+1,0) | 1 (2.3%) | 1 (10.0%) |
(−1,+1,+1) | 1 (2.3%) | (+1,−2,+1) | 1 (2.3%) | ||
(−1,−2,−1) | 1 (2.3%) | (+1,−2,0) | 1 (2.3%) | ||
(−1,−1,−1) | 2 (4.7%) | 1 (10.0%) | (+1,0,−1) | 1 (2.3%) | |
(−1,−1,0) | 1 (2.3%) | (+1,+1,−1) | 1 (2.3%) | ||
(−1,+1,+2) | 1 (2.3%) | (+1,+1,+1) | 5 (11.6%) | 1 (10.0%) | |
(−1,+1,0) | 1 (2.3%) | (+2,+2,+1) | 2 (4.7%) | ||
(−1,+1,+1) | 2 (4.7%) | 1 (10.0%) | (+2,+2,+2) | 1 (2.3%) | |
(0,0,+2) | 1 (2.3%) |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sulaiman, M., Ismail, Z.H. (2013). Chemistry Pre-service Teachers’ Mental Models of Science Teaching and Learning in Malaysia. In: Chiu, MH., Tuan, HL., Wu, HK., Lin, JW., Chou, CC. (eds) Chemistry Education and Sustainability in the Global Age. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4860-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4860-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4859-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4860-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)