Yezdan
Boz
*a,
Betul
Ekiz-Kiran
b and
Elif Selcan
Kutucu
c
aMiddle East Technical University, College of Education, Dept. of Maths. & Sci. Edu., Ankara, Turkey. E-mail: yezdan@metu.edu.tr
bVan Yuzuncu Yil Unıversity, College of Education, Dept. of Maths. & Sci. Edu., Van, Turkey
cVan Yuzuncu Yil Unıversity, College of Education, Dept. of Elementary Edu., Van, Turkey
First published on 29th April 2019
In this study, we examined the effect of School Experience (SE) and Practice Teaching (PT) courses on pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs towards chemistry teaching over a one-year period. To reach this purpose, participants’ beliefs and experiences towards chemistry teaching were monitored closely throughout the varied phases of the two practicum courses. Two pre-service chemistry teachers participated in the study. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews, observation notes, CoRes and reflection papers. Semi-structured interviews focusing on the pre-service teachers’ beliefs regarding chemistry teaching were conducted three times while participating in the SE and PT courses. During the PT course before their teaching experiences the participants prepared CoRes, and after their experiences they critiqued their own performances. Moreover, the participants were observed during their student-teaching experiences to identify how they transfer their beliefs into their teaching. Data were analyzed via inductive analyses. Results indicated that both pre-service teachers had stable core beliefs derived from their own experiences as students that remained constant during these courses and guided their practical instruction. Although both participants attended the same courses during the teacher education program, their attitudes while taking the educational courses were different. Factors that shaped pre-service teachers’ beliefs towards teaching were presented as the practicum courses enriched with CoRes and reflection papers, observing their mentors, experiences gained from microteaching sessions, and pedagogical and methods courses taken during the pre-service teacher education program. Implications for the formation of pre-service teachers’ beliefs towards teaching throughout pre-service teacher education programs were provided.
Novice and pre-service teachers have unstable, disconnected belief systems that remain pliable (Simmons et al., 1999; Jones and Carter, 2007; Wallace, 2014). Due to this instability, they are more prone to modify these beliefs compared to experienced teachers who have developed stable core beliefs that are more resistant to change.
Therefore, it is important to address pre-service and novice teachers’ beliefs early in their careers when changes are more likely to occur. In addition, beliefs brought into teacher education programs interact with new concepts and materials taught in these programs. Together with other factors, perceptions about teaching will be moulded throughout the pre-service education programs. Factors that contribute to this development should be clarified to help them develop complex belief systems related to teaching (Jones and Carter, 2007).
In the related literature, there have been calls for additional studies to explore the development of pre-service teachers’ beliefs (Wallace, 2014). When we have clear ideas on ‘…changes of attitudes and beliefs over the span of a teacher's career, we can design more effective professional development programs at pre-service and in-service levels’ (Jones and Leagon, 2014, p. 843). Therefore, starting at the initial pre-service level, examining how programs can structure a teacher's beliefs reveals important information.
It is important to determine the changes in pre-service teachers’ beliefs about teaching science and help them reconsider these beliefs in order to improve the quality of teaching and learning activities by avoiding obstacles caused by their existing personal beliefs.
If a program is to promote growth among novices, it must require them to make their pre-existing personal beliefs explicit; it must challenge the adequacy of those beliefs; and it must give novices extended opportunities to examine, elaborate, and integrate new information into their existing belief systems (Kagan 1992, p. 77).
Therefore, in this study, we examined how pre-service chemistry teachers’ preconceptions about chemistry teaching changed after taking two practicum courses over a one-year period, namely School Experience (SE) and Practice Teaching (PT). Also considered were factors that influenced the changes. The research questions of the present study were as follows:
(1) How did pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs about teaching chemistry change during and after the year-long practicum courses?
(2) How did pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs affect their teaching practices?
(3) What factors influenced pre-service teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching?
According to the TPB, three factors were reported to influence people's beliefs. First, ‘background’ is a personal factor that involves general attitudes, personality traits, values, emotions, and intelligence. Second, ‘social’ factors relate to age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, income, and religion. Third, a person's experience, knowledge, and media exposure form information-related factors (Ajzen, 2005).
