Starting and staying strong: pre-service primary teachers’ attitudinal profiles towards science learning and their outcomes in an introductory science unit

The Australian Educational Researcher - Tập 47 - Trang 385-408 - 2020
Deborah Pino-Pasternak1,2, Simone Volet2
1Faculty of Education, University of Canberra, Bruce, Australia
2College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Australia

Tóm tắt

This paper investigates associations between pre-service primary teachers’ attitudinal profiles towards science learning (n = 108) and their learning outcomes in an introductory science unit. It expands on previous work on this cohort that used person-centred analyses (cluster analysis) to identify attitudinal profiles at the start and end of the unit (i.e. Optimal, Promising, Vulnerable, and Uncommitted). In the present study, profile transitions from start to end were calculated to determine transition patterns (i.e. Stays Favourable, Stays Unfavourable, Migrates to Favourable, and Migrates toUnfavourable). Subsequently, one-way multivariate analyses of variance were conducted to test differences in learning outcomes by initial attitudinal profile and transition patterns. Total assignment mark and final exam mark were used as indicators of achievement of unit learning outcomes, while number of quizzes completed was used as an indicator of student commitment to unit assessment. The results indicate that pre-service primary teachers who started the unit with Optimal and Promising profiles achieved better outcomes and engaged more with unit assessment than those who started with Uncommitted or Vulnerable profiles. In terms of transition patterns, starting and staying in a Favourable profile (Optimal and Promising) led to the most successful outcomes, while the opposite was the case for students who started and stayed in the least favourable profiles (Vulnerable and Uncommitted). These findings suggest the importance of the early identification of students whose attitudes towards learning science may show vulnerability or lack of commitment so targeted interventions and suitable adaptations to curriculum and classroom environment can be put in place.

Tài liệu tham khảo

ACARA (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority). (2017). Foundation to year 10 curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/science/.

Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an understanding of science teaching practice. Research in Science Education,33, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023666618800.

Australian Science Teachers Association. (2014). Primary science teaching survey final report. Retrieved from https://asta.edu.au/programs/assist/primary_science_teaching_survey.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bergman, D. J., & Morphew, J. (2015). Effects of a science content course on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy of teaching science. Journal of College Science Teaching,44, 73–81. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst15_044_03_73.

Blank, R. (2013). Science instructional time is declining in elementary schools: What are the implications for student achievement and closing the gap? Science Education,97, 830–847. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21078.

Bleicher, R. E. (2009). Variable relationships among different science learners in elementary science-methods courses. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,7, 293–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9121-8.

Bleicher, R. E., & Lindgren, J. (2005). Success in science learning and preservice science teaching self-efficacy. Journal of Science Teacher Education,16, 205–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-005-4861-1.

Cooper, G., Kenny, J., & Fraser, S. (2012). Influencing intended teaching practice: Exploring pre-service teachers’ perceptions of science teaching resources. International Journal of Science Education,34, 1883–1908. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.698762.

Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology,78, 98–104.

Education Council. (2015). National STEM school education strategy, 2016–2026. Retrieved from http://www.educationcouncil.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/National%20STEM%20School%20Education%20Strategy.pdf.

Fuesting, M. A., Diekman, A. B., & Hudiburgh, L. (2017). From classroom to career: The unique role of communal processes in predicting interest in STEM careers. Social Psychology of Education,20, 875–896. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9398-6.

Gilbert, A. (2013). Using the notion of ‘wonder’ to develop positive conceptions of science with future primary teachers. Science Education International,24, 6–32.

Gilbert, A., & Byers, C. C. (2017). Wonder as a tool to engage preservice elementary teachers in science learning and teaching. Science Teacher Education,101, 907–928. https://doi.org/10.10002/sce.21300.

Glynn, S. M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Science motivation questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,48, 1159–1176. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20442.

Herbert, S., & Hobbs, L. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ views of school-based approaches to pre-service primary science teacher education. Research in Science Education,48, 777–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s111650-016-9587-x.

Hobbs, L., Campbell, C., Chittleborough, G., Herbert, S., Jones, M., Kenny, J., Redman, C., Gilbert, A. & King, J. (2015). School-based pedagogies and partnerships in primary science teacher education: The Science Teacher Education Partnerships with Schools (STEPS) Project. Report to the Office for Learning and Teaching. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-steps-project.

Kaufman, L., & Rousseeuw, P. J. (2009). Finding groups in data: An introduction to cluster analysis. New Jersey: Wiley.

Kenny, J. (2010). Preparing pre-service primary teachers to teach primary science: A partnership-based approach. International Journal of Science Education,32, 1267–1288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902977994.

Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on Interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education,33, 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518645.

Loughran, J. J. (2007). Science teacher as learner. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1043–1065). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

McDonnough, J. T., & Matkins, J. J. (2010). The role of field experience in elementary pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and ability to connect research to practice. Science and Mathematics,110, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00003.x.

Menon, D., & Sadler, T. D. (2016). Preservice elementary teachers’ science self-efficacy beliefs and science content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education,27, 649–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9479-y.

Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Milne, I. (2010). A sense of wonder, arising from aesthetic experiences, should be the starting point for inquiry in primary science. Science Education International,21, 102–115.

Mircioiu, C., & Atkinson, J. (2017). A comparison of parametric and non-parametric methods applied to a likert scale. Pharmacy,5, 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy5020026.

Norris, C. M., Morris, J. E., & Lummis, G. W. (2018). Preservice teachers’ self-efficacy to teach primary science based on ‘science learner’ typology. International Journal of Science Education,40, 2292–2308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1528645.

Palmer, D., Dixon, J., & Archer, J. (2015). Changes in science teaching self-efficacy among primary teacher education students. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,40, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n12.3.

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. T. (2005). Achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ). User’s manual. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Munich, Munich.

Pino-Pasternak, D., & Volet, S. (2018). Evolution of pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards learning science during an introductory science unit. International Journal of Science Education, 40, 1520–1541. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1486521.

Prinsley, R., & Johnston, E. (2015). Transforming STEM teaching in Australian primary schools: Everybody’s business—position paper. Canberra: Office of the Chief Scientist.

Rosenshine, B. (2015). How time is spent in elementary classrooms. Journal of Classroom Interaction,50, 41–53.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review,57, 1–22.

Sorge, S., Keller, M. M., Neumann, K., & Möller, J. (2019). Investigating the relationship between pre-service physics teachers’ professional knowledge, self-concept, and interest. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21534.

TIMSS. (2015). Science 4th and 8th Grade. Students’ attitudes towards science. IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. Retrieved from http://timss2015.org/download-center/.

Tuominen-Soini, H., Salmela-Aro, K., & Niemivirta, M. (2008). Achievement goal orientations and subjective well-being: A person-centred analysis. Learning and Instruction,18, 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.05.003.

van Aalderen-Smeets, S., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. F. (2012). Primary teachers’ attitudes toward science: A new theoretical framework. Science Education,96, 158–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20467.

van den Hurk, A., Meelissen, M., & van Langen, A. (2019). Interventions in education to prevent STEM pipeline leakage. International Journal of Science Education,41, 150–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1540897.

Weijters, B., Baumgartner, H., & Schillewaert, N. (2013). Reversed item bias: An integrative model. Psychological Methods, 18(3), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032121.

Yazici, B., & Yolacan, S. (2007). A comparison of various tests of normality. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation,77, 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/10629360600678310.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

The Australian Educational Researcher

Tập 47

385-408

Thông tin tác giả