(1) Based on the TPB, two important aspects were inferred: people's beliefs influence their actions; therefore, it is important to reveal those beliefs.
(2) Some of the aforementioned factors influence the formation of those beliefs.
The present study was underpinned by the TPB. Considering that beliefs influence a person's intention to perform a behaviour as the basis of the TPB, in this study we examined pre-service teachers’ chemistry teaching practices as the behaviour and their beliefs about chemistry teaching as the beliefs that influenced that behaviour.
The study of Al-Amoush et al. (2014) compared Jordanian, Turkish, and German pre- and in-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning chemistry. Results concluded that the Jordanian teachers had traditional beliefs. Markic and Eilks (2008) and Al-Amoush et al. (2014) defined traditional beliefs as ‘transmission-oriented beliefs of learning with a focus on pure subject-matter knowledge’ and modern beliefs as those ‘based on constructivist learning, student-oriented classroom structures, and an orientation toward more general educational skills, including scientific literacy for all’ (p. 770). The Turkish teachers held more moderate beliefs compared to the Jordanians, but their beliefs about teaching were still more closely related to traditional views. Conversely, the German teachers expressed the most modern beliefs about teaching. That said, Markic and Eilks (2010) mentioned that most of the German pre-service chemistry teachers during their first year in the program also held teacher-centred beliefs.
Similarly, Bryan (2003) defined the belief system of pre-service elementary teachers regarding science teaching and learning. Beliefs were categorized as foundational and dualistic beliefs. Foundational beliefs were very resistant to change. On the other hand, dualistic beliefs were unstable and had contradictory elements. Likewise, Boz and Uzuntiryaki (2006) found that most prospective chemistry teachers held unstable beliefs and that inconsistencies were evident.
In contrast, some researchers reported cases of inconsistencies between belief and practice (Simmons et al., 1999; Haney and McArthur, 2002; Uzuntiryaki et al., 2010). For example, Haney and McArthur (2002) analysed the beliefs of four pre-service science teachers with respect to constructivist teaching and whether these beliefs were consistent with their actual practices in the classroom. Two kinds of beliefs emerged from the data analysis. One kind was central core beliefs that guided pre-service teachers’ classroom practice. The other kind was peripheral beliefs that had been mentioned but not implemented in the classroom. Although all pre-service teachers believed that students should assume roles in deciding and planning their learning processes, none reflected this in their lesson structures.
Uzuntiryaki et al. (2010) stated that the relationship between pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs and their practice was not this straightforward. Factors such as deficient chemistry knowledge, the abstract nature of the topic, large class sizes, school facilities, and teaching methods employed by their mentors all caused potential divergence between pre-service teachers’ beliefs and practice. Wallace (2014) mentioned the lack of content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) required to employ constructivist teaching strategies as potential causes for the disconnect between teachers’ beliefs and practice.
In the related literature, studies have explored the development of (pre-service) teachers’ beliefs about science teaching. Veal (2004) examined the development of two pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs about teaching and their PCK during a student-taught science curriculum course over a one-year period. He found an inseparable and synergistic link between the teachers’ beliefs about teaching and their PCK. Likewise, Luft et al. (2011) investigated the development of novice science teachers’ beliefs over a two-year period. Teachers’ beliefs shifted toward a student-centred model by the end of the first year; however, they reverted to more traditional views by the end of the second year. Teachers who received specific science training still implemented more student-centred teaching strategies in their classes. Another example of the development of beliefs about science teaching was Markic and Eilks (2013), a cross-level study that investigated the development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning. While university freshmen held traditional beliefs, they found that student teachers at the halfway point of their programs held the most modern beliefs about teaching. Recently graduated teachers held more modern beliefs compared to freshmen students but less modern beliefs compared to student teachers who had partially completed their teacher education programs.
Instrument(s) | Placement | Purpose(s) |
---|---|---|
1st interview | Beginning of the SE course (9th semester) | To reveal the pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs regarding chemistry teaching |
2nd interview | After finishing observations in the SE course (9th semester) | To understand the influence of observation of school environments and the mentor's instruction on the pre-service teachers’ beliefs regarding chemistry teaching |
CoRes | Before teaching experiences during the PT course (10th semester) | To define the pre-service chemistry teachers’ beliefs and determine the inconsistencies between their CoRes and teaching practice |
3rd interview | After the PT course (10th semester) | To evaluate the influence of experiencing PT on the pre-service teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching |
Field notes | During the observation of the pre-service teachers’ instruction during the PT course (10th semester) | To observe the pre-service teachers’ instruction in the teaching experience course and to understand how they transmit their beliefs into instruction |
Reflection | After teaching experiences during the PT course (10th semester) | To understand the pre-service teachers’ evaluations of their own instruction and the factors influencing the pre-service teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching |
Reflections 2 & 3 | After the SE and PT courses (9th and 10th semester) | To identify the factors influencing the pre-service teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching |
(1) In your opinion, how is chemistry taught effectively, and why?
(2) How did your beliefs change as a result of your observations at schools?
(3) How did your beliefs change as a result of your teaching practice at schools?
(4) Can you evaluate the impact of your mentor on your beliefs about chemistry teaching?
(5) What types of problems did you encounter during your first school placement and in-class practice sessions?
Although English was the language of instruction in the university where we collected data, interviews were conducted in Turkish. Therefore, the interview questions were translated into English by this study's researchers who are fluent in both Turkish and English. Moreover, in some cases, back translation was provided in order to not corrupt the original data. For instance, interview questions obtained from the related literature were already in English. The three authors translated them into Turkish independently and then formed the final versions of the questions through discussions. After conducting interviews and analysing data, final interview questions were translated back to English.
In order to analyse data, an inductive analysis was performed. First, semi-structured interviews were transcribed. After transcription, all interviews were read and emergent categories were formed. Codes were then placed under some categories. The codes that emerged from the analysis of data are shown in Table 2.
Participant | Before the SE course | After the SE course | After the PT course |
---|---|---|---|
Barbara | ‘Student-centred instruction’ | ‘Analogies’ | ‘Macroscopic, microscopic and symbolic representations’ |
‘Analogies’ | ‘Daily life examples’ | ‘Experiments’ | |
‘Experiments’ | ‘Experiments’ | ‘Daily life examples’ ‘Analogies’ | |
‘Daily life examples’ | ‘Macroscopic, microscopic and symbolic representations’ | ‘The relationships among topics and ordering of these topics’ | |
‘Macroscopic, microscopic and symbolic representations’ | ‘Lecturing’ | ‘Time allocated to a topic’ | |
‘Lecturing’ | |||
Linda | ‘Experiments’ | ‘Experiments’ | ‘Daily life examples’ |
‘Daily life applications’ | ‘Why, how questions’ | ‘Experiments’ | |
‘Why, how questions’ | ‘Daily life examples’ | ‘Why, how questions’ | |
‘Animations, simulations’ | ‘Animations, simulations’ | ‘Microscopic level’ | |
‘Lecturing’ |
By examining these codes, participants’ beliefs were further categorized as core or peripheral beliefs. Core beliefs were those deemed stable and central. They did not change at all during the development cycle. Moreover, these beliefs were also reflected in their instruction. On the other hand, peripheral beliefs were less stable and more prone to change through experience over time. They were not reflected in the participants’ instruction.
After categorization of core and peripheral beliefs, a secondary categorization was conducted based on whether participants’ beliefs reflected constructivism or not. Two categories emerged from this analysis: constructivist beliefs and transitional beliefs. Constructivist beliefs refer to beliefs that are consistent with the characteristics of the constructivist approach. Transitional beliefs encompass both constructivist and traditional views. If a participant had both constructivist and traditional beliefs, this was categorized as transitional. Participants with transitional beliefs would be viewed as having inconsistencies in their belief systems.
Data obtained from observation notes, CoRes, and reflection papers were analysed through content analysis. They were used to support the findings obtained from the interview questions for the second and third research questions.
Triangulation of sources was provided by using different data sources, including interviews, observations, field notes, and reflection papers to examine the same phenomena. Patton (1999) defined analyst triangulation as ‘using multiple analysts to review findings’ (p. 1193). This was provided by asking two colleagues to analyse certain parts of the data by giving them transcribed documents of the interviews. After their analysis, we met to discuss incongruent sections until we arrived at complete agreement. Moreover, the instruction sessions of each pre-service teacher were observed by one of the authors as well as another research assistant in the real classroom environment. After observation, they met to discuss their observations. Any incongruences were solved by negotiation.
Participant | Before the SE course | After the SE course | After the PT course |
---|---|---|---|
Barbara | Constructivist beliefs | Transitional beliefs between traditional and constructivist beliefs | Transitional beliefs between traditional and constructivist beliefs |
Linda | Constructivist beliefs | Constructivist beliefs | Transitional beliefs between traditional and constructivist beliefs |
If I ask students what happens when I put a steel paperclip in water, they will probably say it will sink. I could respond by saying it will float based on surface tension. However, rather than give the answer, I can demonstrate the concept to the class by actually placing a paperclip in water and asking students what they thought would happen. They will make predictions, after which they will see that the paperclip floats. Through the support of the demonstration, we can discuss reasons while explaining surface tension. Since students are involved in the process and have witnessed the result in person, the lesson is student-centred and more effective.
Barbara's statements reveal the importance of active involvement of students in their learning process. This is a characteristic of constructivist instruction. The way she learned chemistry concepts through laboratory experiments in the college of education influenced her beliefs about the necessity of student-centred instruction for effective chemistry teaching:
Laboratory courses were like this as we felt we were the part of the instruction. The important factor was to understand the learning process of students. We were asked questions such as what we observed and what we could infer from these observations instead of merely stating the result of an experiment.
Barbara also explained the characteristics of student-centred instruction and the role of the teacher in a student-centred instruction: ‘Student-centred instruction does not mean that the teacher will do nothing and students will learn everything by themselves. As a teacher, I should be designing the activities, managing, and guiding students through the lesson’.
I was persistent about the necessity of student-centred instruction before my school placement, but my ideas about lecturing changed. I realized that I might also use lectures for effective teaching. Lecturing should not be unilateral. As a teacher, if I wrote everything on the board, students would simply copy the same information into their notebooks. I realized that lecturing can be performed differently. For instance, I might write paraphrases on the board while students devise notes that demonstrate their understanding of concepts discussed. Apart from improvements in content knowledge, their listening and note-taking skills also improve. Lecturing is not confined to teachers writing information on a board for students to copy. I realized at my school placement that lecturing can be used effectively.
According to this quote, Barbara realized that lecturing could also be used effectively when students take notes that paraphrase information in their own words while the teacher continues to teach. Her definition of lecturing changed because of the SE course. Before school placement, she felt that lecturing was a unilateral process, with students copying verbatim the information that the teacher had written on the board. Observation of her mentor's instruction changed her opinion about lecturing as an efficient method to enhance teaching and learning. Also, Barbara offered constructivist ideas:
Teachers should engage students by asking their ideas and thoughts about issues. They should give students the confidence that their opinions are important, that their input matters, and that teachers are not an authority figures in the class, that is, students and the teachers learn together. If students actively question the concepts they learn, learning will be more permanent.
We learned student-centred teaching methods in our methods course [methods of science teaching course]. We are familiar with the application of 5E learning cycle. I can easily adapt [the] 5E learning cycle model to every topic and see it works well for student-centred instruction.
However, after her PT teaching experience, Barbara's views on the implementation of student-centred teaching methods changed. In her reflection paper, she stated that it was very difficult to apply student-centred instruction at the high school compared to a lecture-based format that was easier and more applicable in the real classroom environment. She described appropriate lecturing as the incorporation of examples from daily life and analogies. She stated that her mentor used analogies and related information in his lectures as well. Though Barbara believed strongly in the necessity of student-centred instruction to improve student learning, she also recognized the difficulties of implementation in high schools.
Barbara felt that one impediment prohibiting the reflection of her pedagogical beliefs in actual practice was the high school students’ lack of familiarity with alternative teaching methods. She found her experiences in university were different from what she experienced during the school placements:
In university, we prepared student-centred lessons that were easy to apply as our friends did not behave like high school students. Instruction based on 5E learning was difficult to apply in high school because students were not familiar with the instruction method. When I asked questions to engage the students, they did not participate. Some students were impossible to motivate into satisfactory participation. Therefore, I do not think we should insist on student-centred instruction in the schools.
Barbara had explained a common difference between microteaching in the college of education and pre-service teaching at partner high schools. She also suggested that the incorporation of student-centred instruction was difficult to apply at schools based on the teaching methods of mentors:
Our mentors teach traditionally; therefore, students have been taught to listen and take notes. They are not accustomed to participating during classes. Therefore, when I asked a question, students did not answer. Perhaps they were afraid of giving wrong answers.
For her practical sessions, Barbara adopted the 5E learning cycle, one example of student-centred instruction, in order to teach Boyle's law. However, based on the observation notes of the researcher, she could not reflect this completely in her instruction. During her lesson, she tried to involve students by asking them questions but struggled to elicit any responses. Eventually, she had to provide the answers herself. Students were only partially active during her classes. This serves as evidence explaining her transitional beliefs that combine constructivist and traditional ideas.
Observation notes of the researcher revealed that Barbara's core beliefs were also reflected in her practice. Her instruction involved linking the topic with daily life examples, experiments, analogies, and macroscopic, microscopic, and symbolic representations of the topic.
In the curriculum, kinetic theory is explained after gas laws. However, for effective teaching, I should introduce kinetic theory before gas laws and explain motion of gas particles and collision before explaining gas pressure. As a teacher, if I explained gas pressure before teaching kinetic theory, students would not have the relevant information to grasp the concept. I should also be aware of the time allocated to a topic to use it effectively and to avoid exceeding curriculum limits. For example, I should not allow two class hours for atom bombs while teaching sub-atomic particles.
The above statement reveals Barbara's belief that teachers should have solid knowledge of the curriculum, one of the five components for PCK. In her reflection paper, she stated that observing her mentor's instruction methods with the aid of a form based on PCK components and preparing CoRe lesson plans both solidified her belief in the importance of PCK components in order to teach chemistry effectively.
I think chemistry should be taught through experiments; they should be linked with daily life examples and the teacher should ask ‘why’ questions frequently during the lesson so that students understand the reasoning for any concept rather than simply memorize results or facts. Students should be active in the classroom and construct their own knowledge. I learned better this way. I think the methods that produced your best learning outcomes as a student will be similar to the methods you employ to ensure the most effective learning for your students.
Beyond experiments, daily life applications, and the use of probing questions mentioned above, Linda also mentioned the importance of animations, simulations, and the use of visual elements to enhance learning outcomes.
Linda stated that initially she was hesitant about becoming a teacher; however, her thoughts began to change during the courses related to teaching methods and pedagogy. These courses influenced her attitude towards teaching and were influential in moulding her beliefs.
I once viewed education as a teacher dictating information to the class. I was not aware of alternative teaching methods until I took some education courses [related to pedagogy]. I began to see teaching as something special that I might do to improve the education of children. Thus, I became more positive toward teaching.
Linda's comments express the importance of methods and pedagogical courses in forming pre-service teachers’ beliefs about teaching.
I did not observe anything that I must apply myself, but I saw things I would surely not do. For example, students solved a lot of problems in the classroom. These problems do not promote their creativity. They are just exercises where they plug values into a formula to solve them. Take chemical equilibrium as an example, students solve plenty of exercises, but do they really know what chemical equilibrium means conceptually? When I become a teacher, I will certainly not assign so many exercise-type problems in my classroom.
When we asked Linda whether her school observation and teaching experiences impacted her views about effective chemistry teaching, she repeated that she observed things that she would not do as a teacher and gave another example:
The teacher always solved exercises. After a short explanation of something, for example the concept of chemical equilibrium, she began solving problems. These are mathematical problems. I certainly would not use this type of instruction model as a teacher. Students can solve problems on their own at home, but they might not learn the topic conceptually.
We can conclude that Linda's first school placement experience did not positively affect her beliefs.
I taught Boyle's law in the high school. Instead of saying ‘when volume decreases, pressure increases’, I used marshmallows in a syringe to explain the relationship of volume and pressure. I asked questions to students to engage them, and they we able to deduce the P–V relationship themselves. It was easier for me and better for them.
After the PT course, we could say that Linda beliefs about teaching chemistry did not change considerably with the exception of her attitude toward lecturing. She still felt that the use of experiments was vital in teaching chemistry because students would learn better by first-hand involvement. This belief resulted from her experiences as a student. ‘When we used experiments, students learned better. I use the formation of soap experiment as an example. When I performed the experiment myself, my learning became more permanent’.
Linda also mentioned the emphasis of microscopic representation of chemistry: ‘You can see what happens macroscopically, but I think it is also important to understand what happens at the microscopic level. The importance of the microscopic level cannot be overlooked’. Therefore, the only noticeable change was Linda's thoughts about lecturing after observing both her mentor and a colleague's instruction methods:
I was convinced I would never use lecturing as a teaching method because I felt the students would be bored. However, after observing my mentor's instruction, I saw that he lectured in an effective way. He could incorporate analogies and microscopic representation of the topic very well into his lectures. Another example was one of my friends who lectured in a microteaching session. He explained the topic so well I changed my opinion about lecturing, and now believe I can use this method of delivery as well.
These statements show that Linda's observations at the high school and during microteaching sessions in the college of education were influential in the formation of her beliefs. Similarly, in her reflection paper, she stated that she still did not have enough knowledge about different teaching strategies such as drama, conceptual change, role play, and lecturing. She had mostly used the 5E learning cycle until then. During the microteaching sessions, Linda was able to observe different teaching strategies. In the partner high school she only observed lectures. At the beginning of the semester, she believed that lecturing could never be a student-centred form of instruction; however, after observing her mentor's lecture she realized that lecturing can be a student-centred technique and therefore useful for explaining various chemistry concepts. Apart from new opinions about lecturing, the school placements did not affect Linda's beliefs. That said, her critical evaluations of educational courses in university helped form some of her beliefs about teaching. Linda still preferred to use lecturing in a student-centred way. In this respect, while she exhibited some transitional beliefs that straddled constructivist and traditional approaches, she was more closely aligned to the constructivist model compared to Barbara.
When asked about the potential influences of the PT course and the high school placements on her beliefs, Linda stated that the PT course did not change her beliefs much:
I always had a certain plan in mind beforehand, constantly considering what to use or not use, and I would always refer back to the curriculum. These were constantly on my mind. I finally had the chance to test my plans in the practice teaching course.
As inferred from the above statement, Linda thought ahead about what she should include in her teaching and had formed her beliefs before the PT course. She had critically evaluated her thoughts and priorities about teaching, and she had already formed her own basic framework for effective chemistry teaching before entering the PT course. This might have resulted from critical evaluations of what she had learned from the courses.
Another issue that influenced the formation of Linda's beliefs was CoRe. In her reflection paper, she stated that preparation of CoRe was crucial for identifying the vital points necessary for effective chemistry instruction:
While you prepare CoRe, you need to be aware of students’ potential learning difficulties regarding a topic. You need to consult the curriculum to see if there are other related points that need to be addressed while preparing lessons. CoRe provided a way for me to uncover the smaller details necessary for effective teaching in the big picture.
Parallel to her beliefs, Linda activated students by engaging them with questions. She also used a simple marshmallow and syringe experiment to illustrate the pressure–volume relationship:
Instead of telling students that pressure decreases when volume increases, I tried to make them realize this relationship by putting a marshmallow in the syringe. When I increased the volume, the pressure decreased and the marshmallow expanded. It was an interesting activity. More importantly, I think students will remember the relationship between P and V since their learning became more permanent through visualization.
From these statements we saw that Linda intended to make students discover the relationship between pressure and volume rather than tell them directly.
Before any of their high school sessions, both Linda and Barbara had constructivist beliefs. After the first school placement, Barbara's belief that student-centred instruction was fundamental for effective chemistry teaching changed after observing her mentor's instruction. She became convinced that lecturing could also be valuable if done properly. Moreover, her earlier preconceptions about lecturing (the teacher writing information on the board while students copied the same information) dissipated as she witnessed an alternative method; that is, if a teacher paraphrased information rather than leading unilateral dictation, students would be encouraged to understand the concept in order to take accurate notes for themselves. Barbara believed this type of lecture would enhance students’ understanding. Though she maintained some constructivist ideas, she also had traditional beliefs. Therefore, Barbara had inconsistencies in her belief system and transitional beliefs that encompassed both traditional and constructivist beliefs.
Conversely, after the first school placement session, Linda's beliefs did not change and her constructivist beliefs were retained. She criticized the way her mentor taught; specifically, Linda felt her mentor was not teaching conceptual chemistry, rather, too much time was spent solving exercise-style problems that hinder students’ creativity. She mentioned that the methods she observed would not be incorporated into her own teaching methods in the future. Although the two pre-service chemistry teachers had been placed at the same school, one considered her mentor's instruction effective, while the other found it to be inefficient. This may be a result of Linda's attitude during the educational courses. She reflected on what she had learned during the educational courses and formed her own beliefs about what she felt was most important for effective instruction.
At the end of the last school placement, Barbara had traditional and constructivist ideas; therefore, her beliefs were classified as transitional. She stated that the application of student-centred instruction was difficult at schools based on the way her mentors had traditionally taught. Both her teaching practice and observation of her mentor prompted her to believe that lecturing can be used as an effective instructional strategy when daily life examples and analogies were incorporated. Similarly, in the case of Linda, observations of her mentor's instruction and her colleague's instruction during microteaching caused Linda to also believe that lecturing can be effective when teaching chemistry. She had not seen how lecturing could be applied in a student-centred method before this course.
Zeichner and Tabachnick (1981) stated that there is a shift in pre-service teachers’ beliefs from progressivist views to more traditional beliefs once they begin student teaching at schools. While Linda's beliefs were categorized as transitional, she remained more aligned with constructivist methods than Barbara as she intended to use lecturing only in a student-centred format. At the end of the PT course, Barbara felt that knowing the relationships between topics, their sequence, and the time allocated per topic in the curriculum were all important for effective teaching. All are vital components in the knowledge of the curriculum component of PCK. We can infer that the development of Barbara's PCK influenced her beliefs. Linda also mentioned the influence of CoRe plans to sum up the necessary factors for effective chemistry teaching. Since the PT course was formulated to promote pre-service teachers’ PCK by means of CoRe plans and a reflection paper, this influenced participants’ beliefs about chemistry teaching. Veal (2004) also declared this synergistic link between the development of PCK and beliefs.
It is also important to explore factors that shape pre-service teachers’ belief systems during teacher education programs. The present study provided evidence that mentors influence their beliefs. The importance of this shaping has also been reported in the related literature (Boz and Uzuntiryaki, 2006; Crawford, 2007). The present study also demonstrated the importance of microteaching sessions in university as pre-service teachers also learned from their peers. Moreover, the preparation of CoRe and a PT course based on PCK also influenced teachers’ beliefs.
The present study also revealed that pedagogical and methods courses influenced Linda's decision to become a teacher and her core thoughts about teaching. Since she was educated traditionally, she felt that teaching only involved giving information. After taking pedagogical courses in the university, she realized that effective teaching was more than provision. This increased her willingness to become a teacher.
In terms of consistency between the participants’ beliefs and their instruction, Linda could reflect her beliefs in her practical instruction. However, Barbara's instruction did not always mirror her beliefs. Before their lessons, both pre-service teachers had student-centred beliefs regarding chemistry teaching. Though one of the pre-service teachers (Linda) could apply the student-centred instruction effectively, there were some contradictions between Barbara's beliefs and her practice. For example, in some cases she could not garner student replies for her questions, and her instruction shifted back to a more teacher-centred approach. It can be assumed that students’ attitudes towards student-centred instruction will influence the application of this type of instruction. The expectations of students have been reported as one of the factors influencing the inconsistency between teachers’ beliefs and their practice. Another factor that explains the disconnect between teachers’ beliefs and their practice may be the teachers’ self-consciousness of their beliefs and their reflection on their teaching practice (Ernest, 1989). When we compare these two participants, Linda had more constructivist beliefs, her beliefs were more stable, and she could apply them in her lessons. On the other hand, Barbara's beliefs were less stable and in some cases were not reflected in her practice. Since Linda was more aware of her beliefs and reflected more on what she had learned from the pedagogical courses, this might have resulted in the formation of solid core beliefs and more consistency between them and practice.
Barbara thought that lecturing only involved giving information while students took notes. By the time she completed the two practicum courses, she understood that there were more effective ways to lecture.
The present study contributed to the literature by indicating pre-service teachers as change agents in the formation of beliefs. Though the participants were enrolled in the same teacher education program, one of the participants formed more stable core beliefs that were consistent with her practice. Her attitude might have influenced this. Attitude is one of the personal factors influencing people's beliefs according to the TPB (Ajzen, 2005). It could be stated that pre-service teachers’ attitudes during teacher education programs may trigger the formation of stable core beliefs, consistent with educational reform. Other factors influencing pre-service teachers’ beliefs are the use of CoRes, with special mention of PCK knowledge in teacher education programs.
This study also revealed the influence of pedagogical and methods courses on pre-service teachers’ perceptions of teaching. If these courses could be taught via methods consistent with reform-based approaches, pre-service teachers would in turn develop beliefs that align with current and future educational reforms.
In the SE course, pre-service chemistry teachers observed their mentors’ instruction by means of CoRe plans. In the PT course, they prepared CoRes and taught their classes based on PCK components. Both courses influenced their beliefs about effective chemistry teaching. Therefore, we suggest the implementation of CoRes based on PCK components in teacher education programs.
Another finding of this study was that pre-service teachers were not familiar with the application of different teaching strategies. This implies that pre-service teachers should be encouraged to incorporate different teaching methods into their lessons, such as drama and role-play in their pedagogical coursework.
Observer: | Date: |
Teacher observed: | Unit observed: |
School: | Topic observed: |
PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE DIMENSIONS | |
Knowledge of Learners | Does the teacher elicit students’ prior knowledge? Explain how. |
Does the teacher remember/mention pre-requisite knowledge for learning the new topic? Explain how. | |
Does the teacher realize that students’ have misconceptions and/or difficulties related to the topic taught? Explain how. | |
Knowledge of Instructional Strategy | Does the teacher use any subject-specific strategy? (e.g. 5E, conceptual change, inquiry). Explain how. |
Does the teacher use any topic-specific strategy? (analogies, models, simulations, daily-life examples, demonstration, discussion, questioning). Explain how. | |
Knowledge of Curriculum | Does the teacher know goals, objectives, and purposes stated in the curriculum? Explain how. |
Does the teacher relate the topic to the other topics in the same grade? Explain how. | |
Does the teacher relate the topic to the other topics in the previous and next grades? Explain how. | |
Does the teacher relate the topic to the other topics in physics and biology? Explain how. | |
Knowledge of Assessment | What does the teacher assess? (e.g. knowledge, application of knowledge taught, nature of science understanding, science process skills, etc.) Explain how. |
How does the teacher assess students’ understanding? (e.g. quiz, informal questioning, etc.) Explain how. |
Name: LESSON PLANNING FORM | ||||
Chemistry Topic/Content Area: | Grade Level: | Curriculum Objectives to be Addressed: | ||
1. What concepts/big ideas do you intend students to learn? | ||||
Concept#1 | Concept#2 | Concept#3 | ||
2. What do you expect students to understand about this concept and be able to do as a result? | ||||
3. Why is it important for students to learn this concept? (Rationale) | ||||
4. As a teacher, what should you know about this topic? | ||||
5. What difficulties do students typically have about each concept? | ||||
6. What misconceptions do students typically have about each concept? | ||||
7. Which teaching strategy and what specific activities might be useful for helping students develop an understanding of the concept? | ||||
8. In what ways would you assess students’ understanding or confusion about this concept? | Formative Assessment | |||
Summative Assessment | ||||
9. What materials/equipment are needed to teach the lesson? |
Footnote |
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c9rp00022d |
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2019 |